Phonepayplus takes safety to the top of the class

[mike99]

Background:

Industry regulator joins forces with Ministry of Sound, the Peter Jones Foundation and Make Your Mark to launch PhoneBrain - an innovative new schools programme

So from the PhoneDrain site, our kids can download the following:

CASE STUDY:
ALEXANDER AMOSU
– LORD OF THE RINGTONES
Alexander Amosu is one of Britain’s most successful young entrepreneurs and a leading figure in the mobile entertainment industry. He launched one of the first ringtone phone-paid service companies in the UK in 1999 and made his first million at the age of 25.
Growing up on a north London council estate, Alexander Amosu learned earlier than most that there were two ways to get what you want in life. "You either stole it, or you found a way of paying for it." Amosu, now 33, opted for the latter. He got a £10-a-week paper round and earned enough money to buy a new pair of Nike trainers. "I realised then that I didn't want to be poor anymore." He tried several businesses, from providing cleaning services to organising parties, until he hit upon an idea.
Playing around with his new mobile phone, he created a ringtone using the phone’s composing facility which he sent to his brother. The ringtone tune was based on ‘Big Pimpin’ by the rapper Jay-Z and was an instant hit with his brother's classmates, 21 of whom came knocking at his front door the next evening looking for it.
"So I put my entrepreneur hat on and told them if they wanted it, they’d have to pay £1 each." That evening, I sat there with £21 on my lap and thought, what would happen if I made 100 or 200 ringtones and advertised them for sale? My brain went into overdrive.” Alexander found there were only two other firms making and selling ringtones at that time, both focusing on pop music tones – and so he decided to specialise in R&B music.
Within six weeks, Alexander had come up with a further six ringtones. He installed an extra phone line, with a premium rate number charging £1.50 a minute, in the council house where he was living with his parents. He then advertised the number on the back of 20,000 flyers he made for a party at his university. On the first day, he made £97. Within four months, he had moved the operation out of his parents’ council house into two offices in Islington and was employing 21 staff creating and selling 1,000 ringtones.
From there, the company grew quickly. Now called RnB Ringtones, it started advertising in newspapers and on TV. "If we did a full-page advert in The Sun for £6,000, we would get five times that back in a week. That's how phenomenal the market was."
At the end of his first year, his accountant told him he'd turned over £1.6m. "I said, 'Hold on, let me go to the cashpoint and check if you're pulling my leg'. And there it was – more than a million in our account." Over the next three years, the company did another £6.3m in sales, before Amosu decided to sell up. A German telecommunications group who wanted his ringtone back catalogue paid just under £9m for the firm in 2004.

Trouble is, as we know, Mr Amosu does not have a perfectly clean record:

A member of the public complained about a live mobile phone ringtone
and logo service whose promotional material in the Daily Star failed to
indicate the total call costs as required in the service provider’s
permission certificate (1.4 Live Code). The live service failed to provide
call costs on connection and pricing information was only given after
the caller had been connected for two minutes (2.3 Live Code).
Monitoring showed that, while connected to the service, callers were
informed that the ‘data’ would be transferred to their phones without
appropriate details having been taken. Callers were put on hold for
several minutes while the apparent ‘transfer’ took place (3.12 eighth
edition). Call revenues were requested, together with full promotional
and operational details (5.2.3 eighth edition).
Investigation and Decision
Mr Alexander Amosu t/a R ‘n’ B Ringtones disputed that call costs were
not given on connection, stating that every operator was aware that this
information was required. He did not dispute the omission of the
required maximum call costs in the promotional material but claimed
that this was due to a graphics error when placing the advertisement in
question. He stated that the appropriate changes had since been made.
He did not dispute that callers were put on hold but claimed that this
was not unreasonable as it ensured that customers received the items
requested while connected to the service. The requested information was
supplied.
The Committee upheld breaches of paragraphs 1.4 and 2.3 of the ICSTIS
Live Conversation Services Code of Practice and paragraph 3.12 of the
eighth edition of the ICSTIS Code of Practice. A breach of paragraph
5.2.3 was not upheld. Mr Alexander Amosu t/a R ‘n’ B Ring Tones was
fined £1,000 and warned about his future conduct.

Also, if you go to his R ‘n’ B Ring Tones website (no longer owned by Mr Amosu but it was owned by him during the period covered by the PhoneDrain hagiography - above) you find a link to "free" ringtones which would cost any child foolish enough to download one a great deal of money.

Okay, neither of these things are "hanging offences", but are PP+ behaving entirely appropriately here? I wrote to them at the address provided on their website to ask ..........

