O2 bill for B4U 84010 text scam despite police warning

[El Gringo]

Apr 7th, 2006, 2:09pm
I suspect that a lot of people will have had 84010 unsolicited text messages on the 31st March this year. Looking on Grumbletext there appears to have been a deluge of them. They come from Dialogue Communications Limited according to O2, they gave me an 0871 number of course. Of course O2 didnt want to know, they even claimed it would only cost the same as a 01/02 number to dial 0871 fomr the mobile ! Dialogue in turn washed their hands completely of the problem, extremely rudely I might add, saying they were only a service provider !!!! , then tell you to ring B4UTELE.com, again an 0871 number, only charged at 1p per minute, yes they both claimed this.

I would be very interested to hear from other members if they had the same scam pulled on them, by the way I have sent in the geographical numbers for both, Dialogue is 0114 281 5275, B4UTELE is 0121 643 7969. I got the Dialogue number from ICSTIS after much complaining and refusing to hang up. Of course, as usual everyone blames everyone else.

I won't hold my breath for a refund.

Originally Posted by Saynoto0870

Subject of the post : 84010 (4885 posts) by cswa at: 19:22 29/03/06
84010 I am a PAYG with O2 & have been for a few years. I received an unsolicited message from the scam artists at Dialogue Communications Ltd, owners of 84010 according to ICSTIS. It wasn't even a joke, just some advert offering no doubt spurious vouchers from a mobile phone website (www.B4Utele.com). I have never subscribed to a text service in my life. I would love to catch whoever sold these 'see you next tuesday's' my number.

CITY OF LONDON POLICE MEET WITH NETWORK OPERATORS
Offences
The COLP ECD advised Networks of the importance of due diligence and the dangers
of doing business with people that they suspected were involved in criminality. It was
stressed that Network Operators may be committing offences if they continue to do
business with people after such suspicion arises.

Originally Posted by City of London Police Economic Crime Department (COLP ECD)
1 February 2006

Grumbletext
I have never actually sent any texts from my O2 number ever! After he'd investigated further, he told me that it appeared there had been other similar complaints about this same 84010 in the last few days. I said that in that case, it seemed to me that someone out there was fraudulently obtaining money from O2's customers through O2 and that maybe they(O2) should look into it.

Originally Posted by Grumbletext 18/04/06

Why is New Labour giving O2 and the other washing machine operators immunity from police investigation?

[El Gringo]

31 st May 2005
MDA Members serve with ICSTIS and IMCB
Mike Short, MDA Chairman and Vice President for Research, Development and
Technology for Network Operator O2, has joined ICSTIS, the Independent Committee for the Supervision of Standards of Telephone Information Services, in a move which sees the appointment of three new committee members drawn from the commercial
arena.

Independent no. Involved yes.

17 January 2005
Provider(s) O2 Online Ltd
Telephone network(s) O2
Service type Reverse-billed adult information
Cost £1.50 per message
Fine £500
Sanction Formal reprimand

5 May 2005
Provider(s) O2 Online Ltd
Service type ACE Recorded service and Unsolicited SMS advice
Cost £1.50 per message
Fine £10,000
Sanction 12 month bar on this service

31 March 2005
Provider(s) O2 Online Ltd
Telephone network(s) O2
Service type Prize claim shortcode
Cost £1.50 per minute
Fine £10,000
Sanction Service barred for twelve months

8 July 2005
Provider(s) O2 Online Ltd
Telephone network(s) All Mobile Networks
Service type Adult Chat
Cost £1.50 per message received
Fine £2,000
Sanction Formal reprimand. Service barred for 6 months or until permission is granted
whichever time is longer

4 April 2005
Provider(s) O2 Online Ltd
Telephone network(s) 02
Service type Reverse-billed SMS download
Cost £1.50 per message received
Fine £10,000
Sanction Service barred for 12 months

[El Gringo]

whois B4U

© 2003 copyright B4U ™ Trademark of K.S.B Trading Ltd

www.B4Utele.com
Registered Address:

B4U Telecom Ltd
90 Broad Street
Birmingham
West Midlands
B15 1AU

0121-632-4710

KSB Trading Ltd
Company ID: 39505
Member Since: April 2004
Contact Person: Rav Banga
Online Status: Member currently offline Member is currently offline
Address: 90, Broad St, Birmingham, B15 1AU
Country: UNITED KINGDOM
Tel: 0121 643 9988
Fax: 0121 632 4710
Business Type: Export/Import

