Warning Warning Warning

[emmaf01]

That's the bit I hate- when I go through the pile of (sometimes unopened) mail, and an age of phone messages!

[Slippy272]

karnevil - About your 4 calls 08701240200: do you by any chance know what company that number belongs to? I've received several calls to my home phone from this number, but they never leave a message & I'd rather not call them back as I don't know who they are!!

I'd be really grateful for any info.

 

 

G money and first national - it goes through to a pre recorded message.

[gretal69]

I keep getting frequent harrassing calls off Citi Cards. Practically every other day. Me and my hub have split up so I wrote to Citi explaining that I could not afford to pay my monthly repayments in full because my circumstances have changed. I sent them a financial statement and told them I could afford £15.00 a month and asked them if they would freeze interest and charges.

 

I then received a call from Citi putting pressure on me and asking me if I could afford to pay more. I'm like hell no. (I only work 5 hrs a week, got 3 young kids, so I am living off my salary, tax credits, child benefit and get £80 a week off the ex. I have to pay full rent, council tax, gas, elec, phone, etc etc) Anyway they asked me to send them a financial statement, and I'm like WTF I've sent you one. Next, they are asking for a payment straight away, and I'm like I will pay you in a few days when my cash goes in the bank, and they say, yeah fine.

 

Two days later I receive another phone call, (I always receive these calls around 7.30pm when I am getting my kids ready for bed etc, and I am like at home from 1pm and they don't bother to ring then do they!,) anyway I receive this call from another person asking me exactly the same question again "can you pay more, can you make a payment now, send a financial statement bla, bla bla," I'm like HOW MANY MORE TIMES????

 

A day or 2 later on a Friday another phone call. This time I am told I am in arrears bla bla bla. I repeat myself again and make a payment of £15 by debit card, then they ask me to make another payment in the next few days, and I'm like no, I have made an offer to pay £15 a month, and again they tell me that I need to send a financial statement. Well Jesus F*****G christ, put me through to somebody who is British! What do I have to do to get through to these stupid bunch of dimwits! I still get calls, off somebody different each time, asking me for payments, to send a financial statement bla bla, and I end up repeating myself over and over again.

 

Frustrated, and distressed because I am having a bit of a shit time at the moment, I wrote to Citi, again, with my offer, sent another financial statement and added a complaint of the frequent harrassing calls. I am hoping these calls will stop because I am getting really peeeeeeed off now. I feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall!

[gretal69]

Have I posted my last message in the wrong place?!!!!!!!!

[Slippy272]

That's not allowable really.

 

There is a thread on here somewhere about who you can write to and what is and isn't allowable.

 

I haven't time at the moment to find it - but it sounds like you could create a real fuss!

[johnyboy]

I've been living abroad for a while and I keep getting calls from a foreign debt collection agency for a previous tenant.

 

This only stopped when I started saying "you sound really sexy, what are you wearing?"

 

They don't like that for some reason

[Annbary]

Often one has to enjoy annoying these callers, I get calls after 8pm, when I do, I immediately ask for name and their home phone number!

They get shocked, and alway say that is "personal" and cannot give it away, then I come down on them like an avalanche on them for calling me during my private hours. Then I ask for their full names, their bosses name and their contact number, they fudge away and keep a bitter taste in their mouth, they never call again.

[stevokenevo]

Post #85 (not wanting to quote it) Is that Vicky Pollard in disguise???

[MARTIN3030]

Yes you should tell them.

For a start they are in breach of the administration of Justice act.

[No6]

I agree creditors have the right to chase for money owed, but it must be done fairly and legally. Calling debtors at work is one thing which definitely shoud be outlawed it happened to me once and all the gossips listen to your private phone calls, especially if you work in an open plan office, they sense it's private, everyone goes quiet and listens in, it's amazing human behaviour. Just like it goes quiet before a thunderstorm, even traffic seems to disappaer for some reason, the birds go quiet.

 

Anyway I digress, chasing debtors must be done fairly, and having been in debt for many years in the past and gone through several CCJ's belive me you are better taking the initiative and calling your creditors, face the music, come to an arrangement, take the initiative otherwise they will, and have a right to hound you. After all I'd do the same if someone owed me.

[voddiemonster]

Exactly there is NO logical reason why these companies (or hospitals) need to have anon numbers if theyre worried about ppl calling it it can be set to not accept incoming calls easily enough.

 

As for not answering anon calls well if its important thats what the answer phone is for lol

 

 

Actually i will think you will find there is a very good reason why some NHS clinics, hospitals etc choose withheld number plans, not every department is phoning about something you would share with your mother over a coffee and a biccie if you know what i mean.

 

Solicitors also use these withheld number lines, maybe not so important for some case files but for an abused partner trying to file and injunction or find out advice on how to go about divorce or sheltered housing, the last thing they need is a number that can be traced back if a recorded log is left on the phone.

 

Some companies do this to protect the person they are trying to get in touch with, not to victimise.

