[Gllug] Phone scam?
gllug at lgeezer.net
Tue Apr 19 01:00:23 UTC 2011
John Winters wrote:
> On 18/04/11 10:37, Alistair Mann wrote:
> > I don't remember where I saw this (might have been the economist?)
> > but with telephone fraud it can take upto three months to get the
> > law to disconnect them. From a business point of view, it can make
> > sense to start up a shell company that looks kosher, and wring it
> > for everything.
> I once had occasion to complain to ICSTIS about a premimum rate phone
> line scam and they performed far better than any other supposed
> regulatory authority which I've come across.
> The line was promptly disconnected, all revenue was confiscated, the
> operators were fined a large sum, and I was sent full details of
> those behind the scam in case I wanted to pursue it further myself.
To be fair, that was because they were on a premium line -- they're much
less use against a company with a 'regular' phone number.
> Would that other operators were as effective.
Perhaps it's as well that they're usually not: a reasonably well-known
social attack is to induce complaints to a regulator about equally
legitimate competition to one's own business. I'm led to believe
brothels do this to each other regularly: leaving anonymous notes under
the doors of the competition's neighbours asking them to complain to the
Police if that competing brothel "is a problem." For such
establishments, perhaps we can afford not to care, but it would suddenly
be a big problem if someone was able to shut any one of us down
'promptly' on little more than a single complaint.
Gllug mailing list - Gllug at gllug.org.uk
More information about the GLLUG