[El Gringo]

The MHRA updating service for medicines

The MHRA updating service
for medicines
No. 143 May/June 2004

New manufacturer’s and wholesale dealer’s licences issued
in March and April 2004

Licence.............Licence Holder
WL 19854.........Mr Ravindar Banga, 90 Broad Street, Birmingham, West Midlands, B15 1AU

[El Gringo]

Subject of the post : 84010 (4911 posts) by Barrie at: 12:11 04/05/06
08712316604 Like so many other posters (it's good to see that I am not alone!), I've fallen victim to text scam. HOWEVER, I rang the 0871 number for Bergholt (08712316604), selected option 4 (to speak to a customer service rep) and got straight through to a person. She took my name, mobile number and address and confirmed that I had received seven texts. She told me a refund would be sent out within 30 days and that “it is all cancelled”. Time will tell what, if anything, I receive.

Originally Posted by grumbletext

Vodafone details them as "Bergholt Investments Ltd.
smoke and mirrors.

[El Gringo]

Why are the Network Operators and crooks like Zamano giving this number in response to complaints.
08712316604
It can only be found on Grumbletext.

Subject of the post : Re: 82277 (4912 posts) by alisonhugh at: 12:02 06/04/06
08712316604 Re "82277" posted by stuartmcclella at 23:43 20/03/06 ...

Phone 08712316604 ask for refund and number from which the supposed order was made plus date order was made. I am waiting to see if I recieve mine . I asked for cost of calls plus £5 inconvenience payment to cover cost of calls to provider and internet use etc

Originally Posted by Gumbletext

82277
Atlas Interactive
47b Welbeck Street
London
W1G 9XA
020 7258 8700

Originally Posted by Icstis

[El Gringo]

What a load of thieving ********. The m.o. :-
1) Zamano or whoever send the reversed billed unsolicited text.
2) Network Operator commits the revenue sharing "act of theft".
3) Victim sends stop and recieves another reversed bill text with a 0871 premium number to call.
4) When called it gives another 0871 premium number to call.
5) This number then gives another 0871 premium number (08712316604). It belongs to Independent Customer Care Services. They apparently handle complaints and refunds for companies like Zamano.

Why should families have to jump through expensive hoops to get money back from a bunch of thieves?
Is this Icstis's idea of a f**** joke?

This is what I mean. The same "Customer Care" number is being used to handle B4Utele.com complaints.

Subject of the post : 84010 B4Utele.com (4912 posts) by MICCA at: 11:48 02/05/06
08700790400 Me too........
Vodafone details them as "Bergholt Investments Ltd Jokes line and Dialogue Communications Ltd on customer care lines 08700790400 and 08712316604"

Originally Posted by Grumble

This is one example. Complaints concerning different companies and short codes all go to 08712316604.
from 22/09/05 to now. I think this is OFCOM's idea of their new industry refund procedure.

I received a text last night from Zamano who I'd never heard of previously. The text was a ridiculous poem containing swear words, which I was charged £1.50 for! I sent a text asking them to stop and received another message - again costing me £1.50! I telephoned the number on the reply (08712777799) and this gave me another number to ring - 08712779988. I actually spoke to someone on this number and they gave me yet another number (08712316604) to obtain a refund. This company is called Independant Customer Care Serivces and they told me that they work for various phone companies such as Zamano and provide refunds.

Originally Posted by Grumbletext

[tothepoint]

Hello All. just have to point this out to everyone- that that text number 84010 is on a 'text share' with lots of other companies in the UK. I have just spoke to Dialogue as i am getting lots of Joke messages which they confirmed are not from B4U tele. I spoke to somebody at B4Utele who was helpful and passed me all relevant contact numbers for dialogue and they said they had taken a few calls about this......guess time will tell...

[El Gringo]

30 August 2006
Content and/or promotion provided by B4U.co.uk
Service provider responsible for compliance under the Code of Practice Dialogue Communications Ltd
Service provider location Sheffield
Telephone network(s) All mobile networks
Service type Reverse-billed SMS
Cost £1.50 per message
Number of complaints 70
Source of complaint Public
Complaint from Nationwide
Fine £50,000
Sanction 12-month bar for both the service provider and information provider in relation to the provision of this type of service
Formal reprimand
Copy advice to be sought

Originally Posted by Icstis

http://www.icstis.org.uk/consumers/a...p?node=&id=549

Complaints were received regarding the receipt of the following unsolicited text message:

“Your B4U voucher w/c 27/03 is MARSMS. Log onto www.B4Utele.com for discount credit. To opt out reply stop. Customer care call 08717 168 528.”

