Ripoff Report Needs Your Help!
X  |  CLOSE
Report: #134847

Complaint Review: Integretel, Information Service, InfoServicZZ - SAN JOSE California

  • Submitted:
  • Updated:
  • Reported By: South San Francisco California
  • Author Confirmed What's this?
  • Why?
  • Integretel, Information Service, InfoServicZZ 5883 RUE FERRARI SAN JOSE, California U.S.A.

Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

Is this
Report about YOU
listed on other sites?
Those sites steal
Ripoff Report's
content.
We can get those
removed for you!
Find out more here.
How to fix
Ripoff Report
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

On February 6, 2005 I was mysteriously billed for a 900 number I did not dial. The charge for the 900 number was for $75 by Integretel on behalf of Information Service aka InfoServicZZ on my SBC phone bill. The bill claims I made a phone call to (900) 444-0308 at 12:18AM on 2/6/05. However, I have made no such 900 call. On 2/6/05 my computer was HIJACKED by a SPYWARE program that I did not intentially download.

It is also known as MODEM HIJACKING or a SPYWARE DIALER. It might also be related to a VIRUS or a TROJAN. The computer is hijacked and then USES THE MODEM to make silent calls to 900 numbers that the user does not know about. This can happen if you visit an innocent looking web site, even without downloading anything. Being charged on your phone bill for things you did not authorize is also known as CRAMMING.

On that date my computer was hijacked and it started acting bizarrely including lots of VERY UNWANTED pornographic pop-ups, even though I have TWO pop-up blockers installed, including the latest pop-up blocker from Microsoft. Also my home page kept being changed to an unwanted pornographic web site. Getting all that unwanted porno was extremely upsetting. Also my modem speaker was mysteriously TURNED OFF.

On that date I spent three days cleaning my computer of Spyware using the three leading Spyware cleaners. I have ample logs showing the SPECIFIC spyware cleaned. I used LavaSoft Ad-Aware, Spybot Search and Destroy, and Microsoft's new beta AntiSpyware to clean my computer of Spyware. I did not intentially pay for any 900 numbers or porn web sites. Nor did I intentially download any programs on that date.

On the following day, February 7, 2005, at about the same time 12:22AM I was billed $13.37 by Billing Concepts, Inc. d/b/a Zero Plus dialing, ZPDI on behalf of Opticom on my SBC phone bill. The bill claims I made a phone call to 214 446-5895 for five minutes, which comes to $2.67 a minute. I never made such a call. The same Spyware dialer must have made this call as well.

I live alone and absolutely no one else has access to this compute or my phone. Literally no one can use them. I am disabled and have a hard time using the computer myself. Any energy I put into trying to resolve this complaint is very difficult due to my disability.

If this happens to you file a complaint with the FTC at www.FTC.gov. Click on "File a Complaint" at the top! They do follow up on these and the more people that complain then the more likely they are to take action! Also you can get a lot of valuable information by doing searches directly on the FTC site, which shows actions they have taken and information on your rights!

The FTC has already made an order against Integretel before related to "Internet-based adult entertainment - that the consumers never purchased or authorized", quote from FTC order. See the FTC order at http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm. This has also been listed as one of the "Law Enforcers Target Top 10 Online Scams", quote by FTC. See http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2000/10/topten.htm for the FTC Top Ten scams list.

Billing Concepts, Inc. d/b/a Zero Plus dialing, ZPDI has previously had to settle with the FTC for CRAMMING in "FTC v. Enhanced Services Billing, Inc., and Billing Concepts, Inc. et al". See website: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/cramming/index.html

Other web sites:

Tips on preventing modem hijacking by the New York State Attorney General known as a firebrand consumer advocate: http://www.oag.state.ny.us/internet/tips_modem_hijacking.html

FTC site on cramming: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/edcams/cramming/index.html

FTC site on unauthourized phone charges: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/alerts/cramalrt.htm

FTC site on 900 numbers and your rights: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/tmarkg/nine.htm

The FTC consumer site: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/menu-call.htm

FTC cramming info: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/services/cramming.htm

Integretels whois info showing their physical corporate address: http://www.networksolutions.com/en_US/whois/results.jhtml;jsessionid=0BVZSR4IAO21ECWMEAPSFEY?whoistoken=0&_requestid=1043318

Integretels site: http://www.integretel.com

Dale
South San Francisco, California
U.S.A.