 

Oh does it show i have 8 years of working in law behind me and now work for the NHS lol

[buzby]

These reasons, and more have been used by those trying to justify withholding their telephone number, but all are bogus. Hospitals have no implied right to anonymity, and since no private information would be disclosed until they were sure they were speaking with the patient, the fact that some NHS trust is calling is not the issue. The fact they feel they have the right to be anonymous, is. I have ACR on my line and these callers here an announcement saying I do not accept calls from 'withheld' callers. If it is important, they can release their number and call again.

[voddiemonster]

These reasons, and more have been used by those trying to justify withholding their telephone number, but all are bogus. Hospitals have no implied right to anonymity, and since no private information would be disclosed until they were sure they were speaking with the patient, the fact that some NHS trust is calling is not the issue. The fact they feel they have the right to be anonymous, is. I have ACR on my line and these callers here an announcement saying I do not accept calls from 'withheld' callers. If it is important, they can release their number and call again.

 

 

With most companies i would say yes but some, as i said earlier do it for protection for the person in which they are calling and i find that totally understandable and acceptable.

 

You dont have to have been a finalist on Mastermind to if a solicitor's phone number is calling you back and you have been beating up your partner what that phone call is proberbly about (i am not saying anyone here by the way just giving examples of situations, not accusations), neither would it much of a shock if you rang back a number you didnt know and found out it was an STD clinic or Mental Health Clinic. You would know someone in that household had been in contact with or attended those places.

 

All a person has to do if they are nosy is dial the number back or even go on the net to locate where the number comes from. No patient history would be released anyway but someone in your household would know your secrets or who you are in contact with and sometimes thats enough to cause major problems or issues.

 

It is times like this i feel numbers should be and are held to protect and provide privacy for the individual.

[buzby]

Isn't that particular argument one of the tail wagging the dog? It's not a name, but a number! It doesn't display SOLICITOR or HOSPITAL (or it could do, but that wasn't adopted). As for protecting the call recipient, if they are that sensitive, the display can be cleared and even BT provide a (free) code that wipes it from 1471. For the 'nosey' person in a non-director exchange, all they discover is that it came from some town with 100,000 lines - in a director area, it can be slightly smaller, but with number portability you cannot even tell where or which network the line belongs to. Of course, they could dial the number and ask, but the same would happen in the call recipient wasn't in and then was left a message to call back the call originator - whether the number is shown electronically or on a piece of paper the end result is the same.

 

Since there are by far too many abusive calls made from numbers where the number is withheld, I think we should go the OTHER way, and ban ALL callers from withholding their number. ACR at least allows me to ensure they cannot get through, but why should I have to pay to block their block?

[patdavies]

These reasons, and more have been used by those trying to justify withholding their telephone number, but all are bogus. Hospitals have no implied right to anonymity, and since no private information would be disclosed until they were sure they were speaking with the patient, the fact that some NHS trust is calling is not the issue. The fact they feel they have the right to be anonymous, is. I have ACR on my line and these callers here an announcement saying I do not accept calls from 'withheld' callers. If it is important, they can release their number and call again.

 

There are a couple of wrinkles that you need to consider, before moving to condemnation.

 

 

1)

 

All the phone extensions in the hospital from all departments will be routed through a central switch (PABX). To make external calls, this switch will have attached trunks (lines). For the most part, and unless specifically configured otherwise, any external call will be routed over nay free trunk.

 

However, it is not possible to deliver the extension number calling as a CLI (Calling Line Identifier - which is what is needed for you to have caller display). The telcos (and BT lead on this) will only allow a single common CLI for the trunks. If a hospital calls and you miss the call, if a singe CLI is presented then you will have a number - however, if you call this, at best you will get the manual switchboard (eventually) who won't have a clue who originally called you. So the callback will be wasted time and money that you may resent.

 

2)

 

If a hospital rings to speak to an individual, then data protection legislation mandates that they only speak to that individual. If the 'wrong' person picks up the CLI and rings back, then the fact that a hospital answers may set questions flying that the intended individual may not wish to answer.

[patdavies]

I I think we should go the OTHER way, and ban ALL callers from withholding their number. ACR at least allows me to ensure they cannot get through, but why should I have to pay to block their block?

 

So if you ring a debt collector, bank or other leech, you are perfectly happy to hand over the number of your land line?

 

I'll try not to ring you as we have permanent CLI blocking.

 

Something else that upset Sky:p - however, I couldn't find anything in their T%Cs that made CLI a specific requirement.

[buzby]

As I noted earlier, these are, and remain today bogus excuses;

 

All the phone extensions in the hospital from all departments will be routed through a central switch (PABX). To make external calls, this switch will have attached trunks (lines). For the most part, and unless specifically configured otherwise, any external call will be routed over nay free trunk.

 

Ah - the 'technical' argument. In the days of klanky manual exchanges the above was quite common. Indeed, this was the excuse put forward by firms for the trunk number to be suppressed (as it would not provide useful information to the call recipient). Some 15 years on, they still try this, yet PABX equipment has readily supported the injection of a Presentation Number to identify a valid DDI for the extension making the call. For those situations where this would be unsuitable, a generic number is provided - again a Presentation Number - should the call recipient make contact, hears an announcement that the XYZ Co called, and if the matter was urgent, would call back.