The unsolicited taking of money is theft. Those involved in the unsolicited taking of money are thieves.
"guess time will tell"

[mike99]

O2 are still billing on behalf of Dialogue Communications, and Dialogue Communications are still using the 84010 number to send unsolicited reverse charge premium rate text messages. The only difference is that, in order to comply with the ICSTIS bar on such activities: http://www.icstis.org.uk/consumers/a...p?node=&id=549,
Dialogue Communications are now using a different information provider: "Gabriel Investments" 08712316594 - about whom I have so far been able to uncover any information.

Mike

[El Gringo]

From rags to riches.
I dont know if this is the same Gabriel Investments but they are in the same biz.

The O2/Dialogue partnership are the ones who are really committing the act with Icstis looking on.

[mike99]

Interesting! Thanks M

[mike99]

Just out of interest, has anyone ever come across an "information provider" (leasing a short code from a company like "Dialogue communications") which is not a ghost company based somewhere like the British Virgin Islands; which does not send *unsolicited* reverse charge texts; and which makes money legitimately by persuading people to willingly sign up to parting with £1.50 a time for receiving crap jokes?

Mike

[mike99]

The premium rate SMS “Value Chain” (a summary)

O2 (UK) Ltd, 53 Fleet St, London, EC4Y 1BE, 020 7583 2463, bills on behalf of, and makes its network available to, “service providers” Dialogue Communications Ltd (84010), Zamano Ltd (80122), and
Hybyte Solutions and Services Ltd (82040). O2, and the other networks, were warned by the police about the dangers of working with suspected criminals earlier this year.

In August 2006, Dialogue Communications Ltd, 0871 700 2211, The Workstation, 15 Paternoster Row, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, S1 2BX were (by ICSTIS) found guilty of and fined for and barred from providing services to B4U who (inter alia) had sent unsolicited reverse charge SMS and lied about how its customers had “signed up” for the SMS.

Following the bar, Dialogue Communications Ltd continued the reverse charge SMS business on 84010, but are now using “information providers” "Gabriel Investments”, 08712316594.

Meanwhile, B4U is currently being pursued by the ICO for failure to comply with data protection laws.(scroll to “Friday, 7th July 2006”).

Also in August 2006, Zamano Ltd, 0871 277 9988, nigel@zamano.com, The Bridge, 12-16 Clerkenwell Road, London
EC1M 5PQ were (by ICSTIS) found guilty of and fined for and barred from sending unsolicited reverse charge SMS jokes.

Zamano currently provides its 80122 number to “information providers” "Goldeford Investments”.

And also in August this year, Hybyte Solutions and Services Ltd, 0870 835 5550, were found guilty of and fined for and barred from much the same sorts of activities that Dialogue Communications were penalized for. Hybyte appears to be a South African firm, but has UK offices at: 114-116 Rochester Row, London, SW1P 1JQ.

Hybyte also provides its 82040 number to “information providers” "Goldeford Investments”.

Gabriel Investments do not seem to have a website, but if El Gringo(see #12 above) has identified the same “Gabriel Investments”, this firm would appear to have had a chequered history.

Goldeford Investments Ltd, Company No 655407, are registered at: 3rd Floor, Omar Hodge Building, Wickhams Cay I, PO.BOX 362, Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands. Far be it for me to suggest that all businesses based in this part of the world are crooks, but if you type: "Omar Hodge Building" “Wickhams Cay” “Road Town” Tortola scam into Google, you do get some interesting results.

So what, apart from O2 and the fact that they both began sending unsolicited reverse charge SMS to my wife this year, is the link between these companies?

Well, both Gabriel and Goldeford are contacted through: Independent Telecom Customer Care (no website), Unit 235, Rosden House, 372 Old Street, London, EC1 V9LT, help@need-help.co.uk. It is this outfit that issues the: "unknown person rang an 087 number a year ago and signed you up for this service; technical hitches delayed start up for several months" stories when customers complain to them.

