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

91–100 of 150 posts

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

#91

Post by c0mpute »

corin_ wrote: post #83
talmand wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't he state his preference was for him to call the salesman back and the salesman insisted he be the one to call?

That's semantics about what happens, doesn't change the overall situation. Reword to "the salesman said he would call back and the customer didn't ask him not to but instead said it was fine".

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 with the callers.

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

#92

Post by jonknee »

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.

Not in the situations I've seen, but perhaps this situation was different. I really doubt it though. Each "sales person" is in a cube with a headset on and an auto dialer either getting calls transferred (like in the OPs case after answering some questions) or making outbound calls from a pool or the call back / appt list. It's integrated with a CRM so that everyone can be tracked and the audio of the calls are recorded. The conversations are scripted and the agent reads what's on the screen while answering any questions with other prompts.

It's not like he got in touch with a sales guy who was going to take him to dinner. He just got to a human at a telemarketing company. They are just cogs in a larger machine.

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

#93

Post by alan_cx »

Profitable, commendable, and a fine example to us all, but BORING!!!!!

Before I go on, yes, I do have way too much time on my hands, and a hugely immature area in my brain.

I like to go for creative abuse. Immediately I start arguing and generally giving them a hard time, winding up to virtual verbal abuse until....

...two things happen. They hang up, and never call back. Bonus: I feel better for getting some stuff off my chest. Dirt cheap therapy which they pay for!!!! Triple win. Yay!!!!

Dunno what its like in the US but here in the UK it seems that these people are not allowed to hang up. Big no no, from what I can tell. So, a great game is to time how quickly you can get them to hang up, or how long they can last out.

Should I grow up and generally get some sort of life? Yeah, probably.

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

#95

Post by corin_ »

c0mpute wrote: post #91
corin_ wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's semantics about what happens, doesn't change the overall situation. Reword to "the salesman said he would call back and the customer didn't ask him not to but instead said it was fine".

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 cases of people trying to trick you, any customer in the world would, if they changed their mind about being interested, wait for the call back and say it then, not contact someone else at the company to be put on a do not call list.

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

#96

Post by rdtsc »

jrockway wrote: post #94

My favorite feature of Google Voice is the "block caller" button. Works like a charm.

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.

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

#97

Post by jrockway »

rdtsc wrote: post #96
jrockway wrote: post #94

My favorite feature of Google Voice is the "block caller" button. Works like a charm.

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.

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

#98

Post by michaelrkn »

beeskneecaps wrote: post #36

"I believe that, done right, telemarketing is an effective, appreciated way to get people services they want, deliver important political messages, and raise money for non-profits" This make anyone else cringe?

Here's an example of what I think is telemarketing done right. We have a client that's a roofing company. They scout areas that have seen a lot of damage from storms, note the houses with roofing damage, and look up their phone numbers. They call the residents, explain how their home insurance companies usually cover most of the cost of the roof repair, and offer to schedule a time to take a closer look at the roof and give an estimate.

I think it's mostly about targeting - don't just call tons of people with no reason, but focus on particular people who have a high likelihood of becoming a customer. Then call them with salespeople who know the industry, be helpful and courteous, and take people off your list who don't want to be called. And, of course, follow the law.

Unfortunately, there's so much bad telemarketing that the good stuff has gotten drowned out, so it's easy to see it all as bad.

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

#99

Post by rdtsc »

ianferrel wrote: post #24
latch wrote: post #4

The first call after he goes on the DNC is clearly a violation. The calls thereafter, when he's stringing them along...not so sure. Once you start saying "I'm interested, tell me more"...I think the company has a fairly solid claim of having a business relationship...if not legally, certainly ethically.

In my opinion, the fact that there's no way to figure out who is calling you and hold them accountable without stringing them along makes this an ethical thing to do.

Yeah I think it sort of puts it in the hands of the judge at that point (I am talking about a small claims court).

I would be interesting to find out what would have happened in court.

Even with the most business-sympathetic judge, he should at least allow for the first couple of calls to be admitted as violations because in those cases he clearly did not have any semblance of a business relationship with them.

The most consumer-sympathetic judge would allow all calls to be counted against the company as the person did explicitly ask to be put on the DNL. He expresses an initial interest but then decided he didn't want anything to do with the company.

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

#100

Post by leephillips »

michaelrkn wrote: post #98
beeskneecaps wrote: post #36

"I believe that, done right, telemarketing is an effective, appreciated way to get people services they want, deliver important political messages, and raise money for non-profits" This make anyone else cringe?

Here's an example of what I think is telemarketing done right. We have a client that's a roofing company. They scout areas that have seen a lot of damage from storms, note the houses with roofing damage, and look up their phone numbers. They call the residents, explain how their home insurance companies usually cover most of the cost of the roof repair, and offer to schedule a time to take a closer look at the roof a…

Unfortunately, we live in a world where so many people can't tell the difference between right and wrong that I get annoying calls from roofing companies. Here's a clue for you: just because something might not be against the law and might be profitable doesn't mean that it is civil behavior. People like you create the annoyances are the bad side of all our modern, convenient technology. You know very well that those people already know their roofs are damaged and know how to use a telephone to call the roofer that they want to call when it is convenient for them to do so. But you are willing to harass 20 people who don't want to hear from you so that you can hit that one old lady who will swallow your pitch and hire you (or your "client") rather than comparison shop and research reputations.

There is no "good" telemarketing that gets "drowned out." What you are doing is wrong.

Post reply on HN