Possible compensation for dial-up fraud

beryldog

This is how it went for me.... Ripped off £400 for premium rate numbers via the internet.
BT advised me to contact ICSTIS, took forever to get through. I gave them all the numbers that had been used, they search to see if these numbers are under investigation. They all were 6 months prior to my bill. Went back to BT said they were already under investigation so why hadn't they barred these numbers. They said something about 'Human rights' ha ha. But would hold fire on the bill while ICSTIS investigate. Never heard from ICSTIS again, then BT took the WHOLE bill from my account without warning, making me go overdrawn with a £25 bank charge. Changed from BT to AOL (Far cheaper) and have since been bombarded with telephone sales asking if I'd like to go back to them. HA HA HA HA.

gregg1

In reply to OHIT - thing are not always as straighforward as this though - we had spybot, virus checkers, firewall etc on our computer and they still got through. At the time we were scammed (£240) BT were aware of the problem, ICSTIS had the scammers number on their "investigation list" but still BT did not put a block on the number. Have to say that if you knowingly allowed your car or house etc to be used for a crime you would be implemented as an accessory. They were using a BT line - why should this be any different?

gregg1

nrobinson wrote:

I am currently threatening BT with a police enquiry!

They are party to a fraud in the fact that they collected monies for a fraudster - they are therefore complicit.
They acknowledge the fact in that they give all funds gained to charity - whereas in fact they should make the system for use of such numbers more tight so that the problem is reduced or avoided.

Until authorieties put a squeeze on BT for this they have no interest in stopping or limiting it.

And any report of fraud is a criminal and not a civil matter and the police are required to investigate.

I'm hoping this tact will get us somewhere - any thoughts anyone?

Cheers,

Nik.

Well said - totally agree with everything you say - we were hit for £240 - we told BT not to pay the fraudsters and that if they did then it was their problem and their loss - yeah right - they paid em and came to us for the money. BT have allowed their lines to be rented out and be used for a crime - we felt like we had been mugged in our own home but the sting in the tail was that we had to pay up AFTER the event. ICSTIS have proved to be as much use as a chocolate tea pot.

Will be interesting to see how you get on -good luck

gregg1

LD wrote:

I accept all you say, but as in real life thieves abound, and whilst I won't ask the type of site your example occured on, most occur on less reputable sites which people visit as a result of a search etc.

also glad you mentioned CTRL ALT + DEL which no doubt will be new to some, (try it now you will see a list of running programs - then just close it)

But the main point I was trying to make was that it wasn't the phone companies fault and other then the standard rate they have to pay the monies to the owners of the line.

I would love to know how many people have read my post - disagreed, but not bothered to check out the two links I gave, hopefully not to many, since many people on this forum are Internet shoppers I would suggest they do, as apart from diallers there are 'data harvesters' and 'keyloggers' which install for the sole purpose of obtaining addresses credit/debit card details etc - identity theft.

Bottom line - unprotected surfing is dangerous.

Sorry- but it IS the phone companies' fault if they knowingly allow their lines to be used for crime.

Armbase

LD wrote:

Bottom line - unprotected surfing is dangerous.

Exactly. Tip one. Get broadband and a hardware firewall like a decent router with NAT. Alternatively, if you are on dialup, get a cheap old P3 500 or similar from ebay or similar. IE one that is going to be cheap. Slap linux on it have use it as a firewall through which you dial. you main computer will still be fast, and it wont affect dialup because the bandwidth of the dialup is slower than the firewall machine.

OR don't use windows.

Cheers
Bob