61 posts tagged “phonepayplus”

Back in August I got stung for the second time by Spread Media/Spread Mobile and their pals mBlox.  I had never chosen to do business with either company.  However, that didn't matter - they had my mobile number from somewhere and were able to repeatedly take money from my account.

Spread and mBlox got done early in 2008 for doing this to a bunch of folk, they sat out their short bar from providing such "services" and then did it again later in the year.  Un-frigging-believable eh?

No doubt the guy behind Spread will launch another company and team up with mBlox again.  I can almost guarentee it.  There's nothing to stop 'em.  The law and the regulators would appear to be on their side.  mBlox's PR just don't get it either, they joked about me kicking up such a fuss.  Well, wouldn't you if you had money stolen from you?  Okay a few quid here and there isn't the same as having your house ransacked but the principles the same.

Oh well.  Not much can be done.  None of the UK mobile operators are interested in stamping this fraud and abuse of their customers out.  My operator, H3G (aka 3UK or 3 Mobile) made it clear that I was on my own and 'good luck getting your money back' (not a direct quote, but not far off).  The police, politicians, consumer organisations and industry regulators - not one of them in the least bit interested in stopping this abuse and bringing the culprits to justice.

PhonepayPlus Tribunal

I am the Investigations Executive charged with the running of this investigation. As Paul Whiteing has indicated in his email below, during the current investigation PhonepayPlus has never at any stage dealt with Spread Media Limited. A thorough investigation into the activities of all parties to the value chain – mBlox Limited and Spread Mobile Services Limited – has been undertaken.

 

If you have been informed that your complaint is with ‘Spread Media’ then that is indeed incorrect.

 

When investigations arise in any circumstances the Executive is careful to review the complaint’s history, timeline, along with facts relating to service operation and the parties operating it. Where it is appropriate the Executive makes full use of its powers under paragraph 8.9.3 of the PhonepayPlus Code of Practice 11^th Edition (amended April 2008) in relation to potential failures to comply with previous sanctions imposed. This case was processed in the usual manner following the Standard Procedure, and at no time did the Executive consider the evidence justified using these powers.

 

The case will come before the Code Compliance Panel sitting in Tribunal on 2^nd April 2009. As a complainant you will be kept fully informed of the adjudication decision, which will be published on the website in the usual way.

 

David Levitt

Investigations Executive

I asked Paul (the new CEO at PhonepayPlus) about what conclusions the regulator had come to regarding Spread Media's dodgy unsolicited texts in August 2008.  Below is his response...

This investigation has been ongoing since September 2008, and whilst this has been delayed for various reasons, the consumer harm was minimized by the suspension of the service by mBlox Limited prior to 9^th September 2008.

 

The investigation identified a number of potential breaches of the PhonepayPlus Code of Practice 11^th Edition (amended April 2008), and these were raised as against the service provider within a formal breach letter on 27^th January 2009. One aspect of the investigation leading to the delay was the need to appreciate precisely which company operated the service at the time of issuance of MT messages in August 2008. In light of your entry for “Subject” of this email, it is worth noting that PhonepayPlus has never at any stage dealt with Spread Media Limited in relation to this investigation. The Tribunal will consider which companies form the value chain as part of its decision.

 

mBlox have co-operated fully with this investigation. This case will be presented at the next available hearing, which is 2^nd April 2009. This is due to other cases being heard at the next Tribunal, which is sitting on 19^th March 2009.

What does one make of that?  Hmm, still digesting it.  Spread Media isn't part of the investigation, yet mBlox puts the blame on them, claiming that they themsleves are just another innocent party in all of this.  PhonepayPlus are putting all the blame on mBlox yet Paul makes it known that mBlox have co-operated fully.

Oh and what are 'MT messages' anyway?

As always, the guys over at The Scream's forums have done a cracking job of digging the dirt and un-spinning the crappola that comes from those in the premium rate industry and the so-called regulator.

These recent posts really are worth checking out:

• Carry on stealling: the latest PhonepayPlus adjudications
• mblox not cited in latest PP+ adjudications - no really!
• Phonepayplus/Aime: The mass-debaters
• Phonepayplus publish new scammers charter
• Premium Rate Fraud: Regulatory loopholes or Government arseholes
• Suhail Bhat(MEF) alarming response to Paul Whiteing(Phonepayplus)
• George Kidd (formerly) of PhonepayPlus lies and lies on camera

Good work (as usual) fellas! Kudos to mike99 and El Gringo for the above (and Hamlet as well for help in the past).  Keep up the good work.