[mike99]

First to PiratesRusCommunications who did the stuff on the website for PP+

Dear *****

I downloaded the "case study" you have provided on the PhoneBrain site:

CASE STUDY:
ALEXANDER AMOSU
- LORD OF THE RINGTONES
Alexander Amosu is one of Britain's most successful young entrepreneurs and a leading figure in the mobile entertainment industry. He launched one of the first ringtone phone-paid service companies in the UK in 1999 and made his first million at the age of 25.
Growing up on a north London council estate, Alexander Amosu learned earlier than most that there were two ways to get what you want in life. "You either stole it, or you found a way of paying for it."

This article goes on to sing the praises of Alexander Amosu and hold him up as a kind of role model for young people. However, back in March 2001, PhonePayPlus (then "ICSTIS") fined Mr Amosu £1,000 and warned him about his future conduct after his company breached several paragraphs of the PP+ code of practice.

Also, if you go to Mr Amosu's site (http://www.alexanderamosu.com/business.asp) there is a link to his firm R'nB ringtones: (http://www.rnbringtones.com/). The R'nB site has a link to "FREE downloadable ringtones". This link take you to a long list of sites advertising "free" ringtones and these sites are 100% dishonest. For a example, top of the list of sites providing "free" ringtones is http://www.boltblue.com/specialoffer...gtone&mt=broad whose "free" ringtones will cost any child foolish enough to download one, £9 every six days until he or she can persuade Boltblue to stop.

I'm afraid that the owners of most PRS firms learned very early in life that if you want something, you steal it - from unsuspecting mobile phone users.

Are you sure that you have really chosen a suitable role model for our children in your promotional material?

Mike

[mike99]

Dear Mike

Thank you for emailing through your concerns.

I have forwarded your email on to the team at PhonepayPlus who will look in to the details further tomorrow.

Many thanks

****

[mike99]

Hi Mike

**** forwarded me your note – I’m responsible for the campaign that we launched last week.

First of all, many thanks for taking the time to look at Alexander’s involvement (and, by extension, the campaign itself). Your feedback is valid, useful, and greatly appreciated.

I wasn’t aware that Alexander had fallen foul of our Code. When someone first suggested his involvement, I checked with my colleagues to see if he was known to any of them. The fact that he’s been fined just once – 7 years ago to the tune of £1,000 – explains their lack of awareness, I think. Of course, we take any breach of our Code extremely seriously, but at least we can be sure he is not a repeat offender and seems to have cleaned up his act wherever necessary a long time ago.

The reason we first got involved with Alexander was that he was recommended to us by Make Your Mark, for whom he is an ambassador. You can find out more about this government sponsored initiative at http://www.makeyourmark.org.uk/.

On your second point, I’d be concerned if Alexander is helping to promote any non-compliant services. I asked a colleague to look into the links below and there seems to be some confusion as to whether they are live links or not. Still, I will raise this with Alexander and ask that he checks that any partner websites are compliant and doing everything possible not to mislead customers.

I hope this answers your concerns. Thanks once again for your interest and helpful comments.

Kind regards

****

[mike99]

Hi ****

I realize that Mr Amosu was fined 7 years ago, but this was 2 years after the start of the "ringtones" career that you are commending to young people in your "Case Study".

I also realize that Mr Amosu was only fined £1000; but this is half as much as you have just fined Tanla (12 previous offences) for teaming up with VisionSMS Ltd (AKA 2 Comm Ltd AKA OneGoalLimited - 3 previous offences and various other frauds involving inter alia the sale of flying lessons [sic]) to promote a "service" that was "harmful to children". I assume, therefore, that PP+ considered Mr Amosu's transgressions to be half as serious as those of the aforementioned repeat offenders.

As for the "liveness" of the links to fraudulent websites: the links from the http://www.rnbringtones.com site to the fraudulent sites are very live. The link from the http://www.alexanderamosu.com/business.asp site to the http://www.rnbringtones.com is not currently live, but the url "www.rnbringtones.com" is clearly promoted on the http://www.alexanderamosu.com/business.asp site.

While I realize that (pace his continuing promotion of dodgy PRS sites) Mr Amosu may have "cleaned up his act" and could therefore be regarded as a suitable role model for the rest of the PRS industry (who haven't); I'm afraid that my question still stands: Are you really sure that you have chosen a suitable role model for our children in your promotional material?

If, as PP+ often claims, phone-paid services are overwhelmingly honest and fair, surely you can find one example of a PRS business person who is "squeaky clean" and one example of a website promoting ringtones to children which is not misleading!

Kind regards

Mike

[mike99]

Hi Mike,

A quick update to note that we’ve had word back from Alexander re the www.rnbringtones.com site. He sold the domain in 2004 and has no affiliation with the new company or any of the business there.

More broadly, I’m sure you’re aware (let me know if you’re not) of our proposals to resolve issues of consumer harm in the mobile space. You can expect to see new rules implemented in this area before the end of the year.

