On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block. If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator. If
number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block. There must be
other warning signs.

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 17:18:54 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:40, dennis@home wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
*** some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

The calls are usually from overseas call centres that do not fall under
UK law, but they are gathering customers for UK companies to actually
sell goods or services. Simply extend the law to cover that by fining
the companies in the UK for each call made on their behalf.

Would you not have to establish knowledge and find the 'controlling
mind'?

If you take your car for an MOT and the garage uses a stolen oil
filter, I don't imagine you would relish being held liable for theft.

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 17:18:54 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:40, dennis@home wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
Â*Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

The calls are usually from overseas call centres that do not fall under
UK law, but they are gathering customers for UK companies to actually
sell goods or services. Simply extend the law to cover that by fining
the companies in the UK for each call made on their behalf.

Yes, exactly.

--
Little Britain leaves. Great Britain stays.

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:55:07 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 17:21, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:44, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:26:52 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
Â*Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.

Depends what you mean by 'do business'.Â* If they have a branch or
office in the UK, I agree with you but if they are based abroad and
phoning UK numbers, I don't see how that would work.Â* You can't get
somebody extradited for an alleged crime that took place outside the
jurisdiction.Â* By that logic, if someone used a clone of my credit
card in Hong Kong, they could be brought to court and prosecuted in
the UK.Â* How would that work?Â* Extraordinary rendition?

How many nuisance calls have you received where the services or goods
being offered are being advertised for a company that does not have a UK
presence? I've not had one. They have all been for double glazing, new
boilers, new kitchens, accident compensation, etc., where there is a
clear UK presence that is simply using overseas call centres to get
around the UK laws.

Registering with the telephone preference service will knock out the
majority of legit uk based cold callers.

I don't believe there are any "legit" UK based cold callers.

For the few that still ring,
simply mentioning they are ringing a TPS listed number makes them vanish
very quickly.

They should have checked this before.


--
Little Britain leaves. Great Britain stays.

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:58:54 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:41, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the
last
month or so.
Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff,
usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having checked
this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".

The law may say that, but the phone calls, still say something like,
"Press 8 to be removed from our database" and when over a period of 6 or
7 weeks, you have received 10 phonecalls from the same company and don't
have a tone dial on the phone you are answering with, it gets damned
annoying!

Would it be less annoying if you had a tone dial phone, still got the
same 10 calls, even though you pressed 8 every time?

(or more likely got more than 10 calls since you have now verified that
the number they are calling is actually being answered and listened to
by a human, and so is actually more valuable to a cold caller than an
unverified number!)

I have often heard this argument being presented but I am not
convinced. If someone really does not want cold calls then there's no
benefit to any business to keep calling them.

--
Little Britain leaves. Great Britain stays.

On 22/03/2019 12:06, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block. If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator. If
number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block. There must be
other warning signs.


You want to censor phone calls now?
What happens when you start blocking legitimate calls by mistake?
If you want to block them then use a call blocker.

On 22/03/2019 11:56, Scott wrote:

Unfortunately, legit UK based callers seem to be the minority. The
biggest number seem to be automated followed by calls with the
character of the 'sub-continent'.


That's because the telephone preference service works.

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:17:21 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 12:06, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block. If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator. If
number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block. There must be
other warning signs.


You want to censor phone calls now?
What happens when you start blocking legitimate calls by mistake?
If you want to block them then use a call blocker.

Yes, in exactly the same way as I expect my ISP to filter junk at the
server end. What about vulnerable people? Do they not deserve
protection?

Mike Clarke Wrote in message:
On 21/03/2019 16:43, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:10, Scott wrote:

[snip]

Except they are not really opt-outs at all. They are a method of
checking the number is valid thus increasing its value when sold on.

They know it is a valid number simply because the line has rung, they
don't even need someone to answer, never mind press a button, to prove
its validity.

It does however mean that they know that the number is one where the
call likely to be picked up by a human. This might increase its value
when sold on.



You think?
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

dennis@home wrote:

We designed cards for the DSLAMs that could supply xDSL and POTs using
VoIP for the POTs and they were controlled by a soft switch based on
SystemX.

They were to be installed in the cabinets in the streets so BT could
sell the exchange buildings.

BT sold all the exchange buildings back in 2000 while most people were
still on dial-up

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:18:46 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 11:56, Scott wrote:

Unfortunately, legit UK based callers seem to be the minority. The
biggest number seem to be automated followed by calls with the
character of the 'sub-continent'.