Click here to read other Rip Off Reports on Integretel

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 03/13/2005 06:07 PM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/integretel-information-service-infoserviczz/san-jose-california-95138/integretel-information-service-infoserviczz-mysterious-900-phone-bill-charge-computer-h-134847. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Updates & Rebuttals

REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
0Author
4Consumer
0Employee/Owner

#4 Consumer Comment

Integretel "same system that 911 uses"

AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Tuesday, May 31, 2005

Dale,
Thank you for your response to my report regarding Integretel, and for all of the information that you have provided. I filled a complaint with the Michigan Attorney General (who is responsible for investing fraud in Michigan), as well as the Better Business Bureau and the FTC.

I will further follow up on my complaints with the information you provided "the defendants are barred from billing or collecting any charge based on electronic capture of a consumer's phone number through automatic number identification (ANI)..."

I had not read the complete text of the FTC case against Integretel, Inc. and eBillit, Inc.
Just to let you know that the Michigan Attorney General sent a complaint to Integretel and received a reply on May 16, 2005. The letter was basically the same garbage that they told me on the phone.

However, they did admit that "the person who intiated the 900 call may not have done so with appropriate knowledge and consent of the line subscriber..." In some small way this may be an acknoledgement on their part that there are people hijacking unsuspecting consumers phones!

Since I have blocked all 900 calls from my phone, I don't think I will get any more of these charges. However, I have a firewall, antivirus software and spyware software installed on my computer as a precaution (I have spent over $100.00 to give me some peace of mind). I will also be switching over to a cable internet provider shortly.

I hope that you have no long term problems as a result of this attack. I know your frustrations, as I've been through some of the same myself.

Thanks again,
ps. I wish there was a more informal way to send info instead of a "Rebuttal"- sounds like I'm trying to dispute your complaint!!!

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Consumer Comment

Weird Google search on InfoServicZZ

AUTHOR: Dale - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Friday, May 27, 2005

I just did a Google search on InfoServicZZ, which was the 900 call that was made when my computer was hijacked. I wanted to see if anyone had anymore information on the hijacking.

To my surprise it pulled up 594 weird listings. You know the kind were it just shows a bunch of random weird words. It looks like they are all weird porno ones. I haven't clicked on any.

When I searched on "InfoServicZZ" and "hijack" it pulls up 151 weird listings. It looks like they are weird porno ones. I haven't clicked on any of them. It looks like they are all in Poland.

Don't click on any of the sites! I tried saving the html and opening it in wordpad. That way I could look at the html computer code, without looking at the pictures or getting a virus.

The very first line was a call to a javascript. It just doesn't look good to me. If there are any computer experts out there give it a look. But be very careful and only save anything if you know what you are doing.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Consumer Comment

This is the letter I sent to the FCC in response to the letter Integrete sent to the FCC

AUTHOR: Dale - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, May 26, 2005

May 26, 2005



Federal Communications Commission

Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau

Consumer Inquiries and Complaints Division

Attn: Martha E. Contee

445 12th Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20554



RE: Notice of Informal Complaint Dated April 13, 2005



Dear Ms. Contee:



Ms. Contee, thank you for taking the time to look into this matter. I know you are the Chief of the Consumer Inquiries and Complaints Division of the FCC, and must be very busy. It is not for me that I hope you look into this. It is for all the other consumers out there that are receiving mysterious 900 calls they did not authorize. I did some research on the Internet, and see that there is a pattern of this happening to a lot of other people. Also, let me assure you that I am in good faith, and I would be happy to make a sworn affidavit.



Attached is my original complaint detailing how after visiting some innocent looking web sites my computer was infected by a virus that took control of my computer, threw up very unwanted pornographic ads, and made an unauthorized call to an expensive 900 number.



In the past, Integretel has charged consumers for "...Internet-based adult entertainment - that the consumers never purchased or authorized", quote from FTC. In FTC v. Verity International, LTD., et al., required the defendants, including Integretel, to "obtain agreements from the vendors they bill specifying the minimum standards that must be applied in gaining the express verifiable authorization from line subscribers", quote from FTC. You can read the details at "www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm", which I have also attached.