Kind regards

****

[mike99]

Hi ****

So if www.rnbringtones.com is now owned by someone who links to PRS frauds, and if both you and Alexander Amosu mention that site on your site and on his site, and if your site is aimed at minors, might it not be reasonable to expect some kind of warning from you, or him, or both of you about the rnbringtones site?

He may have long since "cleaned up his act" but this does not retrospectively make his past misdeeds, and the dishonest industry he has now turned his back on, into something you ought to be commending to our children.

Since you seem disinclined to answer the question I asked, let me provide my answer: I think that - judged solely on the basis of his career in PRS - Mr Amosu is a totally inappropriate role model for young people. I realize that he is probably one of the least dishonest representatives of that "industry" you are able to find, but I'm afraid that that is not quite good enough in this context.

As for your proposals to "resolve issues of consumer harm in the mobile space", I'm afraid that I have been following your organization for a number of years - ever since a "successful entrepreneur" stole about £50 from my wife and PP+ (then ICSTIS) refused to take any action against the thief (although ICSTIS did lie to me, in writing, for several months and pretend that they were taking action). I discovered that for several years before our case, and on a regular basis ever since, PP+ have been promising that good times were just around the corner and that they were just about to start "resolving issues of consumer harm in the mobile space". What has actually happened is that the same service providers have continued to team up with the same dishonest content providers to run the same scams and PP+ has continued to issue token fines and formal reprimands which have had no effect whatsoever on these activities.

In short, I am afraid that I have no confidence that PP+ will "resolve issues of consumer harm in the mobile space" this year or any time in the foreseeable future. The fact that your PhoneBrian site devotes more energy to promoting the virtues of a thoroughly dishonest and disreputable industry than it devotes to protecting our children from fraud and theft illustrates, if any additional illustration were required, where PP+'s priorities lie.

How much of a "PhoneBrain" does it take to appreciate that when you effectively decriminalize fraud and theft in the telecommunications sector, diffuse responsibility along untraceable "value-chains", and then throw in "light-touch regulation" and technology such as diallers and reverse charge SMS, "customer harm" will follow as inevitably as large "subscription" charges follow the downloading of "free" ringtones?

Kind regards

Mike

[mike99]

Mike,

My response to your point on Alexander’s use as a role model was my comment that he is an ambassador for Make your Mark (the government-sponsored enterprise scheme). I am persuaded, as has that organisation been for some time, that he is an appropriate role model for young people.

In regard to your other points, I am truly sorry to hear about your and your wife’s experiences at the hands of certain premium rate providers. I’ve been here for 12 months now and I have unfortunately seen ample evidence of the harm that is done by rogue providers.

You will see new rules announced in the next fortnight which we believe will address the most serious types of harm in the mobile market. I don’t expect you to take my word for it – none of us will know the results until the new year. If complaints (currently some 1,700 per month) go down then I hope you will accept that progress has been made. If they don’t – well, I’ll be the first to be disappointed. We will begin afresh.

I certainly don’t accept any accusation of us acting as industry cheerleader, by the way. Would it be of any satisfaction for you to know that I am regularly – and enthusiastically – accused by the industry of leading a campaign to discredit and abuse the market’s reputation? Sometimes, a regulator gains some degree of satisfaction from being accused of opposite crimes by both ends of the spectrum. In some circumstances it means that we have found the appropriate position.

These are, of course, serious issues and I – along with everyone here – take them very seriously. I hope you will see by my correspondence that I take your points equally seriously. I suggest that you and I both look at the complaints in the new year and see whether progress has been made.

Kind regards

****

[mike99]

****

Thank you for answering my question. I suppose this is a case where we simply have a difference of opinion. I hold that Alexander Amosu was an unfortunate choice and that his SMS career is not something that ought to be promoted uncritically to young people. You take a different view.

I am not suggesting that you personally were in any way responsible for the theft from my wife or for your organization's subsequent behaviour, I was merely explaining why I have taken a close interest in PP+ and the industry it regulates.

While I shall welcome any reduction in complaints, it has to be borne in mind that there have been reductions in particular types of complaint in the past. These reductions have often been related to changes in technology (e.g. the change to ADSL from dial-up) rather than actions taken by PP+. Moreover, in every case so far of a drop in complaints, it turned out that the PRS industry was busy preparing for the next big scam. Until PP+ addresses the fundamental issues that underlie PRS crime, I shall treat any short-term fluctuations in complaints with a certain degree of scepticism.

