Dale
South San Francisco,#2Consumer Comment
Fri, May 27, 2005
Yeah, you mentioned my name! I saved you money, I saved you money! :O) Well, and Ripoffreport too of course. We are a lot stronger together. I think it is fascinating that they said the same thing to you "that they use the same systems that 911 systems uses", so the charge must be correct. They said the same thing to me. I am the one who helped develop those 911 systems. In fact, I helped write the 911 systems for the capital of Canada and Wichita, Kansas. Those 911 systems use special 911 trunk lines that display the callers number and address when the person calls. These 911 trunk lines are much more reliable then caller-id. 900 numbers on the other hand use "automatic number identification (ANI) - a system like Caller ID", quote from FTC. But maybe it sounds very intimidating when Integretel says to a customer that "that they use the same systems that 911 systems uses". Well fooey, I wrote those 911 systems! According to the FTC Integretel specifically "are barred from billing or collecting any charge based on electronic capture of a consumer's phone number through automatic number identification (ANI) - a system like Caller ID - when the defendants know or should have known that the line subscriber (the person responsible to pay charges billed to that phone number), or someone authorized by the line subscriber, did not authorize the charge". Also, "To help ensure that the companies are aware of charges that are not authorized, the companies also will be required to investigate consumer complaints about unauthorized billing in the future". Well, considering that they first offered to have you pay 50% of the bill it sounds like that isn't happening. Also, "it requires the defendants to obtain agreements from the vendors they bill specifying the minimum standards that must be applied in gaining the "express verifiable authorization" from line subscribers". That means that they can't just say someone downloaded a program, or that they traced the call. It means that they have to show that someone authorized it. For more information on the above case do a search on "FTC v. Verity International, LTD." or look it up on the site http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm The fact that you swore you did not make the calls and Integretel not investigating is very important. Please file complaints with the FCC and the FTC.