Complaint Review: Alyon Technologies - Norcross Georgia

I also am an attorney and suggest that other attorneys should follow up. "Class action" is a knee jerk response until folks realize the expenditure and complexity of such. However this "censored" looks like a class action might be worth that expense and complexity.

I previously represented a client who was victimized by the "Miss Cleo" psychic hot line "censored". This Alyon "censored" appears to rely on a Trojan horse autodialer and appears to target households with teenagers or twenty-somethings using phones billed to older relatives. Am I right on that? I expect that the responsible "censored" are spread thru at least N.J., Georgia, probably Canada and elsewhere.

A class action here would be a nice, and possibly even eventually a profitable project for a medium to large firm to take on. Any of us solo practioners would get eaten up by the paper and the investigation necessary to nail these folks down unless there is a bankroll to start. We solos would be better advised to cooperate with a larger organization.

I also am an attorney and suggest that other attorneys should follow up. "Class action" is a knee jerk response until folks realize the expenditure and complexity of such. However this "censored" looks like a class action might be worth that expense and complexity.

I previously represented a client who was victimized by the "Miss Cleo" psychic hot line "censored". This Alyon "censored" appears to rely on a Trojan horse autodialer and appears to target households with teenagers or twenty-somethings using phones billed to older relatives. Am I right on that? I expect that the responsible "censored" are spread thru at least N.J., Georgia, probably Canada and elsewhere.

A class action here would be a nice, and possibly even eventually a profitable project for a medium to large firm to take on. Any of us solo practioners would get eaten up by the paper and the investigation necessary to nail these folks down unless there is a bankroll to start. We solos would be better advised to cooperate with a larger organization.

I also am an attorney and suggest that other attorneys should follow up. "Class action" is a knee jerk response until folks realize the expenditure and complexity of such. However this "censored" looks like a class action might be worth that expense and complexity.

I previously represented a client who was victimized by the "Miss Cleo" psychic hot line "censored". This Alyon "censored" appears to rely on a Trojan horse autodialer and appears to target households with teenagers or twenty-somethings using phones billed to older relatives. Am I right on that? I expect that the responsible "censored" are spread thru at least N.J., Georgia, probably Canada and elsewhere.

A class action here would be a nice, and possibly even eventually a profitable project for a medium to large firm to take on. Any of us solo practioners would get eaten up by the paper and the investigation necessary to nail these folks down unless there is a bankroll to start. We solos would be better advised to cooperate with a larger organization.

I also am an attorney and suggest that other attorneys should follow up. "Class action" is a knee jerk response until folks realize the expenditure and complexity of such. However this "censored" looks like a class action might be worth that expense and complexity.

I previously represented a client who was victimized by the "Miss Cleo" psychic hot line "censored". This Alyon "censored" appears to rely on a Trojan horse autodialer and appears to target households with teenagers or twenty-somethings using phones billed to older relatives. Am I right on that? I expect that the responsible "censored" are spread thru at least N.J., Georgia, probably Canada and elsewhere.

A class action here would be a nice, and possibly even eventually a profitable project for a medium to large firm to take on. Any of us solo practioners would get eaten up by the paper and the investigation necessary to nail these folks down unless there is a bankroll to start. We solos would be better advised to cooperate with a larger organization.

Jim: Thanks for your information on WCMH TV4. I am going to write them a letter right now. I wanted to let you know that my husband has contacted AT&T and the number he contacted to actually talk to someone was 1-800-222-0300. Once he finally got a hold of someone, he told them what was going on and they told him if it any pornographic information was provided by the charges that they would credit our account. We have not received the bill yet for the time frame that our incident happened and as soon as we receive it they told us to call back. They gave us a confirmation number to refer back to and they will credit all amounts involved.

What they had told my husband is that as soon as this company get you connected on their own they immediately start charging you an International Rate for a call that is actually going to New Jersey, just to get the higher billing cost. I will admit AT&T seemed to be very cooperative in the situation.

It is amazing that we can get billed an International rate for something that is right here in the United States.

Jim, I have also made a complaint with WBNS TV10 and Joel Chow and I have been discussing everything. I have sent a certified letter, with signature confirmation to the Norcross, GA address. I am wondering though if anyone is actually there, because I have read some reports in here saying that their actual office is in New Jersey? Not sure if sending it to the GA office will help? Channel 10 wanted to find out what the companies response was back to us before they start to get involved. They want to see how things unfold. If you haven't contacted them you might want to and them them Jill suggested it.

I am also going to write a letter to MSN because that is where all of this came into play at...during a chat room. They seem to be doing a lot of false advertising on TV, showing they are trying to protect you and your children from things that could harm your family.

Keep me and everyone posted on everything and anything new by clicking on the rebuttal box below.

FTC Legislation - November 27, 2002 FTC breaks up phone charge
"censored"
There is legislation pertaining to similar "censored"

For the full article go to http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/1549231

"The Federal Trade Commission says it has obtained a U.S. District Court settlement in a case involving a somewhat elaborate "censored" that resulted in whopping telephone bills for connections to various Internet porn sites. "

Those reports to the FTC about this are important. File complaints at
http://www.federaltradecommission.com/

John,

My clients do have a computer, they did download the program and were certain is was free of charges. They also got and paid a bill from AT&T for long distance charges.

This is over 30 days old.

Your arguments make sense but I do not have the experience to advise them confidently that not paying is a good option. I think I could win the case in court but that is not the crux of the matter. Thanks for the help and I hope this becomes a large enough issue that it is resolved by the force of numbers.