That's because the telephone preference service works.

Thanks. I have forgotten that I registered. It's easier than I
thought to check.

In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
dennis@home wrote:

We designed cards for the DSLAMs that could supply xDSL and POTs using
VoIP for the POTs and they were controlled by a soft switch based on
SystemX.

They were to be installed in the cabinets in the streets so BT could
sell the exchange buildings.

BT sold all the exchange buildings back in 2000 while most people were
still on dial-up

they certianly use teh same buildings round here as they have always done.
Are you saying they now lease them from somebody else?

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:19:33 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
wrote:

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:37:46 +0000, Scott wrote:

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:17:21 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 12:06, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over
say, the last month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having
checked this against charges, it seems to be legitimate and
worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly
updated, 80 year old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone
you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK
to carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots.
Lets just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not
pay a fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and
get them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that
they tend to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite
often avoid paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud
reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the
scammers will just rotate through new ones every so often, making
sure they always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block. If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator. If
number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block. There must be
other warning signs.


You want to censor phone calls now?
What happens when you start blocking legitimate calls by mistake?
If you want to block them then use a call blocker.

Yes, in exactly the same way as I expect my ISP to filter junk at the
server end. What about vulnerable people? Do they not deserve
protection?

But where do you draw the line between protecting the vulnerable and
letting the rest of us get on with life ?

If you want cold calls then I would not objecr if you want be able to
opt-in to them. I just believe that the majority of us should not be
so afflicted.

--
Little Britain leaves. Great Britain stays.

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:18:46 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 11:56, Scott wrote:

Unfortunately, legit UK based callers seem to be the minority. The
biggest number seem to be automated followed by calls with the
character of the 'sub-continent'.


That's because the telephone preference service works.

FSVO "works".

--
Little Britain leaves. Great Britain stays.

On 22/03/2019 15:42, Andy Burns wrote:
dennis@home wrote:

We designed cards for the DSLAMs that could supply xDSL and POTs using
VoIP for the POTs and they were controlled by a soft switch based on
SystemX.

They were to be installed in the cabinets in the streets so BT could
sell the exchange buildings.

BT sold all the exchange buildings back in 2000 while most people were
still on dial-up

So, who owns the exchange buildings that the current ADSL DSLAMS are all
in, now?


--
€œIdeas are inherently conservative. They yield not to the attack of
other ideas but to the massive onslaught of circumstance"

- John K Galbraith

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:31:42 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 16:19:33 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
wrote:
[snip]

But where do you draw the line between protecting the vulnerable and
letting the rest of us get on with life ?

If you want cold calls then I would not objecr if you want be able to
opt-in to them. I just believe that the majority of us should not be
so afflicted.

Excellent idea. You could even refine the service to allow Jethro to
select whether he wants double glazing, a new energy efficient boiler,
advice about his Internet, unregulated investment schemes etc. The
results could be posted online to assist call centres.

On 22/03/2019 16:38, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 22/03/2019 15:42, Andy Burns wrote:
dennis@home wrote:

We designed cards for the DSLAMs that could supply xDSL and POTs
using VoIP for the POTs and they were controlled by a soft switch
based on SystemX.

They were to be installed in the cabinets in the streets so BT could
sell the exchange buildings.

BT sold all the exchange buildings back in 2000 while most people were
still on dial-up

So, who owns the exchange buildings that the current ADSL DSLAMS are all
in, now?



Openreach which "isn't" BT.

dennis@home wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

BT sold all the exchange buildings back in 2000

So, who owns the exchange buildings that the current ADSL DSLAMS are
all in, now?

Openreach
Nope

http://www.telerealtrillium.com/business-areas/property-partnerships/partnerships-1

"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block.

That would prevent a UK operation that chooses to use
an out of country call center from choosing to have those
tho are called by the overseas call center from using a UK
CLI so that anyone who missed the call can call back to
their UK call center.

If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator.

Not feasible with valid out of country call centers that are now so common.

If number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block.

Ditto.

There must be
other warning signs.

Not viable ones.

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 05:59:03 +1100, "Jac Brown"
wrote:



"Scott" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block.

That would prevent a UK operation that chooses to use
an out of country call center from choosing to have those
tho are called by the overseas call center from using a UK
CLI so that anyone who missed the call can call back to
their UK call center.

So? I they want to have the facility for someone to call them back
then they should choose a call centre with a valid CLI.

If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator.