 

 

If a hospital rings to speak to an individual, then data protection legislation mandates that they only speak to that individual. If the 'wrong' person picks up the CLI and rings back, then the fact that a hospital answers may set questions flying that the intended individual may not wish to answer.

 

This one is the spurious argument. Since the hospital will not disclose what or why they called to anyone other than the patient, are you seriously suggesting that the patient has no right to know the hospital is calling them, in case someone else notices the number and grills the patient on their condition? Hardly realistic, as this would disenfranchise more than it would help. Considering - if the subscriber had a TAM, and the hospital left a discreet message, following your scenario, this would be equally heinous. If there could be an issue that the patient - who was really due to visit the VD clinic, explains away the call by saying they've to contact out-patients for an annual check solves the problem. Have you forgotten that if the patient realises the call IS from the hospital can arrange to call back when the family is out?

 

As to Sky and their use of CLI for box-matching. The reason why Sky DON'T put anything in their T&C about it, is because they do not need to. They receive your number when your box calls in, irrespective of whether you have your line CLI blocked or not. How? Firms that take incoming calls have them delivered digitally, complete with the C7 signalling information provided as part of the routing information. Within the C7 data is a pile of info, including your number and whether it should be displayed or not. They're not going to display it, of course, but they know the number of the line connected to the calling box.

[No6]

Bloody telephones are the devils invention. i hate them, love email or the internet but phones are a damn nusiance.

 

Never give your phone number out except to trusted friends, always get it automatically withheld, go ex-directory and register with the telephone preference service. Never ever call any number beginning with "08" or "09" (except 0800 - freephone), people will soon get the message. Phone calls can be recorded with or without your permission, never casually put your number on competition entries etc (that's how sales people get your ex-directory number), basically, you don't need to give it to companies at all, except perhaps if you are expecting a delivery, but give the sods a mobile number it costs them more.

 

I've done all this and life is much better. When the phone rings I pick it up with confidence. No more hassle.... ahhhh bliss.

[Fred Bassett]

I hope this helps somebody. A couple of years ago, I went to this site: dmClub - Business and Free Personal Phone and Fax Numbers with Unified Messaging (Phone, FAX and Email) and got a free voice mail number. It's a good service - you get automatically emailed the message if anyone leaves one. I changed my number with all my creditors to this one and I can now choose to ring or not if messages are left.

 

Best thing about it is that it costs them a lot more than your usual number!

 

Regards.

 

Fred

[Finalreminder]

Choose to Refuse by BT is an excellent option to consider.

[buzby]

Also they are using what is classed as a premuim rate number 0807

 

By whom? There are NO Premium Rate numbers on any 08xx code - - not in the last 10 years anyway!

[Pliny the Penuriosus]

By whom? There are NO Premium Rate numbers on any 08xx code - - not in the last 10 years anyway!

 

The OFT consider 0807 to be premuim rate & should not be used by creditors & DCA's to generate income from defaulters. They may also decide that 0845 should also not to be used

[buzby]

Well, if the OFT consider 08 anything Premium Rate, they're more stupid than I previously gave them credit for.

 

However you talk of an 0807 code - I'm not aware of any. If you mean 0870/0845 the former 'national/local' rate codes, then OFT has absolutely no say in the matter. This matter is regulated by OFCOM, and it may come as a surprise, but 'revenue share' does not mean Premium Rate.

 

Premium Rate calls have to follow particular rules and be licenced, control of which is vested in ICSTIS who deal with complaints. PREMIUM rate calls, commence 09xxx. There may be a caller premium charged for dialling 08xx numbers (including 0800 and 0808 but saying these numbers are premium rated when they are not, is just plainly misleading.

[Pliny the Penuriosus]

Well of course I meant 0870 & if you don't think they are premuim rate I must assume you happy to use them no matter what the OFT state.

[buzby]

Nooo - you misunderstand. OFTEL (as was) published a consultation paper in 1986 (I think) proposing 'flexible' rates for number that were not based on the charges levied by the phone company.

 

I (and many others) objected, saying that this would be a bad move as it meant the consumer would be misled into the cost and have no control over their bills. OFTEL responded by saying (a) They'd have to learn (b) They cannot stand in the way of competition in the marketplace © If they didn't allow it, they could be sued for restraint of trade.

 

Nothing we said changed their minds - so, we're stick with it. Am I happy? No - I think it stinks. Am I happy to use them? Why, I have Premium Rate blocking, I cannot call them. As for non premium calls - I use saynoto0870, and everyone else can learn to do the same.

 

Your argument is with OFTEL for allowing it, and OFCOM for allowing it to continue. Until this changes, it is legal and proper to offer services in this way. ITV Play is turning into a financial disaster because folk are only now realising it's all a con.

 

You have to ask yourself, why did it take so long?