dslreports logo
site
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search Topic:
uniqs
51043
share rss forum feed


DrStrange
Technically feasible
Premium
join:2001-07-23
West Hartford, CT
kudos:1

1 edit
reply to garys_2k

Re: [Scam] Card Services relentless phone calls revisited

FWIW:

406-224-9xxx = PACIFIC TELECOM COMMUNICATIONS GROUP in Livingston, MT
503-457-1xxx = PACIFIC TELECOM COMMUNICATIONS GROUP in Tillamook, OR
503-563-0xxx = PACIFIC TELECOM COMMUNICATIONS GROUP in Portland, OR

213-550-3xxx = BANDWIDTH.COM CLEC, LLC in Los Angeles, CA

941-312-2xxx = LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS, LLC in Sarasota, FL



jkk

@rutgers.net
reply to Ender3rd

I was able to get there direct line in Florida .. Call them relentlessly 772 344 2556 and give them a taste of what its like



Kibbles
Premium
join:1999-07-31
Mission Viejo, CA

said by jkk :

I was able to get there direct line in Florida .. Call them relentlessly 772 344 2556 and give them a taste of what its like

I wonder if that is the company that the spam calls are comming from...from their site
"Company Pricing
Range $499.00 up to $1499.00 "

From what I have read that is the amount people were or going to be charged for the "Credit Services"

There is a physical address..looks like they are next to a vet office.
--
»www.angryrenter.com/


DrStrange
Technically feasible
Premium
join:2001-07-23
West Hartford, CT
kudos:1
reply to jkk

If we can confirm that this is the business where the calling originates, the next person who receives a call can fill in that info on a complaint to the FCC. That will help them shut down this particular 'card services' operation.

It's a pity there aren't rewards paid for turning these people in. If the feds cut victims and informants in for even 1% of the $11,000-per-call fines from a successful prosecution, some people could have a nice second [or third, etc.] income.



bobby

@bellsouth.net

People, all of the numbers that you have listed with the exception of 1-800-218-8787 are spoofed numbers. Frauduantly using someone else's number instead of their own. How do I know? They used my number to call me one day. This is in violation of FCC and FTC rules (laws?). FCC and FTC will not heed our complaints. Nothing will be done by them to stop this. The have no power to enforce the Do Not Call lists.
Shutting down the organization for a couple of days a year is not enforcement. Fines of $1,000,000.00 are.

Prove me wrong please.

I just received a call and explained to them that my number has been on both the Federal Do Not Call list and my states Do Not Call list for three years, the girl responded "the is no call list" and hung up.

Nothing will be done.

I will now call the 1-800-218-8787 number 10 times a day, which will coast me nothing, but will cost them $. Be sure to place *67 in front of their nomber, *6718002188787 to block your number from being displayed.



DrStrange
Technically feasible
Premium
join:2001-07-23
West Hartford, CT
kudos:1

Submit the 800 number in your complaint along with your evidence that the owner of the 800 number is calling you.

That's something the FCC can act on.



AVD
Respice, Adspice, Prospice
Premium
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ
kudos:1

*67 suppresses caller id, 800#s use a different system which is NOT suppressed by *67


harald

join:2010-10-22
Columbus, OH
kudos:1
reply to bobby

The FTC is active in going after these folks, and has had some success, but they have the same problem we do - the number provided by caller ID is fake and there is no way to trace it after the fact.

If you are truly having trouble with repeat calls, get with the nuisance call bureau of your phone company. You'll have to push them and they will make you jump through hoops, but they will put an ANI trace on your line and pass the info to law enforcement.



Doctor Olds
I Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.
Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
kudos:18

1 recommendation

reply to bobby

said by bobby :

I will now call the 1-800-218-8787 number 10 times a day, which will coast me nothing, but will cost them $. Be sure to place *67 in front of their nomber, *6718002188787 to block your number from being displayed.

As posted by others, *67 does not work with Toll Free calls like 1-800, 1-888, 1-877, 1-866, or 1-855. They have ANI. There is no star-code (*-code) to block ANI.

Automatic number identification
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_···fication
quote:
Automatic number identification (ANI) is a feature of telephony intelligent network services that permits subscribers to display or capture the billing telephone number of a calling party. In the United States it is part of Inward Wide Area Telephone Service (WATS). ANI service was created by AT&T for internal long distance billing purposes,[1][2] and is not related to newer caller ID services. Inward WATS is purchased by customers so that other telephone users (for example, prospective customers) can call the number toll free. The customer is issued a distinctive toll-free telephone number beginning with a special area code such as 800, or more recently, 888, 877, 866, or 855. Subscribers to these numbers are typically called Inward WATS subscribers.

ANI has two components, information digits, which identify the class of service,[3] and the calling party billing telephone number.