Not feasible with valid out of country call centers that are now so common.

See above.

--
Little Britain leaves. Great Britain stays.

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 05:59:03 +1100, Jac Brown, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rot Speed, wrote:

"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block.

That would prevent a UK operation that chooses to use
an out of country call center from choosing to have those
tho are called by the overseas call center from using a UK
CLI so that anyone who missed the call can call back to
their UK call center.

ROTFLOL! The senile Ozzietard has ALL the answers, AGAIN ...and AGAIN ...and
AGAIN!


--
Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp addressing Rot Speed:
"You really are a clueless pillock."
MID:

On 22/03/2019 15:37, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:17:21 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 12:06, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block. If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator. If
number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block. There must be
other warning signs.


You want to censor phone calls now?
What happens when you start blocking legitimate calls by mistake?
If you want to block them then use a call blocker.

Yes, in exactly the same way as I expect my ISP to filter junk at the
server end. What about vulnerable people? Do they not deserve
protection?

So how do you differentiate between a legit call centre and a scammer?
Both would so a similar pattern of calls.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 22/03/2019 15:18, dennis@home wrote:
On 22/03/2019 11:56, Scott wrote:

Unfortunately, legit UK based callers seem to be the minority.Â* The
biggest number seem to be automated followed by calls with the
character of the 'sub-continent'.


That's because the telephone preference service works.

Indeed, when I first registered it caused a dramatic drop in cold calls.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 22/03/2019 15:06, Mark wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:55:07 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 17:21, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:44, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:26:52 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
Â*Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.

Depends what you mean by 'do business'.Â* If they have a branch or
office in the UK, I agree with you but if they are based abroad and
phoning UK numbers, I don't see how that would work.Â* You can't get
somebody extradited for an alleged crime that took place outside the
jurisdiction.Â* By that logic, if someone used a clone of my credit
card in Hong Kong, they could be brought to court and prosecuted in
the UK.Â* How would that work?Â* Extraordinary rendition?

How many nuisance calls have you received where the services or goods
being offered are being advertised for a company that does not have a UK
presence? I've not had one. They have all been for double glazing, new
boilers, new kitchens, accident compensation, etc., where there is a
clear UK presence that is simply using overseas call centres to get
around the UK laws.

Registering with the telephone preference service will knock out the
majority of legit uk based cold callers.

I don't believe there are any "legit" UK based cold callers.

If you have not registered on the TPS then any UK firm is free to call
you, or indeed a random phone number if its unregistered.

For the few that still ring,
simply mentioning they are ringing a TPS listed number makes them vanish
very quickly.

They should have checked this before.

Indeed - and there are fines for companies that don't and still call.
Hence why they go away quickly - esppecially if you have made a point of
asking the name of the business first ;-)

(How effective the fines are for the worst offenders is debatable since
when they try to collect them the companies normally fold and do a
phoenix job. They are getting better at baring the owners from being
directors or taking a controlling interest in a business again though).


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 22:36:40 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 15:37, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:17:21 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 12:06, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block. If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator. If
number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block. There must be
other warning signs.


You want to censor phone calls now?
What happens when you start blocking legitimate calls by mistake?
If you want to block them then use a call blocker.

Yes, in exactly the same way as I expect my ISP to filter junk at the
server end. What about vulnerable people? Do they not deserve
protection?

So how do you differentiate between a legit call centre and a scammer?
Both would so a similar pattern of calls.

I'd leave that to the experts You could start with numbers in the
wrong format (wrong number of digits, non-existent code), incoming
overseas calls with a UK number, large number of dropped calls - there
must be tell-tale signs for those that know.

On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 22:43:50 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 15:06, Mark wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:55:07 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 17:21, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:44, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:26:52 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
*** some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.

Depends what you mean by 'do business'.* If they have a branch or
office in the UK, I agree with you but if they are based abroad and
phoning UK numbers, I don't see how that would work.* You can't get
somebody extradited for an alleged crime that took place outside the
jurisdiction.* By that logic, if someone used a clone of my credit
card in Hong Kong, they could be brought to court and prosecuted in
the UK.* How would that work?* Extraordinary rendition?

How many nuisance calls have you received where the services or goods
being offered are being advertised for a company that does not have a UK
presence? I've not had one. They have all been for double glazing, new
boilers, new kitchens, accident compensation, etc., where there is a
clear UK presence that is simply using overseas call centres to get
around the UK laws.

Registering with the telephone preference service will knock out the
majority of legit uk based cold callers.

