Ripoff Report Needs Your Help!
X  |  CLOSE
Report: #141186

Complaint Review: Integretel - San Jose California

  • Submitted:
  • Updated:
  • Reported By: Battle Creek Michigan
  • Author Confirmed What's this?
  • Why?
  • Integretel 5883 Rue Ferrari San Jose, California U.S.A.

Integretel, Ripoff Scam charges from 1-900 phone service San Jose California

*Consumer Comment: Same systems that 911 uses???

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 April 30, 2005 my wife received our monthly telephone billing from SBC. Normally the charges are between $38-40 with long distance service from AT&T, however this bill was for $142.58!

We noticed on the billing summary a charge from Integretel, Inc. for 103.50. Having never heard of Integretel, I called SBC. The customer service rep. stated that Integretel was another telephone carrier, and that their billing was for two 1-900 charges from a company called InfoServicZZ. I had never heard of InfoServicZZ and neither my wife nor I have ever made 1-900 calls. The SBC customer service rep. stated that she would put a "dispute" on the charges, but that we would have to contact Intgetel to have the charges removed. She further stated that if I did not receive a satisfactory response from Integretel, SBC could remove the charge, but that Integretel may still send a seperate billing.
I contacted Integretel and talked with one of their customer reps. He stated that there were actually three charges from InfoServicZZ, and the third call (for approximately $47.00) would be billed on the next SBC billing cycle. As the conversation went on, I became more infuriated, as he stated that there was no question that the charges came from our phone, as Integretel "uses the same system that 911 uses to trace calls." (NOTE: Not a direct quote, but nearly so). After I stated that I was just as certain that the calls were not from our phone, he stated that it actually was from a computer dialing the 1-900 number, and asked if we had a computer in the home. I stated that both my wife and I have computers, but since we are only home nights and weekends, that two of the three charges could not have been from us, since we were at work during these times.

Then the rep. stated that he was "authorized to offer a reduction in the bill of 50% if we agreed to pay 50%. I blew up and told him that he was trying to black mail me for charges that we did not place! I further stated that I would rather get a lawyer and see them (Integretel) in court, rather than pay half and thus admit to making calls I KNEW my wife and I did not make.

In the end, the Integretel rep. did state that they would credit our account for the full amount, but that it would take a month or two. He further stated that he would block the number to InfoServicZZ, but that if I wanted all 1-900 numbers blocked from our phone, I would have to speak to our normal service provider. I did contact SBC and now have all 1-900 numbers blocked on our telephone.

To find out more about this, I used my work PC (with more advanced firewalls and anti-spy software) and found out there were others who have experienced the same hoax. Reading from this site (Ripoff Report.com) I read about a person in California with almost the exact same thing that happened to them (see Dale's report from South San Fransisco, CA).

I also found out that this scam has been used in Florida. Now it appears to be in Michigan. I can only suggest that readers contact their telephone service provider and block all 1-900 calls. en get anti-spyware software for their computer (my next move). Also stick to your guns. If you KNOW that you didn't make the charges, don't let someone try to convince you otherwise (NOTE: My wife was willing to pay the 50% charge, just so our credit rating would not be affected). Lastly, contact your state and local government agencies if this happens to you (I am currently doing so), and tell everyone you know about this type of scam.

I hope no one else has to go through what I have, and maybe this report will help.

James
Battle Creek, Michigan
U.S.A.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 05/02/2005 07:58 AM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/integretel/san-jose-california-95138/integretel-ripoff-scam-charges-from-1-900-phone-service-san-jose-california-141186. 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
1Consumer
0Employee/Owner

#1 Consumer Comment

Same systems that 911 uses???

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

POSTED: Friday, May 27, 2005

Yeah, you mentioned my name! I saved you money, I saved you money! :O) Well, and Ripoffreport too of course. We are a lot stronger together.

I think it is fascinating that they said the same thing to you "that they use the same systems that 911 systems uses", so the charge must be correct. They said the same thing to me.

I am the one who helped develop those 911 systems. In fact, I helped write the 911 systems for the capital of Canada and Wichita, Kansas. Those 911 systems use special 911 trunk lines that display the callers number and address when the person calls. These 911 trunk lines are much more reliable then caller-id.

900 numbers on the other hand use "automatic number identification (ANI) - a system like Caller ID", quote from FTC. But maybe it sounds very intimidating when Integretel says to a customer that "that they use the same systems that 911 systems uses". Well fooey, I wrote those 911 systems!

According to the FTC Integretel specifically "are barred from billing or collecting any charge based on electronic capture of a consumer's phone number through automatic number identification (ANI) - a system like Caller ID - when the defendants know or should have known that the line subscriber (the person responsible to pay charges billed to that phone number), or someone authorized by the line subscriber, did not authorize the charge".

Also, "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". Well, considering that they first offered to have you pay 50% of the bill it sounds like that isn't happening.

Also, "it requires the defendants 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". That means that they can't just say someone downloaded a program, or that they traced the call. It means that they have to show that someone authorized it.

For more information on the above case do a search on "FTC v. Verity International, LTD." or look it up on the site http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm

The fact that you swore you did not make the calls and Integretel not investigating is very important. Please file complaints with the FCC and the FTC.

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