Jim

Thanks John. My clients are a situation 2 and it is more than 30 days. They did also get and pay an AT&T long distance bill that I have tried to get returned to them but cannot get past the automatic response programs and form letters at AT&T.

Lastly, my wife is mad at me just for trying to help in this subject matter.

First of all Jim, I think it's great that you're taking the time to help the elderly couple with this. The only thing worse than a "censored" is a "censored" "censored" the elderly, in my opinion. Best I can tell, you've come to the right place.

When I received my bill, discovered the minidialer, remembered some annoying porn popups that seemed to run off and on for a couple days, and started putting all the pieces together, the first thing I thought of was d**n, $350.00 for a little over an hour of this crap what if they have had my computer dialing this non-stop for a week and another bill is on the way? Scary thought, eh?

I've learned one thing (many things actually) from the reports here. I think the highest bill I've seen is $750.00 or so, and most are considerably less. I also haven't noticed anyone who has received multiple (different) bills, yet. Maybe larger reports will eventually surface that will blow my theory but I think many "censored" calculate what level of billing flies just under the radar of most law enforcement and consumer protection agencies. Also at what point is it more worth paying than having a legal battle over ethics? (not that I even consider paying as an option) I suspect this happens a lot. So I figure our strength is in numbers and our actual collective exposure, which includes the initial bill, your long distance phone charges, piecing your computer back together -- and all this damned letter writing. Yes, if they can legally sell pornography for $4.99/minute, I think we have every right to place a substantial value on the time taken from our daily lives to clean up their mess.

One individual threw out a number like $50k to get government agencies' attention. If he's right, I suspect we're approaching that amount, as a group, once everyone has seen their telephone bills. I know, it's relative but we should make sure that people we talk with about this know it's a growing, significant amount of money and victims.

No offense James, but paying a lawyer to fight this problem does not interest me very much. Feels too much like throwing good money after bad right now. I suspect that's predictable too.

As a taxpayer, I EXPECT these government agencies and officials to step up and not only take an interest, but to do their jobs and engage this problem. This is a form of extortion against US Citizens. Who knows where the money they steal is ultimately going. They have connections in Spain. We are not alone and we're not making this stuff up and it should be obvious enough by now, with 100+ reports in just over a month.. We're seeing 4-10 new complaints a day now that Alyon is coming up in Google/Yahoo searches with more links to badbusinessbureau.com than their own website. And I think it will continue to grow as long as they remain in business. And they'll stay in business as long as people cave in and send them money, and nobody stops them. So this won't go away until it's MADE to go away (or to change names). It's that simple. As taxpayers, we rely on law enforcement to enforce our laws. We're not supposed to take law enforcement into our own hands any more. I EXPECT these agencies and State AG's to do their jobs. It's not OK with me if they blow it off anymore. We should not have to rely on lawyers and reporters to light a fire under them. I think we're reaching a point where we all need to be a little more reluctant than to just take the standard answer they've crafted to get us off their telephone. After all, we're probably paying for the call and their salary.

I don't know much about class action lawsuits but if a mob forms, I'm in.

Thanks BadBusinessBureau.com!

Jim,

Like your clients, I too I have been victimized by Alyon (you can see my predicament under the January 8 post from Pittsburgh.) And like you, I am a young attorney, but I have no expertise in the area of consumer law. Therefore, I want to be clear that I am not providing the information below in a professional capacity, but merely has suggestions based on my personal experience with Alyon.

First, you need to determine the capacity under which Alyon has defrauded your clients. That is, (1) do your clients actually have a computer and was the Alyon dialing program downloaded to their computer; OR

(2) do they NOT have a computer (or, if they do have a computer, the Alyon program was NOT downloaded) and did the Alyon bill come with a billing telephone number that is not registered in your clients' names.

If your clients have a situation (1), then your argument may be that the circumstances surrounding the download of the dialer and clicking "ok" (even though, in some cases the people defrauded claim they didn't even click ok) are not sufficient to enter into a contract for services. Moreover, you clients may have some claim regarding incapacity. But if they can turn on a computer, I would think that this would not be available.

If your clients have a situation (2), then I believe the situation is even more favorable to them. In this case, I believe, but cannot yet prove, that Alyon mistakenly and negligently applied your clients' address to another party's phone number. This may be because of significant mistakes in the directory service that Alyon uses to trace the locations of the computers that dial into its service.

In either case, you should immediately advise your clients to send a letter to Alyon (it should get there within 30 days of the mailing date on the first bill), at the Norcross, Georgia P.O. Box, setting forth: the clients' names and address; the billing telephone number and the account number; the amount of the charge that is disputed; and the specific reason why the charge is dispute (i.e. either (1) your clients' actions were insufficient to bind them to a contract with Alyon, or (2) the billing phone number is not registered in your client's names). They may want to mail it via certified mail, or both certified and regular mail (and ask the post office for a form 2980, which provides some proof that a letter was sent via regular mail).

All in all, this doesn't need to be a work of legal art. It just needs to set out all the necessary info. The clients may even be able to do this or if they have adult children; anyone who can put a few coherent thoughts down in a letter will be sufficient.

Also, it is not clear from your letter whether your clients also had charges on their AT&T bill or whether they had simply gone to AT&T to try to resolve the Alyon bill. If your clients have a situation (2) from above, then they most likely would not have any AT&T charges (for example, I have a situation 2 and accordingly have no long distance charges.) However, if they have a situation (1) they may have charges. In this case, best bet is to try AT&T again and request a credit due to the circumstances, or at least file a complaint under AT&T's grievance procedures.

Good Luck,
You can reply to me by updating your rip-off report.