Therefore, if Integretel says I "authorized the dialing of the 900 number", then where is the "verifiable authorization"? Well there can't be "verifiable authorization", because I never authorized the call.



According to the FTC, Integretel has been instructed, "to help ensure that the companies are aware of charges that are not authorized, the companies also will be required to investigate consumer complaints about unauthorized billing in the future".



When I called their customer service number they repeatedly told me that the charge was correct even after I told them the details of my hijacking. On 3/29/05 at 10:08AM I spoke with Alice EmpId #61241 at their customer service number. She said, "someone in my household downloaded a program which dialed the 900 number". Once again not true.



The customer service rep didn't seem interested in starting an investigation. Well did they start an investigation, and if so where is their documentation? Obviously from the text of the Integretel letter of April 19, 2005 no investigation was done.



The other interesting thing the customer service rep told me was that they used the same systems that 911 uses, and that the call must be correct. I had to be extremely aggressive, persistant, and forceful, to get them to finally remove the charge. I had to explain again and again that I wasn't disputing that the call was made, but that my computer was hijacked and I did not authorize the call.



It was also odd that she said they used the same systems that 911 systems used to verify calls. I used to write those same 911 systems. I helped write the 911 systems for the capital of Canada and Wichita, Kansas. I also worked on 911 systems all over the USA and Canada. As I recall 911 uses special 911 trunk lines. I would have thought the 900 number uses automatic number identification (ANI), a system like caller ID. However, maybe it sounds more intimidating to tell the consumer that they use the same technology as "911 systems and the call must be correct".



In regards to Integretel's response to my complaint. It is amazing that after all the detail I gave in my complaint, that my computer was hijacked, that Integretel completely ignores that and once again goes on to say, "Specifically, someone agreed to download and install a software program from the Internet to their computer and authorized the dialing of the 900 number shown on the bill". If that is the case where is their verifiable authorization that I authorized the call?



I did some research on the Internet, and found out that a lot of people are getting mysterious charges to 900 numbers that they did not make, including to the Integretel number I got charged for. People are getting hundreds of dollars of mysterious charges for 900 number calls they did not authorize.



When they call to complain they are told someone agreed to download and install a software program from the Internet to their computer and authorized the dialing of the 900 number, precisely what Integretel wrote in their letter to me. Well if they are telling people that then where is the "verifiable authorization"? But once again Integretel is refusing to investigate even though there is a pattern of possible wrong-doing.



In my complaint I went on at great length that I never authorized the 900 call. What happened was that a virus infected, and hijacked my computer and, against my wishes, dialed the 900 number. This is an extremely well-known problem and has been listed as one of the "Law Enforcers Target Top 10 Online Scams", quote by FTC. It is well known that computers hijacked by viruses make such 900 calls against the consumers wishes. And a virus can reside on an innocent looking web-site. According to the experts a computer can get a virus by merely visiting an innocent looking web site that contains hidden malicious code.



But after all the detail I gave about the hijacking of my computer Integetrel just completely ignores it, and still insists that someone authorized the 900 call. This is extremely puzzling and disturbing. It is also completely amazing that Integretel has refused to investigate given that wrong-doing could have occurred. When a virus hijacks a computer and forces it to call a 900 number where people receive money for it, then that could be serious wrong-doing.



What happened was just such an outrageous case of someone stealing the use of my computer, forcing it to make an expensive call I did not authorize, throwing up all sorts of unwanted pornographic ads on my computer I couldn't get rid of, changing all sorts of things on my computer that were hard to change back, and forcing me to spend days trying to fix it.



This problem is extremely well-known in the telecommunications field, so it is all the more puzzling why Integretel is refusing to investigate. When I complained to a supervisor at the SBC telephone company she said the same thing happened to her ,where her computer was hijacked and threw up disturbing and unwanted pornographic ads all over her screen. Like me she said that she only went to an innocent looking web site and never knowingly downloaded any programs. Her young child was right behind her when it happened. She said it was fortunate that her child was too young to really know what was going on.



The other thing that bothers me is their statement in the letter, "Please be advised this is a one time courtesy adjustment. The complainant should contact their local telephone company and request a 900-number block to prevent these types of services from being accessed in the future", quote from Integretel, underline and therefore emphasis their's.