I don't believe there are any "legit" UK based cold callers.

If you have not registered on the TPS then any UK firm is free to call
you, or indeed a random phone number if its unregistered.

Depends how they obtained your number. If you supplied the number and
did not consent to marketing calls (that means opt-in) this would be a
breach of the GDPR. If company A sold your number to company B
without your consent, this would be a breach of the GDPR. Granted, if
your number is in the public directory there is nothing to stop them
calling you.

On 22/03/2019 10:58, John Rumm wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:41, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the
last
month or so.
Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff,
usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having checked
this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".

The law may say that, but the phone calls, still say something like,
"Press 8 to be removed from our database" and when over a period of 6
or 7 weeks, you have received 10 phonecalls from the same company and
don't have a tone dial on the phone you are answering with, it gets
damned annoying!

Would it be less annoying if you had a tone dial phone, still got the
same 10 calls, even though you pressed 8 every time?

Once I actually got to answer the call with a tone-dial phone, I pressed
8 and received no more calls from them. If the calls simply said "press
8 to remain on our database", I'd have received no more than the first one!

(or more likely got more than 10 calls since you have now verified that
the number they are calling is actually being answered and listened to
by a human, and so is actually more valuable to a cold caller than an
unverified number!)

They know it is a valid number because it has rung. How many valid lines
are not to humans? Even then, the simple act of picking up and saying
"Hello" shows a human has answered. No need for any button presses.

Why waste time re-calling people who have already shown a desire to be
removed from databases and not receive such calls anyway? They are
surely less valuable to a cold caller, as they are LESS likely than most
to turn into a financially rewarding sale!

SteveW

On 22/03/2019 10:52, John Rumm wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
Â*Â*Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated,
80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

We are talking of two different things here.

Most nuisance calls are not scams - they are cold calls to try and
obtain sales. Generally those sales are of goods, services or a
combination of the two. Examples of the ones we have received are double
glazing companies, kitchen companies, gutter replacement companies,
boiler replacements, etc. All of which require a UK presence to make
good on those sales. The call centres are not making those calls for the
fun of it, they are being contracted to do so by the companies wanting
to sell and it is those UK companies that should be fined.

SteveW

On 22/03/2019 10:55, John Rumm wrote:
On 21/03/2019 17:21, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:44, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:26:52 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
Â*Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated,
80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.

Depends what you mean by 'do business'.Â* If they have a branch or
office in the UK, I agree with you but if they are based abroad and
phoning UK numbers, I don't see how that would work.Â* You can't get
somebody extradited for an alleged crime that took place outside the
jurisdiction.Â* By that logic, if someone used a clone of my credit
card in Hong Kong, they could be brought to court and prosecuted in
the UK.Â* How would that work?Â* Extraordinary rendition?

How many nuisance calls have you received where the services or goods
being offered are being advertised for a company that does not have a
UK presence? I've not had one. They have all been for double glazing,
new boilers, new kitchens, accident compensation, etc., where there is
a clear UK presence that is simply using overseas call centres to get
around the UK laws.

Registering with the telephone preference service will knock out the
majority of legit uk based cold callers. For the few that still ring,
simply mentioning they are ringing a TPS listed number makes them vanish
very quickly.

Yes TPS does work well for UK companies making their own calls or using
UK call centres. It seems to be a loophole though that a company can use
an overseas call centre to make their calls, but the company are not
held liable for those calls and the call centre is out of UK jurisdiction.

SteveW

"Mark" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:58:54 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:41, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the
last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff,
usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having checked
this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".

The law may say that, but the phone calls, still say something like,
"Press 8 to be removed from our database" and when over a period of 6 or
7 weeks, you have received 10 phonecalls from the same company and don't
have a tone dial on the phone you are answering with, it gets damned
annoying!

Would it be less annoying if you had a tone dial phone, still got the
same 10 calls, even though you pressed 8 every time?

(or more likely got more than 10 calls since you have now verified that
the number they are calling is actually being answered and listened to
by a human, and so is actually more valuable to a cold caller than an
unverified number!)

I have often heard this argument being presented but I am not
convinced. If someone really does not want cold calls then there's no
benefit to any business to keep calling them.

Its more complicated than that given that the is more than
one adult in most households.

On 22/03/2019 23:46, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/03/2019 10:58, John Rumm wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:41, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff,
usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".

