Premium rate reverse charged short codes without opt-in

mgldev

Hi guys,

Just thought I'd share what I'm currently dealing with and I'll keep you updated.

For some time I've been receiving messages which I instantly dismissed as spam and ignored:



I never click on adverts, I never fill in Facebook quizzes or fall for click-bait, I have Adblock installed when I browse, and I absolutely would never send a text to a premium rate number, vote for X-Factor or enter a competition via SMS.

I've read articles on here about never replying to scam text messages - although admittedly I'd never read https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/phones/stop-spam-texts in depth where it differentiates between scam text messages and premium rate short codes.

Recently I decided to clean up any direct debits for services I don't need as I'm saving up for a mortgage, and when doing so I noticed my direct debit to my mobile provider, Three, was showing £47 - my contract is a SIM only deal for £26 a month.

When I logged in to my e-bill, I noticed my last three bills have been around the £45 mark, not £26. I know people may wonder how it's took me three months to notice, but I don't go through my statement each month analysing outgoings, and an extra £20 a month going missing went unnoticed.

Here's an example of my last bill:


I initially contacted Three and was informed that this issue must be taken up with the short code service provider, Codazone, as they are the company which have initiated the subscription and it would be through them that any refund claim must be issued.

I first raised the issue on a Sunday, when I noticed, and Codazone operate Monday to Friday, so today was my first chance to get in touch. I tried over 10 times to get put through to an adviser via 0330 053 5853, and on each occasion I either got cut off or put through to a voice mail system.

Ended up going back to Three who agreed to attempt to get in touch with them on my behalf - and if they got through, would connect me via themselves. This happened - I got a phone call from Three who then connected me to a Codazone advisor.

The person I spoke to didn't give me chance to introduce myself and immediately started rushing through information about how I'd supposedly opted-in. I asked her to slow down and to let me ask a couple of questions.

1. What date did I supposedly opt-in
2. How did I opt-in, i.e. via sending a text, mobile advert, desktop advert

"I signed up on 5th February 2018 and I did so by clicking on an online advert which will have been displayed as a game service banner"

If I had of clicked on an online banner for an SMS based gaming platform, at what point did I hand my mobile telephone number over? Firstly, I would never click on an online advert, and if I did, then surely I should be presented with a form where I'd need to enter my mobile number, and I should (dream world?) have to tick a T&Cs / 'opt-in' checkbox to confirm I want to be subscribed to a service which is going to cause me to financial outlay?

The response was, "I'm afraid I can't provide that information at the moment, I'd have to make a request for it, and it could take up to 48 hours". I requested that that information be sent via email once it's available - as I'm very keen on seeing how I 'signed up'.

I'm a software engineer working with web platforms and I sincerely hope these online adverts are not tapping in to the likes of Facebook APIs via embedded Like buttons which then allow these companies to request profile information such as contact numbers then used to sign people up to premium rate SMS subscriptions at the accidental click of an advert.

I've since been in contact with Three again although this time I asked to be put through to a manager as I'd already been passed between around 6 different advisers, each time having to bring them up to speed - but more importantly, I believe that Three themselves and mobile phone operators are not doing enough to protect consumers.

I think the simple fact that a consumer can be charged simply for receiving a text message with no verification process to establish that the person receiving the charge is a person which has a paper trail leading back to the opt-in is fundamentally flawed.

If I have a payment taken from me, it's only ever through my bank. If I want to buy online, I must use my 16 digit card number, my address and my CVS 3 digit code to authorise the payment. If I create a Direct Debit, I must enter my account number and sort code and electronically sign to agree to the payment.

All payment services have a means in place to ensure the person being charged approves of the payment. Mobile phone operators on the other hand have created an additional platform for which to pass on charges indirectly to a customer - via the phone bill. Company A requests Operator A to charge Customer A, which leads to an increased bill - only this method of charging the customer doesn't appear to have anywhere near the same level of verification as more standardised payment methods.

What process is in place to ensure the person receiving the charge actually agreed to it when all it takes is for a company which obtained a short code to simply fire an SMS at a mobile number? Seems far too easy for my liking.

The first thing I'd like to see would be for mobile operators to add the ability to 'disable' being charged for short code services. I appreciate the argument of "there are people who legitimately want to utilise short code services", but for people who don't - having the ability to blanket block these subscriptions would provide peace of mind that you can't be targeted.

Would it not be possible to have some kind of two step verification process in place for short code services? i.e. if you receive a message from a short code service it should contain a 6 digit verification code - if the recipient sends this code back via SMS to the provider, this acts as confirmation that the recipient legitimately wants the service? I have no idea if that's actually feasible as I don't know mobile networks, but some kind of 'I actually opted in' is needed.

At the time of writing a customer relations manager is trying to contact Codazone on my behalf to cancel the subscription and obtain a refund. I appreciate Three's position that they would want to try and reclaim the costs from Codazone as they would be out of pocket otherwise, but I also feel mobile operators have a responsibility to protect us.

I'll update this thread when I next have some news.

boliston

these schemes are pure theft - i was caught out by a scam company called "loadedmobi" who stole 5 lots of £4.50 from me - three initially told me i would need to claim it off loadedmobi but when they refused, claiming i had "signed up" for their "service" which offered access to "hundreds of games" I told three to cancel my mobile account and at that stage they said they would refund me the stolen money

pmduk

Check out the 'regulators' website https://www.psauthority.org.uk. The whole area needs an overhaul by the Government as Ofcom isn't up to the job.

boatman

I'd put a complaint in to OFCOM, if you don't, they will say they don't know about, or they don't feel there is a problem as not enough people complain. PSA maybe the regulator but if OFCOM get a few complaints aswell it won't do any harm.

http://payforitsucks.co.uk/barring-third-party-charges/


http://payforitsucks.co.uk/three-payforit-procedures/

There needs to a text from your provider as soon as you 'sign up' to any of these, at that point you should be able to reject it if need be.