The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Comments on: Ofcom: No premium numbers for previous offenders

Uh-huh 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 08:54 GMT

Black Helicopters

OK so let me get this straight, if someone has used a number to con ppl before, then they won't be able to get one again........unless they turn up with a different trading name and a different director?!?!

When they dreamed up this idea did they really think that a con artist would be honest when applying for a number they were going to use dis-honestly?

Swing and a miss OFCOM

Shame the TV companies get 3rd parties... 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 08:56 GMT

...else you'd see ITV on the blacklist for sure.

Of course, if a company's that dodgy, they'll just shut their doors and magically a new company with a new name will appear in the same place, with the same employees...

Has to be wrong 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 08:59 GMT

Coat

Ofcom acting on the behalf of the consumer, shurely shome mishtake?

Now all they have to do is stop ISPs from using the word unlimited in adverts, though I expect we'll see that when I see a bacon bearing mammal cruising past my office at 50ft.

Mine's the one with the barbecue tongs in it

More OFCOM hot air. 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 09:08 GMT

Flame

There should be no consideration of "how long" they need to be on the barred list, bar them for good! It is time OFCOM sorted this out once and for all. Operators should have to lodge a bond against possible fines for abuse before being allocated numbers - NO 07xx numbers should be issued and those already in use should be withdrawn - this prefix should be mobiles only, that would stop one of the scams - I had a "missed call" only yesterday - on checking it was an 07033 personal number.

Stop pussy-footing around OFCOM and regulate NOW - it is long overdue and you have been "watching" us get ripped off for way too long. The industry has had enough chances to put its house in order, now it is time to make them behave.

Re: Scams etc. 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 09:20 GMT

Does this mean the BBC, ITV etc. won't be allowed them, or was that a different kind of scam?

That's ITV, C4 and the BBC knackered then 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 09:20 GMT

Alert

As they have taken part i scams in the past they are buggered

Would that include... 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 09:23 GMT

...the BBC and ITV?

Hospitals 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 09:28 GMT

Thumb Up

Lets hope they include hospitals on the naughty list. The bedside phones they provide are all 070 numbers & costs a fortune to call sick relatives.

So why only warnings on 070? 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 09:41 GMT

There are a load of 07 numbers that operators, especially mobile ones, charge higher rates for than normal mobile lines. Surely all should carry a warning before connecting?

The easiest way to stop premium rate abuse .... 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 11:16 GMT

Flame

is to make it so that phone subscribers have to explicitly "opt-in" to be able to make premium rate calls, and prevent telecom providers from being able to offer a "discount" if you do opt-in.

Surely a responsible telecoms provider would have no problem with that ? Unless they rely on people dialling premium rate numbers unwittingly (or in the case of my son, without my permission).

Blacklist / Whitelist 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 14:27 GMT

In view of the large number of nuisance phone calls, a Whitelist directory would be a useful tool.

I'm sick of those Double Glazing / Debt Resolution / Opinion Pollsters who "don't want to sell anything" and claim exemption from TPS.

@The easiest way to stop premium rate abuse .... 

Posted Wednesday 1st October 2008 16:43 GMT

> is to make it so that phone subscribers have to explicitly "opt-in" to be able to make premium rate calls

Back in 1994, during the days of 0898 chat/ sex lines, there was an attempt to do exactly that which virtually killed the income of the businesses who, perfectly legally and legitimately, operated these lines, because nobody wanted to phone up an operator and say "please let me access these numbers". Eventually the system was quietly dropped.

Sign up, sign up for The Register's weekly mobile & wireless newsletter - click here

Don’t Miss