The law may say that, but the phone calls, still say something like,
"Press 8 to be removed from our database" and when over a period of 6
or 7 weeks, you have received 10 phonecalls from the same company and
don't have a tone dial on the phone you are answering with, it gets
damned annoying!

Would it be less annoying if you had a tone dial phone, still got the
same 10 calls, even though you pressed 8 every time?

Once I actually got to answer the call with a tone-dial phone, I pressed
8 and received no more calls from them. If the calls simply said "press
8 to remain on our database", I'd have received no more than the first one!

And how many would you have received without pushing 8?
(or more likely got more than 10 calls since you have now verified
that the number they are calling is actually being answered and
listened to by a human, and so is actually more valuable to a cold
caller than an unverified number!)

They know it is a valid number because it has rung. How many valid lines
are not to humans? Even then, the simple act of picking up and saying
"Hello" shows a human has answered. No need for any button presses.

Yeah, but if a robo-dialler is placing the calls it can't tell unless
the "person" answering also interacts with them. An answer machine would
say something, as would a BT message saying this number has been
replaces, please redial etc.

Why waste time re-calling people who have already shown a desire to be
removed from databases and not receive such calls anyway? They are
surely less valuable to a cold caller, as they are LESS likely than most
to turn into a financially rewarding sale!

A "good" salesman will not take no for an answer! One day they catch the
mark off guard, or when circumstances conspire to make a scam call seem
plausible.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 22/03/2019 23:41, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 22:43:50 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 15:06, Mark wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:55:07 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 17:21, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:44, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:26:52 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
Â*Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.

Depends what you mean by 'do business'.Â* If they have a branch or
office in the UK, I agree with you but if they are based abroad and
phoning UK numbers, I don't see how that would work.Â* You can't get
somebody extradited for an alleged crime that took place outside the
jurisdiction.Â* By that logic, if someone used a clone of my credit
card in Hong Kong, they could be brought to court and prosecuted in
the UK.Â* How would that work?Â* Extraordinary rendition?

How many nuisance calls have you received where the services or goods
being offered are being advertised for a company that does not have a UK
presence? I've not had one. They have all been for double glazing, new
boilers, new kitchens, accident compensation, etc., where there is a
clear UK presence that is simply using overseas call centres to get
around the UK laws.

Registering with the telephone preference service will knock out the
majority of legit uk based cold callers.

I don't believe there are any "legit" UK based cold callers.

If you have not registered on the TPS then any UK firm is free to call
you, or indeed a random phone number if its unregistered.

Depends how they obtained your number. If you supplied the number and
did not consent to marketing calls (that means opt-in) this would be a
breach of the GDPR.

GDPR is a relatively new kid on the block. Again scammers are unlikely
to care.

(note also that consent is only one of several justifications for
"processing" personal data, so the fact that you have not consented, doe
not make the act necessarily a GDPR fail).

If company A sold your number to company B
without your consent, this would be a breach of the GDPR. Granted, if
your number is in the public directory there is nothing to stop them
calling you.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 23/03/2019 00:01, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/03/2019 10:55, John Rumm wrote:
On 21/03/2019 17:21, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:44, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:26:52 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
Â*Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated,
80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.

Depends what you mean by 'do business'.Â* If they have a branch or
office in the UK, I agree with you but if they are based abroad and
phoning UK numbers, I don't see how that would work.Â* You can't get
somebody extradited for an alleged crime that took place outside the
jurisdiction.Â* By that logic, if someone used a clone of my credit
card in Hong Kong, they could be brought to court and prosecuted in
the UK.Â* How would that work?Â* Extraordinary rendition?

How many nuisance calls have you received where the services or goods
being offered are being advertised for a company that does not have a
UK presence? I've not had one. They have all been for double glazing,
new boilers, new kitchens, accident compensation, etc., where there
is a clear UK presence that is simply using overseas call centres to
get around the UK laws.

Registering with the telephone preference service will knock out the
majority of legit uk based cold callers. For the few that still ring,
simply mentioning they are ringing a TPS listed number makes them
vanish very quickly.

Yes TPS does work well for UK companies making their own calls or using
UK call centres. It seems to be a loophole though that a company can use
an overseas call centre to make their calls, but the company are not
held liable for those calls and the call centre is out of UK jurisdiction.

Even if they were liable, they would likely claim to be the victim of a
deception... "honest gov, they claimed to be a legit marketing company
that would only call proper bona fide opt in targets - how were we to
know?" Its hard to make anything stick.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"Mark" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 05:59:03 +1100, "Jac Brown"
wrote:



"Scott" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated,
80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone
you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block.

