 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Country Specific / Australian Group / September 2008Re: Premium content charges
I changed to a Telstra NextG phone in March 2008 from a CDMA phone. kept the same number of course but I requested a business plan thi time. In my first monthly account I had ten items in a section calle "Separate Purchases" from provider SOLMOB and the service wa MMFWCONT104MT, each instance charged at $6.60 inc GST. The provider i Sol Mobile which no longer exists since March 1, 2005. I'll give you an example of an unsolicited SMS that they charge $6.6 for :- "Going with the flow will offer the easier route, bu independent thought is by far the preferable option". Telstra i complicit in this theft because they include the charge for the item in your phone bill. If you have a prepaid it just comes off th pre-paid amount without even a statement to allow you to find out wher your money went. I'm still resolving the problem with Telstra but the company (Mobil Messenger Technology of Lvl 1, 225 Miller St North Sydney Tel 0299003600) who runs this fraudulent scam is making a killing. Thei web site is http://www.mobilemessenger.com/news01mar.html and they ar one of the fastest growing companies in Australia and now taking thei thieving system into the US. If you don't check your account thoroughl you could be lining the pockets of white collar criminals. Thei turnover is over $50m!! Even if alert mobile users get the charge reimbursed, the bastards get away with the money of people who do no realise they have been robbed. Elderly and disabled users are at thei mercy and the amounts they steal can be substantial -- Tradein ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** > I changed to a Telstra NextG phone in March 2008 from a CDMA phone. I > kept the same number of course but I requested a business plan this > time. In my first monthly account I had ten items in a section called > "Separate Purchases" from provider SOLMOB and the service was > MMFWCONT104MT, each instance charged at $6.60 inc GST. The provider is > Sol Mobile which no longer exists since March 1, 2005. They still exist - how else could you be charged? > I'll give you an example of an unsolicited SMS that they charge $6.60 > for :- "Going with the flow will offer the easier route, but [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > pre-paid amount without even a statement to allow you to find out where > your money went. Thats the idea, of prepaid, mate. > I'm still resolving the problem with Telstra but the company (Mobile Not a Telstra issue. Youve subscribed to content yourself. You have their details (SOLMOB) and they will work it out with you >> I changed to a Telstra NextG phone in March 2008 from a CDMA phone. I >> kept the same number of course but I requested a business plan this [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Not a Telstra issue. It is a Telstra issue. Telstra's the one billing him. At the very least, Telstra should be able to provide him with details of when/how he subscribed to the service. > Youve subscribed to content yourself. Even assuming the "premium" SMS wasn't completely unsolicited, it's difficult to imagine anyone would knowingly sign up to receive fortune cookie quotations at $6.60 each. > You have their details (SOLMOB) and they will work it out with you Were I in a similar situation, I'd ignore "SOLMOB" and dispute the amount on my Telstra bill. The mobile phone companies (not just Telstra) seem too eager to fob their customers off. When you dispute a charge on your credit card account, the bank investigates. The same should apply (and does apply, if you push the issue) to telcos and their "premium SMS". >>> I changed to a Telstra NextG phone in March 2008 from a CDMA phone. I >>> kept the same number of course but I requested a business plan this [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > It is a Telstra issue. Yep. > Telstra's the one billing him. Yep. And Mikey has been told this a number of times but still can't get it through his thick head. > At the very least, > Telstra should be able to provide him with details of when/how he > subscribed to the service. And their legal obligation goes much further than that.  SignatureKwyj. >>> I'm still resolving the problem with Telstra but the company (Mobile >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Telstra should be able to provide him with details of when/how he > subscribed to the service. Telstra dont keep those details, only the content provider does. Thats why your carrier gives you the contact number, name and ABN of the content provider, so you can call them >> Youve subscribed to content yourself. > > Even assuming the "premium" SMS wasn't completely unsolicited, it's > difficult to imagine anyone would knowingly sign up to receive fortune > cookie quotations at $6.60 each. Were you born yesterday? There is a fuckwit born every minute > When you dispute a charge on your credit card account, the bank > investigates. The same should apply (and does apply, if you push the > issue) to telcos and their "premium SMS". Whether you think it should apply or not, is irrelevant. It doesnt work like that in telco land >>>> I'm still resolving the problem with Telstra but the company (Mobile >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Telstra dont keep those details, only the content provider does. Irrelevant to who's billing him and who has to be able to justify those charges. > Thats why your carrier gives you the contact number, name and ABN of the > content provider, so you can call them Wrong. It's up to TELSTRA to do the running around, as they are the ones issuing the bill. >>> Youve subscribed to content yourself. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > There is a fuckwit born every minute You're living proof of that. >> When you dispute a charge on your credit card account, the bank >> investigates. The same should apply (and does apply, if you push the >> issue) to telcos and their "premium SMS". > > Whether you think it should apply or not, is irrelevant. It doesnt work > like that in telco land Yep - There really is a fuckwit born every minute. The TPA applies to telcos the same as it applies to every other corporation. SignatureKwyj. > Yep - There really is a fuckwit born every minute. The TPA applies to telcos > the same as it applies to every other corporation. It's not so much the TPA as a matter of simple logic: (1) Customer receives Telstra bill which includes bogus "premium SMS" fee. (2) Customer calls Telstra to dispute premium SMS fee. (3) Telstra says "nothing to do with us, call SOLMOB". (4) Customer replies "bugger off, call them yourself". (5) Customer pays the amount of the Telstra bill, minus the premium SMS fee. (6) Premium SMS fee remains "outstanding" on customer's account. Now, if Telstra wants to recover that "outstanding" amount through the courts, it will need to prove the legitmacy of the debt. If Telstra, when asked to present its case, replies "no evidence, but we respectfully invite your Honour to call SOLMOB", the defendant would be successful were he to immediately move for judgment including costs. Alternatively, if Telstra wrongly records a default in a customer's credit file, it leaves itself open to a (successful) defamation action. And if Telstra disconnects a customer for non-payment of a bogus debt, it does itself out of any contractual early termination fees (with the result that the customer might actually get a "free" handset, rather than a "$0" handset). And, incidentally, if Telstra has a Level 4 TIO complaint regarding erronenous premium SMS charges, does it tell the Deputy Ombudsman to call SOLMOB? >>>> I'm still resolving the problem with Telstra but the company (Mobile >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > why your carrier gives you the contact number, name and ABN of the > content provider, so you can call them It's fairly stupid for Telstra not to keep those details. If the OP didn't in fact sign up for the service, he's under no obligation to contact SOLMOB at all. Telstra's the one who has to have to prove the legitimacy of these debts when/if these matters ever reach the TIO or the courts. >>> Youve subscribed to content yourself. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > There is a fuckwit born every minute Are you suggesting that people DO knowingly sign up for to receive fortune cookie quotations at $6.60 each, and are for that reason fuckwits? Or that they're fuckwits for being so easily conned? >> When you dispute a charge on your credit card account, the bank >> investigates. The same should apply (and does apply, if you push the >> issue) to telcos and their "premium SMS". > > Whether you think it should apply or not, is irrelevant. It doesnt work > like that in telco land The law works that way in telco land, whether the inhabitants like it or not. >>> It is a Telstra issue. Telstra's the one billing him. At the very >>> least, Telstra should be able to provide him with details of when/how [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > It's fairly stupid for Telstra not to keep those details. If the OP How on earth is any carrier actually able to keep those details? They can and do keep details of who you SMS, but they dont keep details of the content of the SMS > didn't in fact sign up for the service, he's under no obligation to > contact SOLMOB at all. And then there is the real world. You think 3rd party charging on all networks is illegal or legally untenable? >>>> Youve subscribed to content yourself. >>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Are you suggesting that people DO knowingly sign up for to receive fortune > cookie quotations at $6.60 each, and are for that reason fuckwits? Yes >>>> It is a Telstra issue. Telstra's the one billing him. At the very >>>> least, Telstra should be able to provide him with details of when/how [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > How on earth is any carrier actually able to keep those details? They should consider that before entering into commercial arrangements that require them to pass third party charges to their customers. > They can and do keep details of who you SMS, but they dont keep details of > the content of the SMS Which is irrelevant to the fact that Telstra have to justify those charges. >> didn't in fact sign up for the service, he's under no obligation to >> contact SOLMOB at all. > > And then there is the real world. And real world legal requirements. You seem to conveniently forget those........ > You think 3rd party charging on all networks is illegal or legally > untenable? Nope. Not as long as Telstra can fully explain everything that they print on their bills. SignatureKwyj. >> You think 3rd party charging on all networks is illegal or legally >> untenable? > > Nope. Not as long as Telstra can fully explain everything that they print > on their bills. Telstra can explain it, by supplying you with the ABN, name, and contact number of the company that supplied the charge. They might even be nice enough to put you through, if you ask nicely. >>> You think 3rd party charging on all networks is illegal or legally untenable? >> Nope. Not as long as Telstra can fully explain everything that they print on their bills. > Telstra can explain it, by supplying you with the ABN, name, and contact number of the company that supplied the > charge. Doesnt explain why they are entitled to charge that, you stupid dunny cleaning fuckwit child. > They might even be nice enough to put you through, if you ask nicely. They get to substantiate their claim that they are entitled to charge that, you stupid dunny cleaning fuckwit child. > >> You think 3rd party charging on all networks is illegal or legally > >> untenable? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > number of the company that supplied the charge. They might even be nice > enough to put you through, if you ask nicely. Customers got sick and tired of the few or no replies when they left messages to call back. Some of the problems customers had were rollovers from previous users of the number who had suscribed to the service. when the number became active again the automatic dialing service of the Content Provider kicked in leaving unwanted product that was hard to stop let alone get credit after you had it stopped. the resolution process is very long. On May 22, 8:05 am, "Michael" <mich...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> You think 3rd party charging on all networks is illegal or legally > >> untenable? [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Customers got sick and tired of the few or no replies when they left >messages to call back. I never had any trouble getting a $5 refund. This was when my request to unsub wasnt actioned the first time. Indeed they gave me $10 refund as a compensation > the resolution process is very long. its about one email Did you email the carrier or the fraudsters -- Tradein ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** >>>> It is a Telstra issue. Telstra's the one billing him. At the very >>>> least, Telstra should be able to provide him with details of when/how [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > They can and do keep details of who you SMS, but they dont keep details of > the content of the SMS Then the Telstra gets to (1) wear the cost of challenged premium SMSs; (2) recover from SOLMOB the cost of challenged premium SMSs; or (3) contact SOLMOB itself and obtain the information required to justify the premium SMS charges. >> didn't in fact sign up for the service, he's under no obligation to >> contact SOLMOB at all. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You think 3rd party charging on all networks is illegal or legally > untenable? No. But if the customer challenges the charges, Telstra needs to be able to prove that the service was requested. It can do that by obtaining the necessary evidence from SOLMOB. >>>>> Youve subscribed to content yourself. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Yes Plainly, the OP doesn't fall into that category. At worst, he accidentally signed up for the 'service' without realizing that he was doing so. >>> It's fairly stupid for Telstra not to keep those details. If the OP >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > contact SOLMOB itself and obtain the information required to > justify the premium SMS charges. Or you can just avoid beating round the bush by the customer calling them direct. >>> didn't in fact sign up for the service, he's under no obligation to >>> contact SOLMOB at all. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > No. But if the customer challenges the charges, Telstra needs to be able > to prove that the service was requested. It can do that by obtaining the Which they can do by getting the customer to request the info from SOLMOB >>>> There is a fuckwit born every minute >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Plainly, the OP doesn't fall into that category. The OP *claims* not to fall into that category. How do you know it isnt a son or daughter or someone else? Used to remind me of when I knew colleagues who worked in a call centre. Father swore black and blue that no one in the house made those calls to 1900 sex lines. Oh hang on, he will just check with his 14-year old son . . . then he'd get off the phone saying "ill sort it out in the family" Just because the op physically didnt make the charge himself, doesnt mean someone didnt with access to the service > At worst, he accidentally signed up for the 'service' without > realizing that he was doing so. Which is fine. And if he wants further details he just needs to make a call to SOLMOB. 25c call. >>>> It's fairly stupid for Telstra not to keep those details. >>> How on earth is any carrier actually able to keep those details? >>> They can and do keep details of who you SMS, but they dont keep details of the content of the SMS >> Then the Telstra gets to (1) wear the cost of challenged premium >> SMSs; (2) recover from SOLMOB the cost of challenged premium SMSs; or (3) contact SOLMOB itself and obtain the >> information required to justify the premium SMS charges. > Or you can just avoid beating round the bush by the customer calling them direct. Telstra is the one claiming that they are entitled to charge that. Telstra gets to substantiate that claim, you stupid dunny cleaning fuckwit child. >>>> If the OP didn't in fact sign up for the service, he's under no obligation to contact SOLMOB at all. >>> And then