ANI is also used to describe the functions of two-way radio selective calling that identify the transmitting user.
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time?

caps620

join:2009-01-18
Central NJ
reply to Ender3rd

We don't use our home phone all that much so a few weeks ago I decided to have our multifunction printer with FAX answer all the calls for a few days. So far so good, it's been quiet (for now) but I'm sure this is only temporary.



JALevinworth

@embarqhsd.net
reply to bobby

said by bobby :

FCC and FTC will not heed our complaints. Nothing will be done by them to stop this. The have no power to enforce the Do Not Call lists.

The Consumer Affairs Division has gone after the biggest offenders, but if people don't file complaints (the more the better) they won't be known.

You (or anyone) should look up your states laws on do not call. Each have them, and some are more stringent than the federal ones (my state's are). Many allow you to file civil suit according to the fcc doc here:
»www.fcc.gov/guides/unwanted-tele···ng-calls

I recall a few years ago there was a woman who brought a successful suit (in a state court) against a telemarketer for do-not-call. She managed to prove that she had informed the caller that she was on the do-not-call list, and had proof they called her many times over that since then.

In the end, the telemarketer was fined $1000 for each subsequent call/offense 30 times. The woman was awarded $30,000.

I tried googling to find a link about this case, but haven't found it yet. I'll post it if I do.

-Jim


DrStrange
Technically feasible
Premium
join:2001-07-23
West Hartford, CT
kudos:1

3 edits

Thanks for the reminder regarding state laws.

I can only sue them for actual damages plus attorneys' fees here [under CT Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act], but it looks like I can also send our Computer Crimes Unit after them even if they're operating across state lines.

They've been hitting my cell phone and the wife's cell phone 2 or three time a day lately. Maybe it's time to call the CT authorities.

EDIT: Wait a second. I read Chapter 735a of the CT Statutes, sections 42-110b and 42-110g, a bit more closely. The Court can award punitive damages as well, if I can prove reckless and wanton violation of my rights. *rubs hands together*

SECOND EDIT: I should read law more often.
47 U.S.C. § 227(f)(1). The Telephone Consumer Protection Act - I mistakenly thought the damages were only recoverable for junk faxing] A State AG can bring action on behalf of residents for $500 per call [Up to $1,500 if the caller willfully disregarded the law] or actual damages, or both. It doesn't specify who gets the $500, however. This is starting to look interesting.



JALevinworth

@embarqhsd.net

No problem. Bobby@bellsouth above actually reminded me about the state laws part (and also that woman's suit) when he mentioned being on his state's list and also feeling powerless.

On your edit, cell phone calls are supposed to be completely off-limits federally too (also stated in link above) so I would think the state's statutes would have that included (or strengthened) unless they specifically exclude it. I'm no lawyer though... just an observation on typically how it goes.

I too was rubbing my hands when I read about that woman, lol. If I remember correctly she was in the same state as me (NJ), which also allows calls to be recorded as long as 1 party in the call is aware.

-Jim


flashcore

join:2007-01-23
united state
reply to caps620

said by caps620:

We don't use our home phone all that much so a few weeks ago I decided to have our multifunction printer with FAX answer all the calls for a few days. So far so good, it's been quiet (for now) but I'm sure this is only temporary.

Just make sure you don't keep paper in it, the next thing you will see is fax spam wasting your paper and ink.


JALevinworth

@embarqhsd.net
reply to JALevinworth

Just saw your 2nd edit:

said by DrStrange:

SECOND EDIT: I should read law more often.
47 U.S.C. § 227(f)(1). The Telephone Consumer Protection Act - I mistakenly thought the damages were only recoverable for junk faxing] A State AG can bring action on behalf of residents for $500 per call [Up to $1,500 if the caller willfully disregarded the law] or actual damages, or both.

The federal statute I read is almost exactly the same.
said by DrStrange:

It doesn't specify who gets the $500, however. This is starting to look interesting.

If state AG does it, it's a criminal action (I could be wrong, but I can't see how it couldn't be) and in those cases, fines go to the state (unless written otherwise, such as fines go to victims), but see if your state allows a civil action. If you're the plaintiff in a civil action, you are awarded the damages.


DrStrange
Technically feasible
Premium
join:2001-07-23
West Hartford, CT
kudos:1

Thanks. If I'm still getting these calls next week, I'll call the AG's office and ask for clarification.



JALevinworth

@embarqhsd.net

Perfect. Thanks for the reply post too. Good stuff!

-Jim



Kibbles
Premium
join:1999-07-31
Mission Viejo, CA
reply to Ender3rd

I blocked 7 numbers this week...for a few days no new calls...then a new one was used.