Strangely enough, the address at Unit 235, Rosden House, is also shared by a firm selling herbal "virility" and "weight loss" potions: http://www.herbalsales.co.uk/contact.html for whom Independent Telecom Customer Care also acts.

I think we can be confident that the claims made for these products would stand up to the same scrutiny as the claims made for how customers sign up for their SMS services.

[El Gringo]

hi Mike,
did i read on the google grape vine you got your money back?

[mike99]

Yes, we received a cheque from Hybyte, and a postal order from Dialogue (at least I presume it was from Dialogue, there was no indication who it was from). Nothing from Zamano, but the postal order was for more that the amount that Dialogue had taken and therefore covers the single Zamano text (more gory details on Grumbletext).

I have no intention of letting the matter rest there however.

The more I discover about the premium rate industry, the more outraged I become, and the more determined to try and do my bit to put a stop to the various forms of legalized theft perpetrated by this industry.

[mike99]

Hybyte 82040

Some good(ish) news! I have just heard from ICSTIS that Hybyte have been fined £10,000, given a "Formal Reprimand", and have had a 2 year bar put on the numbers which it has used to operate its unsolicited reverse charge SMS scam (eg 82040, 82110, 85211, 87211, and 84159). Since it is only three and a half months since Hybyte were fined two and a half times this amount for exactly the same scam, it is hard to imagine that the latest setback will actually stop Hybyte sending unsolicited reverse charge SMS, but I suppose we should be grateful for any steps in the right direction!

[El Gringo]

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money-s...7&in_page_id=5

'The industry was worth somewhere between £450 million and £650 million last year- that's ringtones, games, pictures, everything. This year that looks like being 40 per cent down and that is due to the post-Crazy Frog crackdown. A lot of bad ringtone firms were squeezed out of the market.'

Well Mike, I think the above agrees with your general opinion. So much for the few "rotten apples" theory.

[mike99]

So is there really such a thing as a "text scam"? Is it really possible for firms to send out unsolicited reverse charge text messages?

Not according to The Information Commissioner's Office:

reverse charged messages cannot be randomly generated by the sender. You are probably receiving such messages as a result of a service that you have, at some point, signed up to, e.g., a downloaded ringtone, a sports results service, a daily joke/horoscope. If you do not recall doing so, you should consider the possibility that a friend, family member or colleague may have signed up to this on your behalf. You may also be receiving these messages as a consequence of entering a competition. If you do not recognise the name of the sender it may be that they are another trading arm of a company with whom you have had contact.

How do The Information Commissioner's Office know this?

We have been advised by OFCOM

So did OFCOM really advise the ICO that there is no such thing as unsolicited reverse charge SMS? I wrote to them and asked:

1) Did OFCOM advise the ICO that reverse charge premium rate SMS messages cannot be randomly generated by the sender?

2) Does OFCOM believe this statement to be true?

3) If OFCOM does believe this statement to be true, how do OFCOM explain the phenomenon of unsolicited reverse charge premium rate SMS messages?

In reply (yes I received a reply) I received the most extraordinary letter which I reproduce in full below (albeit with the names removed):

Dear ********

Freedom of Information request: right to know

Thank you for your enquiry concerning information provided by Ofcom to the ICO, which Ofcom received on 30 November 2006.

The answers to your questions are as follows:

Question 1

Did Ofcom advise the ICO that reverse charge premium rate SMS messages cannot be randomly generated by the sender?

Response

We provided background information to the ICO on the use of text messages (SMS) for unsolicited direct marketing purposes. The advice was:

" Under the Regulations individual subscribers (consumers, sole traders and (except in Scotland) partnerships) have to give their prior consent to the sender before they receive SMS for direct marketing purposes from the sender.

The exceptions to this rule are:

• The sender obtains a recipient’s mobile telephone contact details in the course of the sale or negotiations for the sale of a product or service to the recipient, i.e. an existing customer relationship;

• The direct marketing is in respect of the sender’s similar products or services only; and;

• The recipient is always able by simple means and free of charge to refuse the use of his mobile telephone number for the purposes of future direct marketing by SMS.

Corporate subscribers

The rules about unsolicited SMS for direct marketing purposes do not apply to corporate subscribers (legal persons and, in Scotland, partnerships).

Identity and address of the sender

The person sending SMS for direct marketing purposes must not disguise or conceal their identity and must provide a valid address to which the recipient of the SMS may send a request that such SMS should cease. "

Question 2

Does Ofcom believe this statement to be true?