That would prevent a UK operation that chooses to use
an out of country call center from choosing to have those
tho are called by the overseas call center from using a UK
CLI so that anyone who missed the call can call back to
their UK call center.

So? I they want to have the facility for someone to call them
back then they should choose a call centre with a valid CLI.

Not practical. The out of country call centers are much cheaper.

If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator.

Not feasible with valid out of country call centers that are now so
common.

See above.

See above.

"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 22:36:40 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 15:37, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:17:21 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 12:06, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over
say, the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to
sell stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated,
80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone
you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK
to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots.
Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and
get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they
tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the
scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block. If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator. If
number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block. There must be
other warning signs.


You want to censor phone calls now?
What happens when you start blocking legitimate calls by mistake?
If you want to block them then use a call blocker.

Yes, in exactly the same way as I expect my ISP to filter junk at the
server end. What about vulnerable people? Do they not deserve
protection?

So how do you differentiate between a legit call centre and a scammer?
Both would so a similar pattern of calls.

I'd leave that to the experts

It isnt possible.

You could start with numbers in the
wrong format (wrong number of digits, non-existent code), incoming
overseas calls with a UK number, large number of dropped calls - there
must be tell-tale signs for those that know.

There isnt.

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 22/03/2019 10:58, John Rumm wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:41, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the
last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff,
usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having checked
this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".

The law may say that, but the phone calls, still say something like,
"Press 8 to be removed from our database" and when over a period of 6 or
7 weeks, you have received 10 phonecalls from the same company and don't
have a tone dial on the phone you are answering with, it gets damned
annoying!

Would it be less annoying if you had a tone dial phone, still got the
same 10 calls, even though you pressed 8 every time?

Once I actually got to answer the call with a tone-dial phone, I pressed 8
and received no more calls from them. If the calls simply said "press 8 to
remain on our database", I'd have received no more than the first one!

(or more likely got more than 10 calls since you have now verified that
the number they are calling is actually being answered and listened to by
a human, and so is actually more valuable to a cold caller than an
unverified number!)

They know it is a valid number because it has rung. How many valid lines
are not to humans? Even then, the simple act of picking up and saying
"Hello" shows a human has answered. No need for any button presses.

Why waste time re-calling people who have already shown a desire to be
removed from databases and not receive such calls anyway? They are surely
less valuable to a cold caller, as they are LESS likely than most to turn
into a financially rewarding sale!

Sure, but plenty of cold callers choose to call even less likely numbers.
Particularly when the calls are free and only answered calls need any
person to get involved. The worst of our spammers dont even use
a human for the initial lying. They have their system tell you that
you system has been turned into a bot and that your service will be
disconnected in minutes if you dont press a number on your keypad.

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 15:14:37 +1100, Jac Brown, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rot Speed, wrote:


I'd leave that to the experts

It isnt possible.

You could start with numbers in the
wrong format (wrong number of digits, non-existent code), incoming
overseas calls with a UK number, large number of dropped calls - there
must be tell-tale signs for those that know.

There isnt.

Senile Ozzie asshole has all the answers, AGAIN! LMAO

--
dennis@home to retarded senile Rot:
"sod off rod you don't have a clue about anything."
Message-ID:

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 14:50:16 +1100, Jac Brown, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rot Speed, wrote:

FLUSH senile troll's troll****

....and much better air in here!

--
The Natural Philosopher about senile Rot:
"Rod speed is not a Brexiteer. He is an Australian troll and arsehole."
Message-ID:

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 14:20:53 +1100, Jac Brown, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rot Speed, wrote:


I have often heard this argument being presented but I am not
convinced. If someone really does not want cold calls then there's no
benefit to any business to keep calling them.

Its more complicated than that given that the is more than
one adult in most households.

LOL In auto-contradicting mode again, you abnormal senile pest?

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 15:19:55 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again:

Why waste time re-calling people who have already shown a desire to be
removed from databases and not receive such calls anyway? They are surely
less valuable to a cold caller, as they are LESS likely than most to turn
into a financially rewarding sale!

Sure, but plenty of cold callers choose to call even less likely numbers.

HAHAHAHAAA!!! In auto-contradicting mode again, you abnormal senile pest?

--
Bill Wright addressing senile Ozzie cretin Rot Speed:
"Well you make up a lot of stuff and it's total ******** most of it."
MID: