Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I sued a telemarketer and got $4,000

impactdialing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 150 posts

Re: I sued a telemarketer and got $4,000

#121

Post by spc476 »

MichaelGG wrote: post #110
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you can originate a call on the internet that's nearly impossible to trace. // Why do the phone networks route calls with faked originator numbers. I can see why they don't block genuine numbers (that terminate at an actual phone) -- to get you to pay for blocking. But surely they can tell that an incoming call from a foreign call centre with a local number is fake. Recently I've had calls, in the UK, from numbers…

Phone numbers are not necessarily symmetric. A given number might legitimately place a call via someone else's network. For instance, think about roaming. You're calling with your local number, via another country's network. So, it's not a super simple problem to solve everywhere.

Roaming doesn't work quite like that. My cell phone is associated with a "home switch" (HS) (based on the provider and cell phone number [1]). When roaming, my cell phone associates with a switch and becomes a visitor to that switch (VS). The VS will inform the HS that it will handle my calls.

Now, when you call me, the HS gets "the call". It then contacts the VS. The VS will assign a temporary phone number to my cell, and send this number back to the HS. The HS then sends this number back to the switch making the call. That switch will then call the temporary number, hitting the VS. The VS sees that number and since it assigned that number to my cell, knows to "ring" my cell phone.

And that's just for cell phones. That doesn't cover call forwarding, for instance.

[1] Number portability adds another layer of indirection to this.

Re: I sued a telemarketer and got $4,000

#122

Post by burnvictim »

webjprgm wrote: post #102

Yay! I hate telemarketing calls. There are 3 I tend to get. 2 of them are from places that I clearly did give my number too, one of which is a non-profit I've asked to stop calling me and the other is a car company that keeps trying to get me to trade in my car. The third is something in spanish that starts off with "felicitations, eres el ganador ..." which is where I hang up every time. Fortunately those have becom…

I think the problem with the car trade-in and the Spanish call (I've heard it is a content sign-up type of thing) is that it's possible they're not even legit businesses. I'm guessing it's going to be really tough, if not impossible to find out the owner, let alone sue them and get any money.

I would LOVE to do that, though.

Re: I sued a telemarketer and got $4,000

#123

Post by modeless »

TwiztidK wrote: post #32
michaelrkn wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Corin. I asked to be on their internal DNC list, and several days later, they called me again. That's illegal. Don't you think companies should have to respect your requests to be put on their DNC lists? I mean, if you unsubscribed from an email list and kept getting emails, wouldn't you be upset?

It's not the same as a mailing list at all. It was person-to-person contact between David and yourself. Although it appears that the law was violated when you were called by David, he was simply following up on your interest in his company's products. Honestly, I feel like you are totally abusing the law in this situation. At the first available opportunity, you should've asked to be placed on their DNC list without…

How do you suggest he find out who to sue without expressing interest in their product? It's really the company who is abusing the law by not disclosing who they are to avoid retaliation.

Re: I sued a telemarketer and got $4,000

#124

Post by rdtsc »

jrockway wrote: post #97
rdtsc wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sure these people are smarter than just using a single number. They can just use random number every time. You could for example have a white-list but that's won't quite work for most people.

They could use a random number every time, but they don't. If they start doing that, I'll enable Google Voice's feature that requires an unknown caller to say their name before the phone call is accepted.

That's pretty cool. Actually my friend implemented a feature on his home phone (he is old school) that had a recording answering the phone and it said, if you are human press "8". If they did then the actual phone would ring, otherwise I guess I just hung up or just kept them on the line. So he screened all the pre-recorded crap.

Re: I sued a telemarketer and got $4,000

#125

Post by c0mpute »

corin_ wrote: post #95
c0mpute wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are willing to give a lot of latitude to the sales person here. I think it is true that it is human psychology to trust a relationship that is established, but we would prefer a world where rules still have to apply, no matter what. Right? It is so much better if this incident sets a standard for their company and the telemarketers are forced to validate each time irrespective of their past association wi…

I don't think I am giving him latitude, if your job was selling to people and a customer had expressed interest in your product and had agreed to wait for you to call back would you in a million years stop to think "maybe he was lying to me, when he said he wanted to call me another type he wasn't telling the truth, I'd better check the database to see if he doesn't want me to call"? Other than random, unexpected cas…

What you are saying is correct, in that what happened in this case was kinda gamed to mislead. One reason where I think the calling company stepped the line was, someone else calling him back when he did not return their call.

I would hope that companies do more due diligence when a customer is not calling back. Maybe the customer changed their minds. The problem with telemarketers is that they don't care about what customers are thinking and so someone else went ahead and called him.

What I would prefer is (and this is where I think I don't want to give any inch of room for the sales person) is that they constantly have to be aware of what the customer's latest situation is. I would prefer all telemarketers get trained this way and not intrude. Don't you think this is better?

Re: I sued a telemarketer and got $4,000

#126

Post by thatjoshguy »

corin_ wrote: post #87
jonknee wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The software that telemarketers use should make this automatic. You have a list of calls to make, during a call you can hit DNC which removes them from your any everyone else's queue. There's another button to add a call back at a future date. If the customer is on the DNC list it won't show up as a callback or will at least very clearly show that you shouldn't call them. http://www.five9.com/call-center-software/fea…

But once you get past cold calling and into actual back and forth, the conversations don't go through telesales lists or software. At that point you're no longer doing telesales, you're discussing options with a client, albeit a client who hss yet to make their first purchase.

If someone says 'don't call me', can't the salesperson then just delete their phone number?

Re: I sued a telemarketer and got $4,000

#127

Post by alain94040 »

dminor wrote: post #103
alain94040 wrote: post #11

Great, but the main problem is to find out who is calling you. I wish the phone company had some kind of obligation to give me that information, so I could trace back annoying telemarketing calls. Stringing them along until they reveal who they work for just doesn't work well. Another idea would be for banks to offer special credit card numbers, that get automatically flagged as bogus purchases. Any bank offering suc…

> Another idea would be for banks to offer special credit card numbers, that get automatically flagged as bogus purchases. Any bank offering such a service? If I ever use the magic number, the transaction is perceived to go through, but it's actually tracked and no money is exchanged. Not sure if it's doable with respect to Visa and Mastercard networks. A credit card that allows you to make purchases but never transf…

Actually, why not... My bank knows me. I'm a good customer. 10+ years of banking with them, not one credit card issue. Thousands of dollars on my bank account. When i use this bogus credit card number for $20 to track a spammer, I think my bank could trust me that I'm not just trying to buy something for free.

Re: I sued a telemarketer and got $4,000

#130

Post by smsm42 »

corin_ wrote: post #45
DanBC wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. That's the entire point of sanitising your lists. When someone asks you to stop calling them you remove their number and stop calling them.

You don't understand how salesmen work at all, and I'm not talking about them being shady, I'm just talking about general business practices. Lists of names/numbers are for cold-calling, and yes, cold-calling should check any opt-outs first. Once you are actually having conversations with a specific person about an actual sale, lists are no longer part of the equation. There's not a salesman in the world who, if aske…

They should. If the customer is no longer interested, and expressed it clearly by asking to be placed to DNC list, they should respect it. There's a lot of software out there that makes it as easy as clicking one button, or even easier - you open your CRM software and see big red "ASKED TO BE PLACED ON DNC" all over the record, and you know it didn't work out, time to move on. Of course, some salesmen may ignore that hoping they can persuade the client to reconsider, but then that's where $500 comes into play.
Post reply on HN