Blow a whistle in their ear

This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.
  • 0
    Widower replies to AnitraF
    That's a good one! The BC "charities" [SIC] are among the worst offenders of take dollars, give out a few crumbs at most. As to the "mainstream" cancer charities, Suzanne in general told everyone thru her obituary not to give money to the "Cancer Industrial Complex" as she questioned the effectiveness of the direction taken by the American Cancer Society, etc. She did like charities which provided direct $$ to cancer patients to help with food, utility, rent, etc. when $ is going for treatment.
  • +1
    Strnj1
    Useless on the growing number of automated calls...
  • 0
    Jane replies to William
    The politicians were/are the worst. Last fall I got bombarded with Robo calls from, and on behalf of, Isidore Hall III, running for Congress after getting termed out from the California State Senate. Leaving voice messages had no impact, and his Robocallers were using the name and number of a recently deceased attorney.  Those running for office need to face real fines for ignoring their constituents' do not call requests.

    TIP:  On the voter registration forms, be sure not to include your telephone number and email address. I am not sure if this would work, but if you registered ages ago, try re-registering at the same address but do not put down your telephone number and email address. It would be interesting to see if that reduces the volume of political calls. I recently re – registered and it will be interesting to see if that has an impact in the upcoming March elections.
  • -1
    Anita
    | 3 replies
    Instead of blowing a whistle in their ear, which from having to use a whistle in the forest can can impact one's own hearing, try this:

       "[Very pleasant voice] My process server would like to make an appointment with you to serve a lawsuit on you for illegal telemarketing and harassment. What is the address at which you would like to be served with the lawsuit?"
  • +5
    Yoda1725 replies to Anita
    | 1 reply
    why answer unknown numbers in the first place?
  • +2
    EtoileLion replies to Anita
    You'd get as far as "process server" before they hang up and call you back tomorrow.
  • +1
    Q replies to Slim
    | 4 replies
    Slim ~
    Hello there.  One year ago, you & a couple of others here in 800notes provided me with accurate information on how to deal with scam / spam / bullsh*t telemarketing phone calls.  On your advice I bought a call blocker for my landline.  To date I have blocked 354 phone numbers.  This is great.  I feel as though I have taken back a bit of the peace & quite in my own home.
    Now today, THIS ONE DAY, I have received 3 'new' crap calls.  They are reported & I have blocked them.  fine as kind.

    This day, I've been on youtube watching some of the "Scambaiting" videos... why?  Because it is cathartic, I tells ya!
    And I came across this TEDtalk:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXVJ4JQ3SUw&feature=youtu.be

    In your opinion, is this a viable solution to help fight back against the telemarketers?
    For $6.00 / year, I am interested.

    Thank You for your time & consideration.
    Sincerely,
    Q
  • +1
    Slim replies to Q
    | 3 replies
    As I understand the process, clients would email the entrepreneur with a list of supposed spam/scam numbers that called the client.  OR they can "conference call" a special number while talking to the scammer.  For the first alternative, the Roger system then calls the numbers, as a sort of "payback".  For the second alternative, the Roger System takes over during an existing call.

    Unfortunately, many of the numbers that show on one's CalleID are spoofed by scammers.  That means an innocent third party could get a Jolly Roger call.  In those cases, the first "solution" is really part of the problem.  The "conference call" alternative looks interesting, since it can be used on an in-progress call.

    Here is a link to a discussion on another system, that won a prize for its usefulness:
    https://800notes.com/forum/ta-86c10e74f9f4d99/

    Opinion:
    The "conference call" method might be entertaining, if you like that kind of entertainment, and if you have conference call capability.

    Pushing a button to block is quicker, and definitely works to prevent second calls from the same number.
  • +1
    Q replies to Slim
    | 2 replies
    Thx Slim.
    I shall check out the discussion you posted in a moment.

    As I understand it, there is an option of simultaneous ringing, a thing set up through my phone company [like call forwarding...?].  In  other words, the scam call rings my number & the Jolly Roger Robot # at the same time which then determines if the call is 'unsafe'.  If I don't answer it, the robot does & keeps them on the line for as long as possible, wasting their time, energy, effort & hopefully costing them money.  Serves them right, imho.  I think it only works for incoming calls, whatever the #, spoofed or not.  I do not believe the system calls the numbers back.  I will find out more; I have an email sent in to them with questions.

    I heed your caution, Slim.  Again, TY ~ have a great evening.
  • +1
    TormentingTelemarketers replies to Yoda1725
    To gather information about them, so you can clearly document a complaint to the FTC. So you can gather information suitable for filing a TCPA lawsuit against them. So you can post helpful information here about the telemarketer for others.
  • +1
    Slim replies to Q
    | 1 reply
    >>  there is an option of simultaneous ringing, a thing set up through my phone company [like call forwarding...?]  <<

    Um ... read the info in the link I provided.
    The company named there () uses simultaneous ringing.
    However, not all telcos offer simultaneous ringing, so that method is not useful for many folks, and the bad guys have found at least one way to defeat simultaneous ringing.

    So, we are left with a personal call blocker ... at least until the govt &/or comm companies come up with a real answer.  History and status reports are here:

    http://www.phonehelp.2truth.com/initiatives.html
  • -2
    TormentingTelemarketers replies to Slim
    Quote:
    at least until the govt &/or comm companies come up with a real answer.

    Personally, I think this is short sighted.  The original TCPA was passed in 1991 - 26 years ago. Various changes to the TCPA has been made, and we still have a problem.  I think we, as a people and community, need to do about it. Waiting for the government to solve our problems, or common carriers, is never really going to happen. They never will come up with the "real answer".
  • 0
    Bill E.
    | 1 reply
    I have been told by some people that this is a bad idea to mess with telemarketer scammers as there are ways  these scammers could retaliate since they do at a minimum have  your phone and address. They might be in India or wherever, but they could have friends relatives here in the states or in same city who could  try and seek revenge some how. My friend who works in law enforcement says these scammers often will carry a grudge  forever and are very patient often waiting months or years to do a getback. They especially like to go after people who post you tube videos of them being messed with.  He said at the very least they will blast your phone # to countless other scammers and your calls will increase 10 fold.
  • +6
    Kellie replies to Bill E.
    So, what is conclusion?
    Don't answer unknown numbers and if you do, hang up immediately and block the number.
  • -2
    Debby replies to Sally
    While I am happy that you are employed, I am on the DNC list and my rights are violated when companies disregard my wishes. I have stated NUMEROUS times to remove me and more than 1/3 ignore my request.