Verizon has a block list...but its short and is not permanent.
I have seen a list of 12+ numbers on 800notes....so just blocking them is temporary

I know the numbers they are calling from are spoofed...but some of those numbers have been active for over a year.
I would think the carrier would block/delete that number...or could the system the scammers are using switch to another fake number if the first one it tries is blocked by the carrier and or the recipient of call?
--
»www.angryrenter.com/



Ender3rd

join:2001-07-15
Connecticut
reply to DrStrange

said by DrStrange:

Thanks. If I'm still getting these calls next week, I'll call the AG's office and ask for clarification.

After a long reprieve, I received another one of these calls several weeks ago. After the auto-bot finished its spiel I gave it the silent treatment for several minutes to tie their line up and it eventually disconnected. I have not heard from it since, but I expect it will start up again at any time. I'll be very interested in what you hear from the Connecticut AG's office DrStrange. In fact, if you call, it might be helpful for me to also call it in. Maybe two voices will be louder than one.
--
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them. (Charlie Reese)
Expand your moderator at work


Ender3rd

join:2001-07-15
Connecticut

1 recommendation

reply to JALevinworth

Re: [Scam] Card Services relentless phone calls revisited

said by JALevinworth :

if you set this up, post back how it's working out for you. If get the recording level right, you will note right away the robo calls will disconnect upon hearing the tone (getting deleted out the the bank may take more than one call though... although it's possible it might be due to my recording quality not the exact pitch or they have a set limit to try again, don't know).

I'd be curious to hear how you did.
-Jim

I finally got around to installing the SIT tone at the beginning of my answering machine's message. We simply don't answer any numbers that we don't recognize and let the machine take them. The robo calls click off immediately following the tone. Puzzled people who don't know my voice mumble and hang up. Our friends and family aren't sure what to make of it, but it amuses me. The message I installed is at the link below. Great fun, eh?

»www.w1aex.com/archive/SIT_tone_message.mp3
--
Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them. (Charlie Reese)


JALevinworth

@embarqhsd.net

said by Ender3rd:

I finally got around to installing the SIT tone at the beginning of my answering machine's message. We simply don't answer any numbers that we don't recognize and let the machine take them. The robo calls click off immediately following the tone. Puzzled people who don't know my voice mumble and hang up. Our friends and family aren't sure what to make of it, but it amuses me. The message I installed is at the link below. Great fun, eh?

Ahhhaha! Bravo! That's just freakin awesome.

May I have your permission to keep a copy?

-Jim

My shoulders are still rolling as I type this.....


DrStrange
Technically feasible
Premium
join:2001-07-23
West Hartford, CT
kudos:1
reply to Ender3rd

That's fabulous.



Ender3rd

join:2001-07-15
Connecticut
reply to JALevinworth

Sure, help yourself! It really seems to work well, so thanks for the idea. With the onset of the "political robo-call season" I'm looking forward to hearing the auto-bot robo-callers hangup each time they hear the SIT tone.



JALevinworth

@embarqhsd.net

said by Ender3rd:

Sure, help yourself! It really seems to work well, so thanks for the idea.

Got it. Thanks!
You're very welcome and glad to help.
said by Ender3rd:

With the onset of the "political robo-call season" I'm looking forward to hearing the auto-bot robo-callers hangup each time they hear the SIT tone.

I've gone months and months now having killed off the lists my house number was on, but the politcos are sure to start any time now. Might just use your file when I finally get rid of my old answer machine/manual method and fully automate my flow with that old number. No one that actually knows me uses it anyway.

-Jim


Doctor Olds
I Need A Remedy For What's Ailing Me.
Premium,VIP
join:2001-04-19
1970 442 W30
kudos:18
reply to garys_2k

said by garys_2k:

said by Doctor Olds:

As of today at 4:42 pm caller ID shows:

Lower Interest
503-457-1085

Thanks, they must have a block of 503-457-1xxx numbers, as I also have 1025 and 1836. Scumbags.

Today at 6:25 pm caller ID shows:

Lower Interest
503-902-8477
--
What’s the point of owning a supercar if you can’t scare yourself stupid from time to time?


DrStrange
Technically feasible
Premium
join:2001-07-23
West Hartford, CT
kudos:1
reply to Ender3rd

Logged 503-902-8287 at 2:34PM and again at 4:55PM. Filed another complaint with FCC regarding DNC. Will contact the CT AG's office tomorrow or Monday with my legal question.


garys_2k
Premium
join:2004-05-07
Farmington, MI

1 edit

Thanks, I added those two to the list. Looking at my phone logs I found another that can be added, called yesterday while we were out: 971-220-1262

Edit to add: I found one from a few days ago, now also added to the block list: 503-468-5012.


garys_2k
Premium
join:2004-05-07
Farmington, MI
reply to Ender3rd

A new one from yesterday: 503-902-8479


The Antihero

join:2002-04-09
Enola, PA
reply to Ender3rd

I had an interesting one last week. I don't recall the number that came up, but the name simply came up as "Phone." Like I was going to answer that one!