Response

Ofcom's view is reflected in the position set out above.

Question 3

If Ofcom does believe this statement to be true, how do Ofcom explain the phenomenon of unsolicited reverse charge premium rate SMS messages?

Response

Ofcom does not have any evidence that unsolicited SMS messages can be received outside of the circumstances outlined above. It may of course be possible for consumers to be misled or not realise that they've entered into a reverse-billed PRS SMS arrangement. This is why ICSTIS provides clear code provisions to ensure these services can be effectively regulated.

You should ensure that when using the provided information in any way, including publishing the information, you comply with all relevant legislation. For example, the information provided may be protected by copyright under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended). If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice. For Ofcom’s policy on copyright and related issues, please refer to our website at http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/accoun/disclaimer/

If you have further questions about the legal issues raised concerning SMS messages, we would suggest that you obtain independent legal advice.

Regards

OFCOM

My summary: It is forbidden (cf "impossible") to send unsolicited reverse charge SMS and we do not have any evidence that anyone does this.

We must conclude therefore that either OFCOM is unaware of the dozens of ICSTIS adjudications in this area or does not regard these adjudications as "evidence" that unsolicited premium rate reverse charge SMS messages are sent.

Or perhaps Ofcom are simply dissembling (to put it as politely as possible). The legalisitic tone of their letter would seem to suggest that they have something to hide and that my direct questions have put them on the defensive.

But what are they hiding and why?

[El Gringo]

"But what are they hiding and why?"
May be what are protecting and why?

Unsolicited? Well what the hell is this then. How can anybody sign up to a service that obviously never existed and could never have been advertised.
I suggest you read it. I find it amazing that it wasn't reported to the police.

13 September 2006
Content and/or promotion provided by N/A
Service provider responsible for compliance under the Code of Practice Opera Telecom
Service provider location Birmingham
Telephone network(s) Orange
Service type Unsolicited text message
Cost 50p per message received
Number of complaints 6
Source of complaint Public
Complaint from Nationwide
Fine £30,000
Sanction Access to the service barred
Formal reprimand

http://www.icstis.org.uk/consumers/a...p?node=&id=557

Background

Complaints were received regarding an unsolicited text message sent to their mobile phones, which charged them 50p for its receipt. It appeared that only customers on the Orange mobile network were targeted.

The message stated – ‘Update: Your services have been modified. Please turn the handset off, then back on, for any changes to take effect’.

As the unsolicited message charged recipients, for the purpose of this investigation it was considered to be both the promotion and the service in its entirety.

The following breaches of the ICSTIS Code of Practice (Tenth Edition, Amended July 2005) were raised:

Legality (Paragraph 4.1): Under Section 22 of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003, it is an offence to send unsolicited promotions using electronic mail (including text messages) for direct marketing purposes, either where the recipient has not specifically consented to receiving such unsolicited promotions, or where the recipients details were not obtained whilst purchasing a similar or related product or service to that being promoted.

Even where such consent or details had been obtained, recipients must be given the opportunity, within each promotion, to opt out (without charge) of using their details for such promotions.

It was reported in this instance that the messages were totally unsolicited and had not given recipients the opportunity to opt out of receiving future promotions.

[mike99]

Quite!

But here's the really weird thing ......

As you point out, at least ICSTIS must recognize that there is such a thing as unsolicited reverse charge SMS. They fine people often enough (actually not often enough but that's a different matter) for doing this.

Except .......

A few months ago I complained to ICTIS about two lots of unsolicited free spam (promoting reverse charge spam) which I received on my phone (cf the reverse charge spam that my wife had been receiving from Zamano, Hybyte, and Dialogue).

Free update
Young Girls waiting 2 talk DIRTY to u! (now with pics)
69977

Now I'm not a prudish man, but (for a number of reasons) I'm not overjoyed when I receive this sort of stuff on my workphone.

I received two letters back (one for each complaint) by snail mail from two different people at ICSTIS. Both contained very similar text. One contained the following claim:

The promotional text you have received would not be unsolicited.

Both letters went on to say (irrelevantly in the circumstances):

ICSTIS does not have to power to force a service provider to refund consumers.