there is the real world. >>> You think 3rd party charging on all networks is illegal or legally untenable? >> No. But if the customer challenges the charges, Telstra needs to be able to prove that the service was requested. >> It can do that by obtaining the > Which they can do by getting the customer to request the info from SOLMOB Wrong, legally. >>>>> There is a fuckwit born every minute >>>> Are you suggesting that people DO knowingly sign up for to receive >>>> fortune cookie quotations at $6.60 each, and are for that reason fuckwits? >>> Yes >> Plainly, the OP doesn't fall into that category. > The OP *claims* not to fall into that category. How do you know it isnt a son or daughter or someone else? Its telstra that gets to prove that thats who ran up the charge, you stupid dunny cleaning fuckwit child. > Used to remind me of when I knew colleagues who worked in a call centre. Father swore black and blue that no one in > the house made those calls to 1900 sex lines. Oh hang on, he will just check with his 14-year old son . . . then he'd > get off the phone saying "ill sort it out in the family" > Just because the op physically didnt make the charge himself, doesnt mean someone didnt with access to the service Its telstra that gets to prove that thats who ran up the charge, you stupid dunny cleaning fuckwit child. >> At worst, he accidentally signed up for the 'service' without realizing that he was doing so. > Which is fine. And if he wants further details he just needs to make a call to SOLMOB. Nope, telstra gets to substantiate its claim that he did that. > 25c call. Only in your pathetic little drug crazed fantasyland. Makes a lot more sense to spend 0c and call the TIO instead. Cancel any credit card or bank debit automatic billing and don't pa your telco bill until you get the statement and read it to check fo any unsolicited additions. If there are any such amounts, ring th telco and say you did not authorise the service and pay the bill minus the disputed amount!!!! This is inconvenient for the telco and makes it more likely they wil refuse to collect for thieves who are frequently the cause o inconvenience. It's still not as good as documenting the evidence for the TI resulting in a fraud squad charge against them. They want to be seen a legitimate business people who have merely wrongfully billed at worst but really they are systematic criminals scamming millions of dollars with telco complicity. If you defraud hundreds of thousands of people for a small amount, it' less likely the victims will take the time and effort to convict you Until at least some of their owners of these carefully contrive systems are in jail with all their property confiscated, these scam will continue -- Tradein ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com ** Horry wrote... > When you dispute a charge on your credit card account, the bank > investigates. The same should apply (and does apply, if you push the > issue) to telcos and their "premium SMS". Isn't this the purpose of the TIO? There is also a mob that supposedly deals with issues arising from the likes of premium number services. I forget what it's called but when I was on dialup, I got attacked by a virus or trojan or whatever it was that installed a dialer on the PC that forced the modem to dial a 1900 number. I managed to pull the pin on the modem but not quick enough to cop a $5 charge. I managed to trace it to one particular mob and I wrote to the TIO and Telstra to lodge a complaint when the charge arrived on my next phone bill. TIO told me to talk to this mob that covers these types of services. I filled out all the info and sent it off. That was the last I ever heard of it. No refunds were forthcoming and in the end I couldn't be f.cked chasing down a pissy $5 charge. But then, perhaps that's how these mobs make their dough. > Horry wrote >> When you dispute a charge on your credit card account, >> the bank investigates. The same should apply (and does >> apply, if you push the issue) to telcos and their "premium SMS". > Isn't this the purpose of the TIO? Nope, the TIO only has a role when the telco f.cks up. > There is also a mob that supposedly deals with issues arising from > the likes of premium number services. I forget what it's called but [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > one particular mob and I wrote to the TIO and Telstra to lodge > a complaint when the charge arrived on my next phone bill. > TIO told me to talk to this mob that covers these types of > services. I filled out all the info and sent it off. That was the > last I ever heard of it. No refunds were forthcoming and in > the end I couldn't be f.cked chasing down a pissy $5 charge. > But then, perhaps that's how these mobs make their dough. > I changed to a Telstra NextG phone in March 2008 from a CDMA phone. I > kept the same number of course but I requested a business plan this [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > realise they have been robbed. Elderly and disabled users are at their > mercy and the amounts they steal can be substantial. I had the same happened to me. Rang Telstra and accused them of basically been a "pimp". Told them that without their complicity scam artists like this couldnt survive. Didnt even bother asking for my money back just told them to close my mobile account straight away. Of course they couldnt close my account and transferred me to someone else and I again vented my spleen and closed my account. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.