Endless Google Calls from Local Lighthouse - GOT 'EM

And also by repeating "Best Local SEO Company" many times on this site, as well?

http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/16/technology/go ... l?iid=obnetwork
Google strikes back at robocalls

Google is getting more aggressive about fighting illegal robocalls -- the automated phone calls that try to mislead people and phish for private information.

The company is starting with a plan that targets fraudulent businesses that pretend to help people improve their Google search rankings.

On Wednesday, Google launched a new online form for reporting robocalls. It also set up a new resource guide and brought a lawsuit against an online marketing company.

The suit marks the first time Google has sued a company for naming Google products in a telemarketing scheme.

 { what took them so long? }

"Since the beginning of 2015, we've received hundreds of complaints from users about robocalls they've received from businesses claiming to be affiliated with Google," Brad Wetherall, a company manager, wrote in a blog post.

http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/
http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2015/0 ... -robocalls.html

...

Robocallers have targeted Google users for many years. Callers commonly bombard recipients—usually small business owners or individuals—with misleading offers and promotions for improving Google Search and AdWords rankings, or to improve their Google My Business profile. Since the beginning of 2015, we’ve received hundreds of complaints from users about robocalls they’ve received from businesses claiming to be affiliated with Google.

These illegal calls are a huge nuisance, cause small businesses and Google users to unnecessarily worry, and can lead to rip-offs. Illegal robocalls never have, and never will, come from Google.

...

It’s difficult for Google to take action against callers because they often use untraceable phone numbers, fake company names, and massive global networks of intermediaries. However, today we’re filing an action in California against one search engine optimization company for making these robocalls and confusing our users. It’s unfortunate when a problem must be addressed in a court of law, but we believe this course of action will protect our users and discourage this practice more broadly.

 { it's unfortunate ... what irony }

Direct link to Google "Report Abusive Robocall" form (Thanks Google!):

https://support.google.com/business/contact/rbc_form

~ Central NY ~
 WE never get calls from ANY #'s in the 202 area code anymore. Our 'puter uses PhoneTray Free to block ALL calls from that insidious 202 Area Code, where almost All the callers are foreign, scammers, and crooked thieves, not to mention just down-right harassing, moronic, low-lifes. Why would you even think about answering a call with this Area Code in the 1st place, much less carry on Any kind of interaction with them.
   If NObody answered these kind of calls, EVER, this Telescamming problem would not be profitable enough to sustain itself, and it would just wither up and DIE on the phone lines that it uses for its very usless existance. You readers that confess to playing with these "people" are just making it harder for the REST of us. WE have to deal with those who have called YOU as they look for "another you" to answer their phone with the possibility of actually completing their scam. You are the reason the REST of Us continue to get these calls. THANKS A LOT!

Google suing them is good; it will be interesting to see if it has any effect. Part of the problem with robocalls are the CNAM dip fees. They need to be eliminated. And authentication to access the phone network is a must. Otherwise, robocallers will continue to call as explained here: http://projectauditors.com/Papers/Why_the_robocalls_keep_calling.php
and http://projectauditors.com/Papers/Who_is_behind_the_robocalls.php

Agreed, and those links deserve to also be in a discussion thread about dip fees and one-ring calls.

I used to work for a law firm - and caller ID spoofing is actually a criminal act and you can do jail time. it is the only thing in telemarketing you can go to jail for. So Local Light House owner could be looking at jail time if he gets busted for caller ID spoofing!

Im sure the FTC will be contacting them shortly!

And Egumball next, they do the same exact thing as local lighthouse

I'm wondering if Google hasn't has a nice little chat with Egumball already.  I got a robocall from them today, and for the first time it didn't mention anything about Google (or Yahoo, Bing, etc).  The only time the agent mentioned them was when he said that Yahoo/Google/Bing/etc got their business map information from them, but otherwise initially presented themselves as "Map Support".

https://800notes.com/Phone.aspx/1-323-741-5453

egumball and local lighthouse are both scams - i worked at both of them. they both sell dreams and provide nothing in return. this is their model. buyer beware

Seems to me that a contract that lists only a Post Office Box, or only a Mail Box Business like the UPS Store, etc., should not be enforceable in civil court to the advantage of the party that uses such addresses, unless said party has already published their physical address and the mailing address of the business on a website or in other media.

Same thing if one of the parties is a consumer instead of a business. And why aren't businesses required to provide a physical address when they register their business with the state? I understand that a few very small businesses that sell to the public need to hide their physical address, but that should be something the state allows on a limited basis. Debt collectors, loan brokers, lawyers, etc., should never get to hide their physical addresses.

The Sec of State's generally don't care about the location of the business, but they do care about the registered agent. If the registered agent is absent, or unable to accept process for the corporation, it would likely get revoked (and possibly something else nasty could happen).

For instance, my state requires corporate name and type (corp, llc, etc), registered agent information, directors, info on stock shares, etc. The entities address just has to be a mailing address, but the registered agent has to be an business address / office address. No PO's or drop boxes.

So is there any news on the Google lawsuit VS Local Lighthouse?

they have 6 class action lawsuits from different states for tcpa vioaltions