So I wrote back asking why ICSTIS had written to me making these blatantly false claims and pointing out that (as ICSTIS is very well aware) firms do send unsolicited texts (both free and reverse charge) and ICTIS does have the power to order refunds.

Some time later - after I had written again to prompt a response - I received an email from ICSTIS containing the following:

I have received your letter and will be replying to you within the next few days. I am very sorry for any delay, but I before I replied to you I wanted to discuss all of your points with my manager and the various case officers that are involved in your ongoing cases. I also wanted to look at any discrepancies in our procedures.

This was about a month ago. As with OFCOM, ICSTICS obviously feel put on the spot - and become rather defensive - when you try to get some straight answers out of them.

So, I ask again: What is going on here? Why are ICO, OFCOM, and ICSTIS issuing the same mis-information - mis-information which flies in the face of the publicly available facts on their own websites?

Who is attempting to cover up for whom? And why?

[El Gringo]

Ofcom does not have any evidence that unsolicited SMS messages can be received outside of the circumstances outlined above. It may of course be possible for consumers to be misled or not realise that they've entered into a reverse-billed PRS SMS arrangement. This is why ICSTIS provides clear code provisions to ensure these services can be effectively regulated.

Originally Posted by Ofcom

I may be wrong but I believe the majority of complaints come from "consumers" on pay as you go phones.
So why is it that these "consumers" are mainly "misled or not realise that they've entered into a reverse-billed PRS SMS arrangement."

@Hamlet. Is that the case in Germany?

[Hamlet]

What ICSTIS (and others) say is a part of the game. Those innovative services (this is my belief) have been invented to trick people. The regulators sound as if they were members of the legal department of the spammers.

SMS-spam is a topic in Germany as well but I have no information that people with prepaid cards have more complaints (if this was your question).
SMS spam comes mainly as "chat invitations" ("Someone has left a picture for you, write an sms to ##### with the text 'Rebecca' to watch it" or "Someone has left a message for you. Write 'Flirt 12345' to xxxxx")
Some people report about their experiences when answering to chat invitations. They get tricked by Call-Center-agents that try to hold them for a while... and for a lot of money. This is known for years. Most of the chat-lines have a chapter in their terms&conditions that 'some of our users may be call-center-agents' or something.

Sometimes they are telling you wonderful stories ("I have a special number, it's free for you" - when in fact of course it isn't free...)
In an article on heise (in German http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/24/24375/1.html ) one compared fighting against SMS-spam with "Don Quichotte"...
The network providers share the profit with those tricky companies - but you won't get the identity of the people sending the messages (data protection).

Nevertheless - a few weeks ago a consumer managed to get the identity of the sender of SMS spam - and found out that the sender was identical to the owner of the premium-sms-Number. That story is not yet finished and may get interesting.

I am not very familiar with the SMS Spam topic because (as you may know) I am the "Dialer Fighter"

-note- as far as I know there is no special regulation at all for Premium-SMS in Germany. It was planned to change the "Telecommunication laws", but the new laws had been blocked by the "Bundesrat" (in Germany we have the federal government and the "upper house" - and during Mr Schroeder's last year as German "new-labour"-chancellor it was common that the "Bundesrat" blocked as many laws as possible - because the CDU (~"Tories") had the majority. Then Mr Schroeder got an invitation from his russian friend Putin to join "Gazprom" and left Berlin [oh sorry, Mr Schroeder, of course that was not the right chronology] - and the new Telecommunication law was delayed on and on. Until now... There is only a "voluntary codex" by the lobbyists from "FST" (--> www.iarn.org --> ~German ICSTIS [ICSTIS: IARN].

-note- new developments in Germany: "WAP-push" - here it seems as if this was first known in Australia and UK. A few months ago the first complaints have been seen in Germany. Interesting: Early australian complaints mention a Germany based website: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum...fm/510022.html
see ICSTIS http://www.icstis.org.uk/consumers/a...p?node=&id=344

[mike99]

I may be wrong but I believe the majority of complaints come from "consumers" on pay as you go phones.
So why is it that these "consumers" are mainly "misled or not realise that they've entered into a reverse-billed PRS SMS arrangement."

@Hamlet. Is that the case in Germany?

