Telemarketer Blows Whistle on Tape-Altering Scam

Recently, Florida-based telemarketing firm Epixtar is frequently accused of cramming an extra $30 onto phone charges of small businesses, yet has proof of legality by recording their calls. Until they laid off some people, one of whom has blown the whistle. The companies' cramming tactics become "legal" by altering those taped recordings to include a quick statement about the $30 charge. MSNBC has the article, including a short audio clip of a sample call.

Comments

Screwed-over employees

[paranoid.android]

Until they laid some people

Well, I guess they really screwed their employees over, too.

Re:Screwed-over employees

[Workpad z50 User]

They screw the public and lay their employees. Sounds like one Fucked Company

Re:Screwed-over employees

[pheared]

After being laid they couldn't wait to start blowing "whistles".

The telemarketing biz doesn't sound so bad after all.

Re:Screwed-over employees

[gl4ss]

well, that's whats really 'nice' about telemarketing companies. they work so on the edge of profitability anyways that anything goes, the typical employees being elderly or naive young people who have failed to get a different job, and are promised 'make big $$$'. while in reality they end up getting below minimum wage(in theory they could be making nice $$$, but thats just theory).

really, of if i had to choose between telemarketing and mcdonalds crap job, big macs here i come(that way i at least get the paycheck i should be getting).

They WHA?!

[Your_Mom]

...Until they laid some people...

Damn, say what you want about telemarketers, but I think I want to work for this company.
The whistleblower obviously was a person that was not laid.

Re:They WHA?!

[switched4OSX]

or, perhaps, was one who was forced to blow the bosses "whistle"

Morality?

[dogbox]

What happened to people reporting this sort of stuff before they had a grudge against the company? Why do only former employees report this sort of thing?

Re:Morality?

[Jason1729]

As long as the employees were getting a big enough piece of the pie, they kept quiet. They should be charged with aiding in the crime.

Jason
ProfQuotes

Re:Morality?

[Planesdragon]

Because once you air this sort of thing, it sort of kills your career.

It's often better to voice your concerns internally, and work to improve the system from within.

I find it very moral to give a company a chance to improve itself. (How long a chance? About as long as it takes for the would-be-whistleblower to find a better job.)

Re:Morality?

[rodgerd]

People don't do telemarketing jobs because they have in-demand skills and a big pile-o-cash to fall back on if they get laid off and can't find another job once word gets out they rat on the boss.

It may be the right thing to do, but being in the right doesn't keep you off the streets, unfortunately.

Re:Morality?

[mark-t]

People who work for telemarketers are often fairly hard up for work as it is. If they do something to rock the boat before they've secured employment elsewhere, they can find themselves without any job at all. It's not easy to make waves when whether or not you're going to be able to pay rent next month depends on keeping your mouth shut.

Re:Morality?

[RWarrior(fobw)]

> Why do only former employees report this sort of
> thing?

I worked at a newspaper once. In my state, it is legal to carry a concealed firearm if you are licensed to do so. An employer or business may prohibit even licenced holders from carrying their weapons on the premises, and this newspaper does.

My supervisor didn't have such a license, because she found it too restrictive to bother with, in part because she couldn't take her weapon into bars. Instead, she worked a couple of nights a month as a volunteer patrol officer and was certified and licensed as a peace officer in Texas (having had a previous career as a full-time police officer). As a peace officer, she could carry her weapon anywhere, anytime she wanted to. That included bars, restaurants, and her place of regular employment, despite the no-guns policy.

The employer's representative had a meeting with her and they let her know in no uncertain terms that, under the law, while they couldn't prevent her from bringing her weapon to work, there were lots of reasons to fire people.

As a consequence, she left her weapon in the car when she came to work.

People who work for telemarketers typically aren't well paid, aren't in it because they love it, and do have families to support and bills that way outstrip their meager incomes, especially in bust economies where unemployment is rising.

It is illegal to fire people for whistle-blowing under state and federal whistle-blowing statues. A person so terminated can recover in a number of ways. Regrettably, most people aren't aware of their rights and even if they are aware of them, do not know how or do not have the money to invoke and protect them.

Besides, there are lots of reasons to fire people.

Re:Morality?

[mark-t]

Actually, if they do that, it's even better for you. It gives you proof of "constructive dismissal". It would be better if they found some reason that they could substantiate and you couldn't disprove, and fire you for that.

Re:Morality?

[Henry V .009]

As a consequence, she left her weapon in the car when she came to work.

Yeah, that makes your company a lot safer. Instead of having the gun in the hands of a female -- trained at its use, at that -- it's out in the parking lot. The first person to break into that car and find it will present a million (actually far more) times the threat that woman did. And the gun won't be there -- again, in the hands of a woman trained in its use -- in case it is ever needed.

I don't know how you feel about the whole situation -- you probably aren't responsible for the decision -- but I think it stinks.

Re:Morality?

[tedDancin]

It's often better to voice your concerns internally, and work to improve the system from within.

It makes you wonder what the laid-off employees (especially the whistle-blower) did to try and restore morality internally before going to MSNBC. Would you complain to management if you knew they would never/weren't intereseted in resolving the issue? Or would you just take the final paycheck and go tell the world?

The media is a powerful tool for an employee with little or no power inside their company.

Re:Morality?

[Billly Gates]

" It is illegal to fire people for whistle-blowing under state and federal whistle-blowing statues. A person so terminated can recover in a number of ways. Regrettably, most people aren't aware of their rights and even if they are aware of them, do not know how or do not have the money to invoke and protect them.

Besides, there are lots of reasons to fire people."

Problem 1 is that it costs money for justice or to prove your innocense in America. Since your fired you no longer have income to pay the legal fee's.

Problem 2 is you have to prove why you were terminated. The burden of proof is usually on the guy who has the least resources. A corporation can make shit up or can find a reason to can you.

I heard stories from other slashdotters of getting fired for leaving the lights on after work, coming in 5 minutes late, spending more then 30 minutes for lunch, being assigned something impossible to finish on purpose so you look bad during a performance review, etc. All of these cases had to do with things like threatening to join unions, complain about there bosses to hr, to threatening to quit, to just about anything.

After all this shit HR will force you to sign a self incriminating document as part of your pink slip to receive severance pay. If you refuse they will then terminate you for sub-ordination and disciplinary issues.

Either way in court they have documents to prove that your performance was the reason you were let go.

Last lets say by a miracle you won and your employer was forced to rehire you. Would you really want to continue to work there? Don't you think they will make you quit one way or another? Kind of like the weird guy in the movie office space. (they cut off his paychecks and moved him into the basement, and forced him to setup bug traps)

I was a merchandiser once and this lady came in late 3 out of 5 days a week and always complained. She filed a sexual harrasment complaint when my boss made her sign a document stating that she was about to be canned and she had 60 days to straighten her act or else. He fired her after she refused to sign it and cursed him off. HR forced him to rehire her after the complaint was filed. Anyway he gave her 3 times as much work to do as anyone else until she quit. Same is true here.

Re:Morality?

[Ian Bicking]

No, that's wrong. What this company was doing was illegal and fraudulent. Companies like this cannot be reformed, you can't improve a system where people knowingly and willingly commit fraud. Hell, you can't believe them when they say they've improved, maybe they've just realized they have to hide their actions from you too.

Not to mention that in a case like this people have been wronged by the company, and deserve redress, which will never occur due to internal reform.

Maybe if you believe the company is doing things that are unethical but legal, then you can try to reform from within. But when it's illegal (or deeply unethical) you have a moral duty to blow the whistle, even if it's going to suck for you. You aren't allowed to put ethics aside because they aren't convenient.

Re:Morality?

[enkidu]

If she were to go crazy, would it matter if the company wanted her to leave her gun in her car? Does the sign "No robbing of the bank allowed" deter any bank robbers? Perhaps you think that you should simply fire all employees who have access to a gun? Heck, you knew that they were a potential danger to the company. Where does liability begin?

Also its illegal in most if not all states to bring a weapon to work unless its the military or a police department.

Uhmmm, not in most states, and especially not Florida. In fact the reverse is true, military and police departments are one of the places where concealed weapons are consistently not permitted (including courthouses, jails, legislative buildings and airports).

I think this is bs but lawyers make a living doing scummy shit as this.

No argument from me.

Re:Morality?

[HaggiZ]

You dang americans with your pro-gun propoganda.

The employers primary concern would be their employees. If she is so well trained in its use you would expect her to know better than to leave it in a relatively unsafe car.

Re:Morality?

[mark-t]

As I said though, sudden demotion of duties or wages constitutes as substantiated evidence of "constructive dismissal", which is where the employer makes the work environment so unsuitable to the employee that he or she feels forced to quit. Where I live, a former employee suing for constructive dismissal is entitled to (in addition to legal fees) one year's worth of wages from his former employer, which is supposed to supply living expenses during which the person can search for another job.

Re:Morality?

[KDan]

It's also called "mobbing". It is indeed illegal.

Daniel

Re:Morality?

[echucker]

But when it's illegal (or deeply unethical) you have a moral duty to blow the whistle, even if it's going to suck for you. You aren't allowed to put ethics aside because they aren't convenient.

Personally, I think that's easier said than done in today's economy. I think a lot more people may find feeding one's family and paying the bills a little more important.