This seems to imply that if an unauthorized call is made in the future I would have to pay it, and the onus is on me to block all 900 numbers. I don't like being intimidated to remove a service from my phone, because companies are not making sure their clients are making sure that charges are valid.



Well, the onus shouldn't be on me to block all 900 numbers. I might want to authorize a legitimate 900 number from another company in the future. Why doesn't Integretel ensure that their 900 numbers that access web sites are legitimate, have "verifiable authorization", and investigate mine and other's complaints?



The other odd thing I noticed was that my computer log clearly showed the call was made at 6:48PM (the time the hijacking occurred), but the phone bill showed the charge at 12:18AM. The customer service rep did admit that the time they gave on the bill was incorrectly billed at 12:18AM, and that the correct time was 6:48PM. Well, if their systems are so correct then why was I billed at the wrong time? Why was it shown to have been made in the middle of the night when people are not monitoring their computer, or who in the household might be accessing it?



I am disabled, and it is very hard for me to deal with these matters. It took me three days to clean my computer of the malicious virus because the bad people who wrote it make it so it keeps reinstalling itself after it is removed. It is very painful and difficult for me to research this, make complaints, and write this letter. And yet after all the pain-staking detail of the hijacking I gave in my complaint Integretel still flippantly says someone "authorized the dialing of the 900 number". It is just amazing.



Their removing this particular charge is not sufficient resolution to this matter. Why did their customer service number not start an investigation of what could be serious wrong-doing? Who is writing, and distributing viruses that call expensive 900 numbers without the customer authorizing it? Where is the verifiable authorization that I authorized the connection to the web site? Who is benefiting from the money they get? Are they still getting money from viruses hijacking innocent peoples computers?



Sincerely,





Dale



cc: Mr. J. Howard Beales, III

Director, Bureau of Consumer Protection

Federal Trade Commission

600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, DC, 20580



Attached: FCC Complaint, Opticom letter, and www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1 Author of original report

More info FCC ordered Integretel to investigate

AUTHOR: Dale - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Thursday, April 28, 2005

I am the one who posted the complaint. The FCC ordered Integretel to investigate. See filing complaints does help. And having lots of detail I think helped. If this happens to you I would definitely recommend filing a complaint with the FCC. I just received a letter from a regulatory specialist at Integretel. I am planning on writing a long letter in reply but it is hard becauce I am disabled and using the computer is difficult.



It is so heart-warming to see people respond to this post. It is hard for me to use the computer because I am disabled. But I put in all that time, which was painful, researching it and getting all the details for all the other consumers out their who have been hijacked like this!



The most interesting thing is that most of the people don't even realize their computer has been hijacked. And I don't blame them!



They get mysterious phone bill charges to 900 numbers or high-cost long-distance charges. They know they did not make them. They call the phone company and the phone company says to call the third-party biller like Integretel or ZPDI.



Then Integretel or ZPDI reads a script about how "someone in your household downloaded a program to connect to an information service". Their is no doubt in the service rep at Integretl or ZPDI. They just tell the consumer that it is their fault.



The consumer tells them they did not make the call and Integretel or ZPDI just repeats the same stuff about "someone in their household must have downloaded a program".



The consumer probably doesn't even realize they have been hijacked. Well you know the companies like Integrel and ZPDI know about hijacking so how come they don't inform the consumer of the problem that is out there?



Even after I complained to Integretel and told them the very detailed specifics of my hijacking they sent the FCC a letter saying "The subject charges were incurred by someone with access to this billed telephone number initiating a call to a 900 number. Specifically, someone agreed to download and install a software program from the Internet to their computer and authorized the dialing of the 900 number shown on the bill".



After I told them all the specifics of my being hijacked and not authorizing it they still persist on blaming it on me! It is fascinating because hijacking is a very well known problem in the telephone industry. Their is no way they can just assume that a person authorized the call.



How could they? If a person dials a 900 number they get a warning that they will be billed for the call. If a computer dialer calls it they can't get that warning. How do they know I authorized it?



My computer was hijacked by a virus that made the call against my wishes. It threw up pornographic ads all over my screen which I did not want and which upset me. It took three days to clean my computer. And I have back problems so this was very difficult for me.



