Cornhill Insurance callback scam 01454 201129

knuckledragger

Here's a cheeky little number that someone at Cornhill Insurance dreamed up and was probably paid very well for:

Your home phone rings and you answer it. But there's nobody on the line.
You do 1471 and get the above number. Naturally you ring straight back to find out who wants you etc.
Surprise, surprise. It's a recorded announcement from Cornhill stating that they've tried to contact you re an insurance quote.
I don't know what the rest of the message says as I hung up.
Bad form Cornhill, you cost me 3p with 1899.

Former_MSE_Archna

Allianz Cornhill have asked us to post this response on its behalf in response and to clarify the situation.

Dear Mr Lewis

I refer to a message left on the moneysavingexpert.com forum entitled ‘Cornhill Insurance callback scam 01454 201129’. The message suggests that when the complainant picked up his phone there was no one on the other end of the line and a message suggesting the recipient call back. This is quite correct but your contributor implied this was a scam, which we must clarify it certainly is not. Cornhill Direct take their compliance responsibilities very seriously and we include this message as part of Ofcom regulations which state the following:

(1) A predictive dialler must not abandon more than 3 per cent of all of the live calls made in any 24 hour period.

(2) If a dialler does abandon a call, it must play a message within two seconds of the call being answered stating on whose behalf the call was being made and giving an 0800 or 0845 number that the called person can ring so that they have the possibility of declining to receive further calls from that company.

(3) Calls must ring for a minimum of 15 seconds before being terminated.

(4) When an abandoned call has been made to a given number, any repeat calls to that number within a 72 hour period must be made by a live operator.

(5) All outbound calls must present a CLI number which, if called back, will be charged at no more than the standard national rate. Any call back to this number must not be used as an opportunity to market to that person without that person’s consent.

(6) Records must be kept for a minimum of six months that demonstrate compliance with these procedures.


I can confirm that we leave a freephone number for the customer on a message, which should be played within the two seconds of the phone being picked up as laid down in the Ofcom regulations.

Yours sincerely,


Simon Coughlin
Media Relations Coordinator
Allianz Cornhill Insurance plc.

king_3

MSE_Archna wrote:

Allianz Cornhill have asked us to post this response on its behalf in response and to clarify the situation.

Dear Mr Lewis

I refer to a message left on the moneysavingexpert.com forum entitled ‘Cornhill Insurance callback scam 01454 201129’. The message suggests that when the complainant picked up his phone there was no one on the other end of the line and a message suggesting the recipient call back. This is quite correct but your contributor implied this was a scam, which we must clarify it certainly is not. Cornhill Direct take their compliance responsibilities very seriously and we include this message as part of Ofcom regulations which state the following:

(1) A predictive dialler must not abandon more than 3 per cent of all of the live calls made in any 24 hour period.

(2) If a dialler does abandon a call, it must play a message within two seconds of the call being answered stating on whose behalf the call was being made and giving an 0800 or 0845 number that the called person can ring so that they have the possibility of declining to receive further calls from that company.

(3) Calls must ring for a minimum of 15 seconds before being terminated.

(4) When an abandoned call has been made to a given number, any repeat calls to that number within a 72 hour period must be made by a live operator.

(5) All outbound calls must present a CLI number which, if called back, will be charged at no more than the standard national rate. Any call back to this number must not be used as an opportunity to market to that person without that person’s consent.

(6) Records must be kept for a minimum of six months that demonstrate compliance with these procedures.


I can confirm that we leave a freephone number for the customer on a message, which should be played within the two seconds of the phone being picked up as laid down in the Ofcom regulations.

Yours sincerely,


Simon Coughlin
Media Relations Coordinator
Allianz Cornhill Insurance plc.

If it is, how much dose it cost? I am not a laywer and have no time ugue about the regulation. the bottom line is: if it is your no and it does cost 3p to ring even through 1899, it is cheating. why not a well kown 0845 or even 0870 no? hope all answer to my question is not.

BexTech

knuckledragger wrote:

Your home phone rings and you answer it. But there's nobody on the line.
You do 1471 and get the above number. Naturally you ring straight back to find out who wants you etc.

No, naturally you don't call back, what happens is (well those sensible amongst us) if you don't recognise the number on caller display you then decide whether to answer or not, if you do answer just to find out what the caller wanted and they hang up, you just forget all about the call, if it was important they would call back, the thing you certainly wouldn't do is call the number back.

BexTech

king wrote:

If it is, how much dose it cost? I am not a laywer and have no time ugue about the regulation. the bottom line is: if it is your no and it does cost 3p to ring even through 1899, it is cheating. why not a well kown 0845 or even 0870 no? hope all answer to my question is not.

People complain though about these rip-off 0845 and 0870 numbers. Any business that calls my house phone or mobile phone touting for business, is a company that gets put on my list to avoid and warn friends and family to avoid.

Any company that calls my number and then you either hit silence or the call dropsl, are scammers no matter what the scamming company try and say, just to wriggle their way out.

Companies should be banned from calling people up, with or with the useless TPS.

BexTech

MSE_Archna wrote:

.

(5) All outbound calls must present a CLI number which, if called back, will be charged at no more than the standard national rate. Any call back to this number must not be used as an opportunity to market to that person without that person’s consent.

This could be why Cornhill, has decided on a geographic number, as we know that 0845 (lo-call) rate and the even more rip-off 0870 (wrongly described as national rate) numbers cost more than the national rate to call.

redux

I made a complaint to another company about a series of missed or answered calls on my landline and mobile. The answered calls said that the call was made on behalf of ___ but they did not have anyone to deal with the call. Only in one call of over twenty did I actually speak to someone.

I spoke to Ofcom, and after my careful description, they thought that the rules did not apply to these non-sales calls, as the caller was identified, and could have been said to have a contractual arrangement with me, though on behalf of another company.

Last Friday evening, I received six of these calls within an hour, including twice on the mobile while I was actually calling them on the landline to complain that this was harassment, especially as they should have been instructed to stop after my direct complaint to their client. I called them three times and eventually was put through to the supervisor who seemed surprised when I said I'd been told that she had been on the phone for my previous two calls. She agreed with me that this was unnecessary and unacceptable behaviour, and promised that no more calls would be made; which is ok so far.

Cornhill may be correct in its interpretation of compliance of Ofcom rules, but the fact remains: although this is probably not a ploy to save on phone charges, they appear to believe that the poor set up of their phone system relative to staffing levels is excusable and are perhaps naive if they think it will not alienate customers.

derrick

OP started 05-09-2005, first reply 22-09-2006, that's a hell of a long time for a response!

bbb_uk

derrick wrote:

OP started 05-09-2005, first reply 22-09-2006, that's a hell of a long time for a response!

I noticed that. Makes you wonder bother to bring up something so old that in fact didn't even have a reply neither.

dc

derrick wrote:

OP started 05-09-2005, first reply 22-09-2006, that's a hell of a long time for a response!

The length of time it took for Cornhill to reply to HMV Martin's query as to reasons for an automated response on the geo number.

However I have to agree with Bex Tech, why call them back?

Heinz

Even after over a year, 01454 201129 still has the recorded announcement on it - asking callers who wish to contact them to call 0800 294 5972