Re:Morality?

[Chief Crazy Chicken]

Because once you air this sort of thing, it sort of kills your career.

It's often better to voice your concerns internally, and work to improve the system from within.

. . .

Jesus of Nazareth did not die so we could enjoy eggs and chocolate bunnies!

Jesus of Nazareth did not voice his concerns internally and work to improve the system from within. True change requires true sacrifice, which few are willing to make.

Re:Morality?

[darkmeridian]

Maybe the whistleblowers are working with a sense of revenge, but ratting out the company also covers them from legal problems. If they took part in the fraud (like actually altering the tapes) and they get caught, the PHBs will claim ignorance and let the peons take the fall.

Also, as far as business ethics, it is important to document internal attempts at redress before going public. Read about the A-7 brakes. (On 28.8 connection, so no link for you.) Basically, the company was selling the Navy airplane brakes that couldn't possibly stop the plane without bursting into flames. One man tried to fix the system internally before he blew the whistle. Required reading (literally) on ethics.

Re:Morality?

[rhombic]

Maybe they could just take away his red Swingline stapler?

Re:Morality?

[jedidiah]

It's time for you to move out of your mother's basement.

Simply put, blood is thicker than water and moral pomposity won't feed the kids.

While it would be nice if we could all live perfect lives. The sad truth is that most of us are little more than worker ants doing whatever necessary merely to survive. Unless you were born with a silver spoon so far down your throat it was coming back out your *ss, "moral superiority" is simply something else you can't afford.

Re:Morality?

[Ian Bicking]

By NO measure I've encountered for morality requries someone revealed a crime in confidence--which a company's employees are--to break that confidence and reveal the crime.

What are you talking about? This applies to priests, lawyers, and psychiatrists. It does not apply to employees. Being an employee does not absolve you of the responsibility to report crimes. By that standard no one in Enron broke the law -- they were all in eaah other's confidence. Your conclusion is absurd.

Re:Morality?

[Planesdragon]

What are you talking about? This applies to priests, lawyers, and psychiatrists.

Those are the ones forbidden to come forth. It's a different state than "not being compelled."

It does not apply to employees. Being an employee does not absolve you of the responsibility to report crimes.

You DO NOT have a responsibility to report crimes unless you're a police officer or a lawyer. You have no right to impede investigation into crimes, but you are not compelled to come forth and testify about every "crime" you see.

By that standard no one in Enron broke the law -- they were all in eaah other's confidence. Your conclusion is absurd.

Y'know, you really should come up with a better model of absurdity.

No one in the Enron case who didn't have a special complusion to be honest--the CEO and the CFO and the auditor--broke any law by being silent about things that they may or may not have. And, similarly, those that did come forward didn't break any law either.

Please go look up the difference between 'compel', 'forbid', and 'allow.' They ARE different, you know.

"You just put your lips together and blow."

[Anonymous Coward]

Lends a different connotation to "blowing the whistle," doesn't it?

Fun things to say to Telemarketers

[Michael's a Jerk!]

Here Enjoy.

Re:Fun things to say to Telemarketers

[evilviper]

That may be stuff that is amusing to individuals, but it isn't exactly legally binding material. When they ask you if you want to order something, and you say "yeah, just in time, the bank hates bounced checks", you still gave a positive answer to the question.

I find it much better to know the laws, and ask them a million and one questions that they legally have to answer.

"What's the name of your boss??? And how do you spell 'Bob'? Slower! Again! Didn't quite catch that... Okay, and his last name? How do you spell that?" etc.

Waste enough of their time, and you'll feel much better, partly because they'll never be stupid enough to call you again.

Of course, with the federal do-not-call list, we may just see the end of telemarketers.

Re:Fun things to say to Telemarketers

[Phroggy]

Of course, the best thing to say is:

"Please add this number to your Do Not Call list."

(Note the important difference between "add" and "remove" - many people ask for their number to be removed, which does nothing - the company has plenty of lists of people to call, so if you get removed from one list, you're bound to show up on several more.)

Re:Fun things to say to Telemarketers

[wowbagger]

Please add this number to all Do Not Call lists your company and your client maintain.

Many telemarketing companies maintain different DNCs for each customer - ask them to put you on ALL their lists at once.

Not Surprising

[Bruha]

These tactics have been around in the industry for way too long. I had a roomate that used to make money off these cramming punks by telling them he had a better deal from X company and they'd give him 100 dollars to switch plus pay the switching fees and such. And he'd play all sides.

Man let me tell you his beer fund was funded :)

Different ethic standards?

[WegianWarrior]

"The company feels it operates ethically and has not done anything wrong," Nasca said.

If you're getting anrgy phonecalls from the people who are giving you money (more or less by voluntarely), you're probaly doing something wrong and / or unethically. Wether you give a damn is another matter entirely... many a sucxessfull business (spammers etc) depends on pissing people off.

on a similar note via snail mail

[phantomlord]

This week, I received a solicitation which was deceptively in the form of a bill from Internet Corporation Listing Service (ICLS). For $37.50, they offered to list my domain in a whopping 14 search engines.

The solicitation most definitely looked like a bill (front page and back page). The bottom half of the page is a tear away bill stub and the solicitation notice on the top right hand corner is in a lighter font than the rest of the text (though it's harder to notice on the scan).

Fortunately, I'm in the habit of reading all of my bills when they come in, but some people aren't. They obviously got the information from the internet WHOIS database even though that database is explicitly protected by a clause saying you can't datamine from it.

The next morning, I filed a complaint with the United States Postal Inspectors because of the deceptiveness and the likelihood that others will be fooled by it. Here is the complaint I sent:

I received a solicitation from ICLS which deceptively looks like a bill. Located on it, is a tear-away payment stub with a customer number, due date and amount with no reference to the fact that it's actually a solicitation on the stub. On the upper right hand corner, it does state "THIS NOTICE IS A SOLICITATION AND RECEIPT OF PAYMENT WILL CONFIRM YOUR ANNUAL LISTING", however, it is a lighter font than the rest of the solicitation.

While I, fortunately, did not fall for the solicitation, I'm concerned that other people whom aren't as careful could easily be deceived as without close examination, it will appear as a bill.

I'm still waiting to hear back from the postal inspectors to see what they have to say.

I own a small business,

[Jin Wicked]

And I've got a telephone, but I've not heard anything about this laying, blowing or cramming until now. Evidently I am in the wrong field.

All I ever get are wrong numbers.

More of the Classics

[Michael's a Jerk!]

How to piss off AT&T

A Nice List
Another Good List

50 Stupid things to Say

These bastards are a pet hate of mine. I've tried most of these at one stage or another. If you can keep from laughing, it's fun to string them along :-)

How fast can you speak?

[grungebox]

So, I know Epixtar added their "lightning-quick" phone-bill-altering deal to the tapes after the fact. However, what I want to know is: Is there some sort of legal requirement for how slow/quickly such statements have to be said? I mean, car commercials/ads routinely have quickly-spoken disclaimers at the end of ads and such. If Epixtar had merely tacked on the "we can alter your bill" or whatever phrase, only spoken at a Micro Machines guy speed so it seemed like crackly phone noise, would that be legal?

Re:How fast can you speak?

[ocelotbob]

Is there some sort of legal requirement for how slow/quickly such statements have to be said?

Yep, saying it extremely quickly is still a deceptive business practice, and thus a dispute would be covered by normal legal methods. Still a hassle, as the telcos have rather stupidly decided that you can't set it up so you have to have written authorization before people can add items to your bill; though it's fraudulent to tack things onto your phone bill, might as well make it difficult to do so.

Re:Until they laid some people...

[switched4OSX]

not to mention the size of the severance "package" the boss gives ya.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

To Hell with fair penalties.

[Rai]

I want one of two things: Either the company responsible for telemarketing fraud is fined the entire dollar amount of all assets plus 50% and all employees directly involved in the particular incident receive no less that 10 years in prison and a fine of no less than $25,000 per instance with all fines being equally disputed among those victims of this company's fraudulant operations.

Or I want button installed on my phone that will kill whoever is on the other line.

Re:To Hell with fair penalties.

[clem]

Or I want button installed on my phone that will kill whoever is on the other line.

Hopefully this button isn't close to the call waiting button. Take the following scenario:

"Mom? I'm getting a call on the other line, can you hold a sec?"

BZZZZZZT

"Er, Mom, you still there? Mom?"

Reality

[Kris_J]

If you're working at one of these places you're doing it for the money, not for a warm feeling. Morality is a luxury many people can not afford.

Re:Reality

[sould]

Morality is a luxury many people can not afford.

Fortunately, anonymity is a luxury everyone can afford.

There's no reason that the media couldn't have been tipped off earlier with an email from disgruntled_employees@hotmail.com.

Don't use morality as an exuse for their timidity.

Don't waste your breath with telemarketers.

[AnalogDiehard]

First they try to twist your responses to indicate an affirmative response for a sale, now this. This is the kind of crap that made me stop talking to telemarketers altogether. Don't waste your precious time with these deceivers, people. Don't even pick up the phone. Get caller ID and ignore incoming calls with no caller ID.

Check out this answering machine for your PC that deals with telemarketers who withhold their caller ID. The software can be configured to hang up on these cases and you will never hear the phone ring. It also implements white lists and black lists. Usual disclaimer applies.