And ZPDI, Zero Plus Dialing refused to remove the charge to the long distance number without my giving them my address. I said I did not want to give them my address for privacy reasons and they still persisted on wanting my address.



I said you have all the information you need, that you tell me you see the charge on your computer screen and you sent me a bill why do you need my address?



I told them that I filed a complaint with the FCC and they said that doesn't have anything to do with them because they are yet another company "Northwest Telecom" doing customer service for ZPDI. I said well if you are doing customer service for them you do have something to do with them!



And they continued to say they have nothing to do with ZPDI and REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE THE COMPLAINT. I think the regulators might be interested in hearing that the company WHO IS SUPPOSE TO BE DOING CUSTOMER SERVICE FOR ZPDI REFUSED TO INVESTIGATE A COMPLAINT.



Ok here is where it gets interesting. I phoned SBC, my phone company in California, and I asked them to remove the charge because ZPDI refused to. The SBC rep said she could not remove the charge.



I said that when I spoke to the SBC rep a month ago they said SBC could remove the charge if ZPDI would not. But the rep wouldn't budge and refused to remove the charge.



I told her I could be disconnected by SBC because of that but she would not listen. I asked to be connected to a supervisor.



The superviser said she WOULD remove the charge. She said SBC talked amongst each other, that at first they didn't want to remove these charges but then decided they could.



She said "she could get into trouble" so I don't know what the official policy is of SBC. And she was very sympathetic. She said her computer had been hijacked the same way with pornographic ads all over the place she couldn't get rid of. She said her kid was right behind her but was too young to understand, thank goodness.



Ok too sum up about how to remove charges:



1. Call the local phone company to have a claim put on the charge. That does not remove the charge but puts it on hold until you can settle it with the third-party biller. That way you have time to settle it with the third-party biller.



2. Call the third-party biller like Integretel or ZPDI. They will read you a canned script about someone in your household downloading a program. If you feel you have been hijacked stick to your guns and be persistant. I was very aggresive and Integretel removed the entire charge.



2. ZPDI might insist on getting your address before removing the charge. It is up to you if you feel comfortable giving them this. In any event stick to your guns and be persistant.



3. If they refuse to remove 100% of the charges call your local phone company and ask them to remove the charges. If they say they can't then ask to speak to the supervisor.



Give them as many details as you can. Remember that the local phone company isn't at fault and they would like to be on your side if they possibly can.



Be polite, kind, and persistant to your local phone company. Remember they are real people with families. Keep telling them all the details and explain if the third-party refused to remove the charges.



The local phone company is in a bad position because of deregulation. They are obligated to send you a bill. Ask to speak to a supervisor if you have to.



I ended up speaking to the supervisor for over half an hour about ZPDI. In the end we were talking more like friends and she said the same thing happened to her.



I sympathized with how the local phone company is in a bad position because of deregulation. I ended up switching my long-distnace carrier to SBC. She was a good egg. :O)



4. Keep notes and logs of everything. Write down the name or employee number of the service reps you speak with. If they don't want to give you a name then sympathize with them why they can't give you a name and tell them there has to be some way you can make a record of the call, it can be an employee id or psuedonym. I always feel uncomfortable when they just give me a first name so now I am asking for employee ids as well.



5. File a complaint with the FCC! Some scumbag out there is writing viruses that are not only infecting our computers but making money off it. The more people that complain the more the government will pay attention!



What changes do I think the regulators should make? I think there should be a rule that third-party billers inform people complaining of mysterious 900 or long-distince numbers that the threat of hijacking is out there.



I think that local phone companies should be able to remove a charge when the third-party company refuses to. I think that flieres should be sent out with bills informing customers of hijacks and viruses. I think that third-parties should be obligated to investigate and NOT REFUSE TO INVESTIGATE LIKE ZPDI did.



Once again if this happens to you file a complaint with the FCC! Or the ghost of a consumer nag like me will be haunting you, file a complaint, file a complaint. Hee hee :O)

Respond to this report!
What's this?
Featured Reports

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.

X
What do hackers,
questionable attorneys and
fake court orders have in common?
...Dishonest Reputation Management Investigates Reputation Repair
Free speech rights compromised

WATCH News
Segment Now