I am afraid that I find your claim that you have struck the correct balance between the opposite ends of the PRS spectrum (crooks and victims) extraordinary. Of course many "service providers" criticize PP+. About once each month you shut down one of their scams, forcing them to team up with a new content provider or (as often as not) the same content provider with a new identity to continue the scam. A fine has to be paid, and while this fine does not render the scam unprofitable, it cuts into the profits made under the scam. Are the police popular with the criminal fraternity? Are the fire-brigade popular with the arsonists? Do these institutions feel a need to strike a balance between competing opinions here?

Of course, you will retort that most PRS providers are honest. When pressed, however, you are unable to come up with the name of a single honest firm. All the main players: Zamano, mBlox, Tanla, Opera, Dialogue, WIN ............... all repeatedly team up with crooked content providers to scam the public.

Of course, they, in turn, will claim (as Andrew Bud - a former PP+ board member no less - often has done) that the service providers are the unwitting victims of crooked content providers. But this, of course, is nonsense:

How an SP can spot a crooked content provider (or at least one that requires greater scrutiny):

The content provider has:

• been repeatedly fined by PP+.
• the same address and staff and style of website as another defunct firm that had been repeatedly fined by PP+.
• a website advertising "free" ringtones.
• a virtual address with "suite" or "unit" in the first line.
• connections with 40 Gerrard Street in London.
• connections with Barkly Wharf, Le Caudan Waterfront, Port Louis, Mauritius.
• connections with Omar Hodge Building, Wickhams Cay 1, Road Town, Tortola, BVI.
• an address in Spain or (especially) Majorca.
• been closed down by the OFT for frauds involving flying lessons.
• a www domain that was registered by one of the SP's own employees who is a friend of a number of PRS crooks.
• a record of doing the SP's bidding when the SP recommends that they fob off customers who ring up to complain.
• an owner or senior employee who boasts about his PRS scams on a public website.
• an owner or senior employee whose PRS misdeeds and criminal connections have been repeatedly exposed on public websites.

etc.

I know all this ( I have done my homework) so the SPs know all this too. That fact that they (the SPs) continue to repeatedly team up with the same crooks makes them at best criminally negligent; at worst, just plain criminal.

So what, I wonder, does the fact that PP+ continue to promote this "industry" as though it were a normal commercial enterprise (albeit with a few "bad apples") say about PP+?

Kind regards

Mike

[silentgenius]

Re PPPs "reply 2" - George Kidd never liked learning from the past and tried to pretend it did not exist.

The fact that there has been such a high staff turnover that no one is "aware" of a case from 7 years ago, does not prevent current staff from doing a database search to see what Mr Amosu has been up to!

[mike99]

I rather think I might have "blown it" with my latest missive. I have certainly not had a response so far.



But what is to be made of all this? On the face of it - and I am inclined to take this particular PP+ employee at face value - we appear to have extraordinary naiveté about the PRS industry rather than deliberate collusion in its crimes. But how can anyone who has worked at PP+ for more than about ten minutes fail to notice what is going on in the industry that PP+ supposedly regulates?

[mike99]

Re PPPs "reply 2" - George Kidd never liked learning from the past and tried to pretend it did not exist.

The fact that there has been such a high staff turnover that no one is "aware" of a case from 7 years ago, does not prevent current staff from doing a database search to see what Mr Amosu has been up to!

Originally Posted by silentgenius

Quite!

But how could anyone contemplate a database search on anyone in PRS and not expect it to turn up something?

And, following on from that, how could anyone at PP+ think that citing a PRS entrepreneur as a role model for young people was likely to result in anything other than a huge "own-goal"?

[Hamlet]

A quick update to note that we’ve had word back from Alexander re the www.rnbringtones.com site. He sold the domain in 2004 and has no affiliation with the new company or any of the business there.

from Mike99's posting here

Sorry, I do not want to interrupt your wonderful postings, but...
http://www.coolwhois.com/d/rnbringtones.com

RnB Ringtones
206 White Hart Lane
Woodgreen, London N22 5QN, UK

admin:
Amosu, Olutayo

The following persons are (according to comanieshouse data) directors of companies in the UK

ALEXANDER OLUTAYO AMOSU
Date of Birth: 21-06-1975
N22 5QN

ALEXANDER AMOSU
Date of Birth: 21-06-1975
N9 0XP

ALEXANDER OLUTAYO AMOSU
Date of Birth: 21-06-1975
LU4 9PU

This might be the same person.

There is also

OLUTAYO ALEXANDER AMOSU
Date of Birth: 21-06-1925
N22 5QN

Then there is

SOBUKOLA AMOSU
Date of Birth: -
N22 5QN

SOBUKOLA AMOSU
Date of Birth: 21-06-1975

N9 0XP

I have no information about any relationship. But I can't keep from thinking that the website wasn't really "sold"

It's no big deal, of course - so keep on posting without caring about it
rnb investments ltd - strike off (voluntarily) in 2005