Yes there is a risk of IDing legitimate calls as false positives. However, I've been monitoring my caller ID for over two years and can confirm that this is becoming less of a problem as more bell systems make their caller ID protocols compatible. So the risk is diminishing with time.

Yes this is a drastic move but until the law catches up this is how you have to deal with aggressive deceptive practices.

Caller ID is a godsend people - use it. Yes the telcos should be hung by their balls for extorting extra services out of the customers by selling personal information to scum telemarketers. In my next residence I will register my phone under an alias. If anyone calls asking for the alias, then they are immediately identified as a telemarketer and I will tell them there is no one here by that name. This crap has gone far enough.

Re:Don't waste your breath with telemarketers.

[markov_chain]

In my next residence I will register my phone under an alias. If anyone calls asking for the alias, then they are immediately identified as a telemarketer and I will tell them there is no one here by that name. This crap has gone far enough.

Hey, that's an awesome idea! Register yourself under the name Mr. Mudder Fokker, so that they avoid calling you in fear of getting in trouble for obscene phone calls :)

Re:Don't waste your breath with telemarketers.

[ocie]

What I do with telemarketers:

as soon as you realize that someone is trying to sell you something:

State loudly and clearly "I am not interested"

Put the phone down (don't hang up)

see how much longer they stay on the line.

Sometimes for a bit of variety, I put the phone next to the TV.

Re:what's the obsession with spam?

[Technician]

It almost is a good enough reason to drop the landline entirely. It adds to the TCO of a landline.

Somehow I see E-mail dying (replaced by online feedback forms) and Landlines dying (replaced by VoIP and wireless).

Any good technology can be turned into trash with the right tools.

"Anonymous Call Blocking"

[exhilaration]

Give your phone company a call and ask them to turn "Anonymous Call Blocking" on. It should be free. Then anyone blocking their caller ID will get a message like "This phone number does not accept anonymous calls. Thank you."

This will eliminate a small number of telemarketers - the rest will get through because they're calling from overseas and would have simply shown up as "out of area" or blank on your caller ID unit.

Re:"Anonymous Call Blocking"

[maxpublic]

Forget call blocking and caller i.d. Do what I did: disconnect your phone and go with a cell service.

Turns out that with all the long-distance calling I do the cell was actually cheaper than the regular phone line. Furthermore, it's illegal to make an unsolicited sales call to a cell - because the cell owner has to pay if *you* call.

Ever since I disconnected my land line and went to a cell (more than two years now) I've been completely telemarketer free. Not one bloody sales call, not even from those hell-fiends at AT&T.

You can't imagine just how much nicer life is when you know that *every* call you get is from someone you want to hear from, or at least need to hear from.

Max

Try cramming Epixtar

[iamacat]

Hold on. Slashdot has so many people experiences in social engineering. Why not give Epixtar a call and sell them some choice beachfront property in Arizona? Then if they don't pay, present them with a recorded conversation. After defending their strategy in court they wouldn't be able to just back out of it.

Better yet, try it on the next telemarketer that calls you. Should be fun and legal, since they called your "business" to "inquire about your services" themselves.

Another low trick

[bgeiger]

This actually happened to my dad. Keep in mind my dad works nights, and typically sleeps all day.

Telemarketer: "Hi, my name is [somebody] and... excuse me, can you hear me?"
My dad (still groggy): "Yes."
Telemarketer: "I'm calling to offer you suchandsuch a service... [blah blah blah garbage]"
Dad: "I'm not interested. Goodbye. *click*"

Next month, he notices his long distance service has been changed to (I think) AT&T.

They used his "Yes" answer to an irrelevant question, and turned it into a "sale".

People like that should be thrown in jail.

Re:Another low trick

[Catiline]

That's why whenever I speak with telemarketers, I do two things:

1. Make them give their pitch as soon as possible.
2. Always give a specific answer to a question: "I can hear you", "That information is correct", etc. avoiding general words of assent.

I knew the scummy ones would edit tapes, and mentally prepared myself ahead of time. If you find it's too much work to do this, you have two options: record the call yourself as well (less work but still work), or take another posters' suggestion and go all cellular. (Number portability-- which I assume will be compatible with land line number portability-- begins before the end of this year.)

So did anybody else notice...

[Lord_Dweomer]

o wait, yup, sure enough first 5 posts or so pointed out the um......"typographical errors". I can just imagine how the whole Clinton/Lewinski thing might have started.

What he meant

"If you blow the whistle you'll be laid off"

What he actually typed

"If you blow my whistle you'll be laid."

eh, easy mistake, anybody could have made it.

Best way to handle telemarketers...

[Winterblink]

The best thing to do is to say nothing except that you're not interested, and hang up. Add some expletives for effect if you desire. I've had to deal with some real pushy ones too, and it's amazing how hard they'll try to keep you from hanging up until you say yes to whatever crap they're selling.

The worst was a local newspaper calling around for new subscriptions. He starts out saying what paper he's calling about and asks whether I receive their paper. I say no. Then he starts off on a sales pitch, which I interrupt to say that the reason I don't receive the paper already is that I don't WANT it, since I get my news from the net. The guy actually tries to continue on reading the script or whatever he's got in front of him... took a couple tries to be polite about not wanting what he's selling before I just flat out said "Listen to the words coming out of my mouth. Not interested." and hung up on the guy. In retrospect that should have been my first response.

I'm amazed people still sit on the phone with these bottom-feeders and answer their questions, unwillingly signing themselves up for a ton of crap. It's not hard to tell them to piss off instead of falling for their tactics.

Re:Best way to handle telemarketers...

[DiveX]

No the best thing to do is to exercise your rights. Saying you are not interested and hanging up does nothing. They can continue to call after that. You need to SPECIFICALLY demand that your name be placed ON their Do Not Call list (i.e. not removed from some other generic list...this is important). Then demand a copy of their written policy regarding the maintenance of their Do Not Call list. They are required to send this do you as a matter of federal law (47 USC 227 - Telephone Consumer protection Act of 1991). Then if they continue to call, sue them in court for damages that are owed to you by statute.

Re:Best way to handle telemarketers...

[darkmeridian]

I once got a telemarketing call from a woman who, after I said no to her first spiel, actually told me that she got paid by how far down the script she got. She sounded as if she really needed the money (why else would she be doing this?) so I listened for about a minute or two more. I said no again, and then she thanked me and hung up.

The point I would like to make is that the telemarketers are people too. They just aren't as fortunate as we are since they are stuck in a crummy job. Don't scream curses at them; imagine if that was your sister on the other end. Just say no, please take me off your list, and if you really are pissed say goodbye and hangup. If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

Or you can do what I do, say you're twelve and your parents aren't home.

Poster didn't read the article...

[0x20]

The companies' cramming tactics become "legal" by altering those taped recordings to include a quick statement about the $30 charge.

That's not what the article says. It hints that the tape was cut off immediately after the person responded "Yes" to a group of questions asked quickly all at once, removing the rest of their response. Which is still bad but not nearly as bad as inserting bits into the conversation that never took place. I'm sure that's not far off, if it's not already happening in some cases, but it didn't happen here according to the MSNBC article.

"Put me on your don't call list"

[billstewart]

The standard thing to say to them in the US is "Put me on your don't call list". Almost all of them will. The last telemarketers I talked to for longer than that were

• One that was unclear enough it took a couple of minutes to figure out quite what he was calling about to figure out that he was a telemarketer.
  
• MCI, because I wanted to hassle one of their supervisors, because I had already asked to be on their don't call list (their system isn't bright enough not to apply the list to multiple phone numbers at the same household, and they were calling my modem. And I work for a telco, and not only did their best rate not beat our employee discount, their employee discount wasn't that hot either. But that was some years ago, and neither is ours now :-)
  
• The California Narcotics Officers Association, or actually a telemarketer selling for them. They were the sleaziest, most evil cause that's ever called me on the phone. Not only do they run a "charity" that gives money to cops for violating people's individual human rights, they lobby for more drug laws and against medical marijuana, because their business would be hurt if people didn't consider their political correctness to be more important than pain suffered by cancer patients. I wasn't able to talk the telemarketer into stopping promoting them, but I did talk to several people there about them.

My telemarketing rule #1

[joejoejoejoe]

NEVER BUY ANYTHING.

Never confirm more than your name, and ask for theirs first.

A person/company calling you has you at a great advantage. It could be an inmate of a prison just trying to get your credit card, and all he/she started with was probably a phone book or Internet connection... I mean come on, they almost always BLOCK their source phone number. How can you even remotely trust someone who is hiding behind an unidentified phone number, wanting to sell you something???

It is like social engineering, surely we here on /. are all aware of how that works. (Free Kevin, oh wait, nevermind) But these guys are just plain arrogant about it. Did you hear the womans voice when she was asked to repeat something? She got a real nasty tone. The social response to that is to not ask for anything to be repeated. And voila, he gets nailed with some services and charges he never really even heard, or realized he was buying.

Now what I have always wanted to do, but never have, is when the call starts and they say it may be recorded, I would say "Good, for my records and quality assurances I AM RECORDING THE CALL TOO." How do you think the would respond to that? most likely "Click."

I Recommend a Seinfeld

[michaelhood]

JERRY: Uh, sorry, Excuse me one second. Hello.

TEL: Hi, would you be interested in switching over to TMI long distance service.

JERRY: Oh, gee, I can't talk right now. Why don't you give me your home number and I'll call you later.

TEL: Uh, I'm sorry we're not allowed to do that.

JERRY: Oh, I guess you don't want people calling you at home.

TEL: No.

JERRY: Well now you know how I feel. [Hangs up]

Seinfeld Episode Transcript

Hell, NSI did/does that

[Sycraft-fu]

I switched from NSI to a different registrar sometime ago for obvious reasons. NSI, of course, tried to stop that from happening but I'd done my homework and everything went smoothly since everything was in order. Several months later I recieve a bill from NSI. I am prepared to get all angry when I notice it's NOT actually a bill, it just looks like bill. It's really a form to transfer my domain back and charge me for it.

I told the FTC about it and they told me that I was not the only one to complain and they were looking in to it. Dunno what ever came of it, NSI has left me alone since.

what are the stipulations?

[CAIMLAS]

EXACTLY. Having been forced into telemarketing for a short period of time myself (due to financial reasons) I can attest that very few people that are able to continue telemarketing work full time have no souls. I didn't last 40 hours, and the only reason I lasted that long was because i had my fiancee providing emotional support, and I couldn't afford to quit.

In my mind, telemarketing is about as self-damaging as prostitution. I'd probably put it up there on the moral scale, too. Its time we see religoius groups going into telemarketing offices and trying to save their souls.

Actually, I think that a prostiute is lest morally detestable than a telemarketer - at least prostitutes can feasably enjoy their job, and it pays better.

Re:what are the stipulations?

[togtog]

One more thing, in the case of prostitution using the service is completely optional. Whereas in telemarketing it crosses the boundries of the home. There is little escape from it. It's really a complete reversal from prostitution in how unethical it is.

-tog

Re:what are the stipulations?

[drinkypoo]

Actually, I think that a prostiute is lest morally detestable than a telemarketer - at least prostitutes can feasably enjoy their job, and it pays better.

Uh, your post made little sense in general (I hope English is not your first language) but this last sentence really takes the proverbial cake. The fact that you enjoy your job and get paid well does not make you moral. A CEO of an overly large software and operating systems company utilizing unfair marketing practices to crush hopes and dreams, and a contract killer could both have those things in common.

The moral defense of prostitution is that it is a victimless crime, which makes you wonder why it is a crime at all. As George Carlin says, "Selling is legal; fucking is legal. Why isn't selling fucking legal?" As far as I can tell, it is religious in nature, based on the prohibition of extramarital sex. Sex, even for money, is still a fairly beautiful and awe-inspiring thing. People not getting laid is probably a significant cause of misbehavior in this world, and so I favor anything outside of rape or coercion that lets more people have it.

Make No Mistake -- This Is Organized Crime

[LaCosaNostradamus]

The overall situation is worse than the article leads you to believe. This is something that I wouldn't expect to see fully explained on any major news site like MSNBC. The situation is thus: You don't need any proof -- or real proof -- in order to steal money from people via their phone bills.

Back in the 1990s I began to realize that a phone bill became viewed as a charge account that organized crime could tack charges onto. This accusation includes organizations like AOL. Charges for goods and services -- delivered or not, worthwhile or not -- could be tacked onto the billing statement, which would be automatically sent and almost automatically paid for. It was simply too good to believe for mafiosi large and small ... but by 1997 I could only change my own behavior in response to the groundswell of all the legalized fraud that was going on. By that year, I knew that I had to hangup immediately to avoid entanglement with a calling telemarketer, and that my phone bills had to be carefully scrutinized every month. *

This new environment has encouraged sociopathic wariness to contact with businesses. Congratulations, Corporate America!

By 1998, I could clearly see a workable but fraudulent business model arising. It's relatively simple ... you issue about 10 thousand blatantly false charges to 10 thousand homes and small businesses via your "Internet service company" and collect from the percentage that don't bother to (effectively) fight your fraud. The next month, you go after another 10 thousand addresses. After a year, you'll have to close down the business to stay ahead of the cops, but by then you've accumulated over half a mill. You pay yourself well, your mafioso helpers okay, and then invest in the next scammer slammer business.

You don't need vox proof of anything, but such things can be falsified when necessary. One anecdote (names altered) springs to mind of what happened within my circle of friends. I know a small, used bookstore named Smather's Books, run by Ms. Smith. One month she noticed a $29.95 item tacked onto her small-business phone bill for "Internet Yellow Pages service" (or something like that). She called to investigate, and when she finally got to the right person at at the IYP service company, they played a recording for her from "Mister Smather". On the tape she clearly heard Mr. Smather authorizing the IYP service.

This would all be fine and dandy, except for the fact that there is no Mr. Smather.

"Smather's Books" is just a name she made up that was close to her own name. The tape was falsified. Even after she pointed this out to the IYP company, she didn't get very far with them, and only after complaining to the telco did the charge get dropped from her bill.

The use of threat and deception to acquire money is morally criminal. Make no mistake at all on this telemarketing and other boiler-room matters ... much of it is organized crime, and it should be treated as such. They should be arrested, charged and prosecuted for what they do. Hopefully when arrested they try to resist and are shot dead on the spot.

* By 2001, I no longer answered my phone, preferring to screen all calls.

Scary Paradigm

[anubi]

I find it scary when one incurs charges by just a quickie phone call. They have their script all rehearsed and phrased where they can blurt out so called binding agreements, and we are "socially expected" to be polite and give a "timely" response, like on the order of seconds.

What scares me is businesses are arranging with banks on direct account withdrawals, and checking account numbers are pretty easy to come by. I mean, if you have ever paid something by check, they have it. And now, they do not even need a signed check to get withdrawal. So you could see charges showing up on your checking account that you have no idea what is.

And dealing with a business is kinda scary, because they have links to Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian. They can mess up your credit and then you have to straighten that out too. You might as well pay them their money just not to have to argue about it. I mean, like me - if I get my credit all screwed up over some business that slipped a charge on me for some "professional services listing" and I refused to pay, I might be denied a job because of that stain. And they know this.

So, I try to keep any monthly billing I have to as few of entities as possible. Once a company has legitimate billing access, they have a foot in the door that a telemarketer can use to fool me into thinking I am doing business with somebody I am already doing business with... like the way they bamboozled the guy with the trick 4-in-one question that if he said "yes" ( which was the obvious answer to three of the questions - if the name, address, and number was correct ), he implies acceptance of the quickly stated fourth question - that he is authorized to modify his billing.

With a business model out now that depends on signing up monthly billing, I see the opportunity for scamming artists soaring, as the number of open accounts, ripe for modification, soars.

I continue all attempts to make purchases on a per-instance basis, meaning I pay full price for the product and close the sale, leaving no loose ends. None of this "support", "warranty", "revolving charge account", etc. I walk out the door with the product, and the vendor has been paid in full. That way things don't change after the agreement has been made.

I have done way too much business already with businesses ( especially insurance companies, and any company having anything to do with investments ) that love to send me tons of paper describing changes after I have agreed to something.

Damm, I just don't have time to read it all. I really *hate* to do business under that business model.

This is the thing that had me so worked up over the Lexmark Printer thing ( where Static Control Concepts tried to make an aftermarket replacement toner cartridge but ran afoul of DMCA because Lexmark put a chip in the toner cartridge, and SCC could not legally duplicate the chip. ). Once this paradigm catches on in the business community, I fear we will see the end of going to WalMart to get replacement aftermarket goods for our day-to-day expendables. Companies could demand and get agreements for monthly billings, and once that's in place, the door is wide open for rampant trickery to modify those agreements.

NY State Residents avoid telemarketers

[joppe]

After the telemarketing got too bad, I dumped my landline for a cel-only lifestyle. Eventually, telemarketers got the cel number. But then I found out that NY State, among others, has a free "Do not call" registry, which really works:

https://www.nynocall.com/index.html

We've received those too...

[Veldcath]

The tech contracting company I work for had a small outsource development section. We host a few websites and we've been getting these ICLS 'bills' for a while.

Even more disturbing are the numerous pieces of mail we receive that look JUST LIKE Network Solutions' renewal notices except that they refer you to some website that's not affiliated with them.

Several of our clients have received these misleading 'bills' or 'warnings' and have contacted us out of concern that they were about to lose their service or whatever.

-V

You should have the RIGHT to phone bill integrity.

[YoungHack]

A lot of scams could be nipped in the bud by
one simple right. I should have the RIGHT to
request that only my phone company put charges
on my phone bill.

My cable company does not put charges on my
electric bill.

My electric company does not put charges on
my gas bill.

My gas company does not put charges on my
water bill.

But my phone company tells me that by law they
must put charges on my bill from carriers, even
if I don't have a business relationship with
them.

Of course you have the right to remand a charge
and have the company bill you for it. But you
have to notice the charge first. I'll tell you,
the phone bill is the one bill I scrutinize every
month. I have had several fraudulent charges on
my bill in the last 5 years.

If scam artists had to bill you direct like any
other business, that would not eliminate fraud,
but it would keep people from going 8 months
without even noticing.