The Mirror does a pretty good job too, can't really forget them as they're the only mainstream news outlet in the UK that reports on these scams and investigates the dodgy goings on between regulated and regulator.

Poor old Florian Demuth, Customer Services Advisor at PhonepayPlus.  I gave the poor fellow quite a hard time last year regarding the times I was scammed by unsolicited reverse-rate SMS cowboys.  Firstly I recorded every conversation and, to comply with the law, told him as such.  Secondly I ranted and er, ranted, about the whole sordid industry his organisation supposedly 'regulated'.

He did quite well sticking to the script but you could tell he was holding back from saying some things.  There was always a slight hint that, deep down, he loathed the industry and was clearly not in the right job (which, amongst other things includes defending the indefensible).

Anyway, with all this talk about PhonepayPlus at the moment, I came across an interview in the regulator's own newsletter where the chappie (which, I must admit, until now I thought was a lady!) admitted the following:

The vast majority of complaints are related to reverse-charged text messages consumers state to be unsolicited.

That's right folks, the vast majority of complaints are because people have been charged for something they never asked for!  No amount of 'educating the customer' will help in this matter.  In many (I'd wager, most) of these cases the company responsible will have deliberately chosen to steal money from mobile subscriber's accounts in what would, in any other industry, be classed as theft or fraud.

I spent many months, sent many emails, made many calls, posted dozens upon dozens of stories related to the theft from my account and only after all of that, the company responsible, mBlox*, finally gave me a cheque for £10.  I wonder how much they've pocketted through fellow victims not knowing or giving up trying to get the money stolen recovered?

Of course, in the premium rate industry, those that work for the regulator also work for the companies responsible!  It's that cosy, and the rewards are great.

*mBlox helped Spread Media carry out this fraud.  mBlox may claim that it had nothing to do with them, they were just the conduit (or some such thing) but this was far from the first time the two companies worked together and ended up doing the same thing.

PhonepayPlus or, as I like to call them PeePeePlus, are in the news again. The regulator in charge of cleaning up a dirty industry is attempting to clean up it's own act but, quite frankly, is not going nearly far enough.  The funny thing being that no one thinks they're doing a good job - whether they're in the industry or just unwitting helpless victims of it.

So, without much further ado, some recent news stories across the interweb that my Google News found for me...

The Register: PhonepayPlus gets stern on pricey premium raters

If I can steal some quotes from PeePeePlus that The Reg has um, quoted:

some companies have adopted practices which are leading to increased consumer complaints

The consumer cannot be charged until they have confirmed their subscription by replying to that text

There are many innovative, useful and fun services available to consumers via their mobiles

A majority of industry respondents were sceptical of the need for subscription services to seek active consumer confirmation, on the grounds that this could cause consumer confusion and adversely affect sales

Good to see PeePeePlus pussy-footing around what those companies they regulate get up to.  Those 'practices' that these companies have adopted would be, in any properly regulated industry, illegal.  Very few premium rate services are run in a fair and honest way.  And, very few are offering a worthy service.

Common sense and best business practice would've suggested consumers should only get a service that they've opted in for.  Had this been the case last year, Spread Media LTD wouldn't have been able to steal money from me and thousands of others.

And of course the industry doesn't want any measure that will lead to scam artists and rogue businesses earning any less.  The big 'legit' aggregators/service providers make way too much money from them to truly want the industry cleaned up.  Just look at how the world's largest mobile transaction network, mBlox, keeps teaming up with folk they know to be scamming the public.  They don't care that innocent parties have had money effectively stolen from them and they don't care that they pocket part of the proceeds of such scams.  Just look at how much time and effort I had to put in before mBlox compensated me with the grand sum of £10!

IntoMobile: UK: New measures issued for Mobile phone services’ marketing and payment

Mobile Entertainment: PhonepayPlus hits back at criticism

..and another nugget from M.E.: Could the new PhonepayPlus rules be flawed?