Originally Posted by El Gringo

I think that unsolicited reverse charge SMS is mainly aimed at pay as you go customers - in the sense that the spammers hope it will land there since their fraud is more likely to be successful when it does. Pay as you go customers do not get itemized bills and are often young people with better things to do than spending hours ringing up 087 numbers to try and find out why £1.50 per week is disappearing from their credit. On the other hand, I cannot see how the spammers can have much control over this when they randomly generate numbers. When numbers known to be in use are obtained in other underhand ways, perhaps the spammers can filter them first, but in our case we received reverse charge SMS (from three different firms from the same forged “sign-up event” one year earlier) on our pay monthly account. Because we have kept all our statements over the years we had no problem in exposing the spammers’ lies. For PAYG customers, this must be very difficult.

[El Gringo]

I cannot see how the spammers can have much control over this when they randomly generate numbers.

Originally Posted by Mike

I think these mass marketed thefts and swindles are anything but random.
This company was named on a blog as being the company that supplied the 0871 numbers for the recent James and the "missed call" deception con. Liquid11 denied they supplied the numbers which may be true but they do supply the type of services that can be abused by mass marketing swindlers.

http://www.liquid11.co.uk/
http://www.the-scream.co.uk/forums/t23613.html?

They offer bulk lists of "opted in" numbers to their clients.
http://www.liquid11.co.uk/mobile-data.asp

They supply other services such as cleaning a clients data base
http://www.liquid11.co.uk/mobile-data-cleaning.asp

[Hamlet]

They are offering services?`

The registrant is a non-trading individual who has opted to have their address omitted from the WHOIS service.

Originally Posted by whois

well. Keep an eye on them.

[mike99]

Interesting.

I had read that many firms randomly generate numbers and send out bulk Spam in the hope of getting a hit. One hit at £1.50 would, after all, pay for a lot of misses at bulk sms rates.

You are suggesting that it is more likely that the spammers buy lists of real numbers. If so, where do firms like Liquid11 get the numbers from?

Also, as Hamlet has pointed out, this firm has no whois address. How can they withhold this? Are they allowed to? If not, can we report them to someone??

Mike

[Hamlet]

You are suggesting that it is more likely that the spammers buy lists of real numbers. If so, where do firms like Liquid11 get the numbers from?

Originally Posted by mike99

In Germany we have all these pretty shiny cars standing at the railway station or in front of a big supermarket with lots of boxes around and lots of postcards where you can answer a question like "what is the number between 7 and 9? Is it 5, 8 or 15? Answer the question and win a car!"
On the postcards you don't find any hint about who is your partner... But there is always a big crowd around the boxes and everyone writes down his name, address, mobile number, birthday and so on - just to win the car.
(Last week I have seen such a postcard and there was a note on it saying "This game is runing until 31/12/07. If you win we will call you". When these companies collect 1000 postcards a day and if they do that in 10 railway stations a day they collect a total of about 1000*10*220=2,2 mio postcards a year
So you give away your complete data for a 1:2000000 chance to win a car.

I have heard that a complete set of data of someone accepting advertising is worth ~1 Euro. When you throw in a card into the box you accept advertising phone calls and what-know-I.
No one knows what they are doing with the data - normally you do not even know WHO is getting your data. What shall I call the people that are throwing the postcards into the boxes? Stupid? Naive?

I have tried to ask my way to the responsible managers of the Munich Central Station one day if they know who is responsible for the game - I got him at the phone and he said "I don't know exactly who it is, we have a company that is arranging that.". When I asked him if he could guarantee that it's all right he said "No." When I told him that I find it strange that a company no one knows is offering strange services in the middle of the Munich Central Station and asked him if he feels resposible for any illegal services that may be connected to it he did hang up.

Dealing with personal data is a huge market.

[mike99]

I got in touch with nominet.

Liquid11 can now be found on whois as:

Domain name:
liquid11.co.uk
Registrant:
Colours
Trading as:
Colours
Registrant type:
UK Individual
Registrant's address:
Riverside Road
Lowestoft
Suffolk
NR33 0TQ
United Kingdom

Note the "address" - they really don't want anyone to find them in a hurry do they? I wonder why? Anyway put their postcode into the royal mail computer and you can find:

Liquid 11
Riverside Business Centre
1 Riverside Road
LOWESTOFT
NR33 0TQ

I wonder who their directors are and when they last submitted accounts

Mike

This company [...] offer bulk lists of "opted in" numbers to their clients.
http://www.liquid11.co.uk/mobile-data.asp

Originally Posted by El Gringo

[Hamlet]

[deleted]