Oh and that's not a 'is it flawed for consumers?' but a 'is it flawed for the grubby companies in this grubby industry of ours?' by the looks of things.

The author of this article admits that the wife got sent an unsolicited text and they were happy enough to just send 'STOP' back.  It looks like neither the author, nor his wife, actually checked their bills.  Had they done, they'd have realised why people aren't happy with the industry and why there's a need for, at the very least, the measures PeePeePlus have now put in place.  In my mind, from my experierence and that of other victims I've heard about, these measures are too little too late.  This industry needs a full overhaul!

Tougher action has come from another regulator PhonepayPlus, which monitors premium content. After a doubling of complaints related to mobile services in the past year, it has issued new rules. Anyone signing up to a subscription service which charges more than £4.50 ($6.25) in any given week (including joining costs) must first receive, and reply to, a free confirmation message outlining the cost and conditions of the service. And content providers wanting to offer such services must first apply to PhonepayPlus.

Link to full article here: Regulators bid for more influence on both sides of the pond

It's good to see that the news is spreading about how complaints (and, as such, presumably fraud) is on the increase.  Only if we complain more and demand action, will we see this kind of fraud and/or business practice stamped out for good.

...and yesterday, and possibly the day before (heck, I should've just said 'week'!)

Mobile Industry Review PhonepayPlus: The dinner lady of the UK mobile industry

CBBC Tough new rules for phone pests

Mobile Entertainment PhonepayPlus 'Why we had to act against abuses'

and Mobile Entertainment again... New rules for UK mobile providers

And if you want expert analysis, well placed cynicism, some laughs and lots of dirt undug I wholeheartedly recommend The Scream's 'General Telco' forum here

A certain English police force (I won't name them as they may not wish for me to do so) has taken an interest in some of what I myself uncovered about a person involved in a dodgy PRS* scheme.  Had four hits from them yesterday and it was clear what and who they were interested in.

Was it just a member of staff that had been sent unsolicited 'adult' texts (at a whopping £1.50 a pop)?  Or is it part of a proper bona fide investigation to the gentleman and the companies he has run?  Hmmm.

*Premium Rate Service (ie premium-rate reverse charged SMS texts)

I'm often quite sceptical and negative about a whole array of things and at times not willing to give the benefit of the doubt.  It's not the best character trait to have, although it can prove handy in some areas, sometimes.  I'm also quite adept at not making myself clear on occasion, but hey, that's just human, right?

Enough of my waffling, and onto my post...

Back in September I wrote a post about charities using premium rate reverse-message billing.  Here it is if you want to click through: Charity Fundraising using Premium Rate Phone-paid Services... In it I advised people to avoid giving to charity via text message (crikey, that reminds me... I have to sponsor a friend that's doing the London Marathon this year!) The reason I advised folk not to give in this way wasn't because I didn't trust the companies that worked on behalf of the charities, but because I didn't trust the rest of the companies involved in the industry.

I've made that as clear as mud, haven't I?  Sorry, I'm a bit hazy at the moment, still got the remnants of a Xmas bug methinks!

I've previously recommended that people avoid all premium rate services wherever possible.  It wasn't because I thought there weren't any companies in the industry that could be trusted.  No, it was because using any shortcodes, even those from reputable companies, makes it that much harder to spot fraudulent unsolicited messages and to prove you haven't inadvertently subscribed to some service or other unwittingly.  If the regulator, PhonepayPlus, had some cajones I would have more confidence in premium services being put to good use.

Now, the reason for this post...

I received an email from Roger Craven regarding the above hyperlinked post.  Roger is the CEO of Vir2 and I both linked to, and quoted some, of his blog post in that September post of mine.  Depending how my post is read, it's possible to come to the conclusion that I believe Roger is talking matsushita and that I'm tarring him with the same brush as the less savoury elements in the industry...

If anyone has come to that conclusion, let me set the record straight - Roger is one of the good guys.  In fact, he is actively seeking changes into how charity shortcodes work, including having a range that would be reserved for charities.  That way people can easily tell what is what.  I'm wishing him every success with that as it'll most likely be an uphill struggle.

Anyway, that's all for now in regards to PRS, but it reminds me I have a part two on my experiences to finish off for Mobile Industry Review...