TELCOM DIRECTORIES telcomdirectories.com Fraudulent invoicing Atlanta, Georgia

The invoice complainants business received is for advertising placed pursuant to an order sent to Telcom by Pat Priest, Site Supervisor at complainants business. The advertising ordered was for a classified listing in the Telcom yellow pages. The advertising also included an internet classified listing for the business at www.telcomdirectories.com. (Additional information regarding the advertising is also available at the web site.)

The original sales package mailed to complainants business by the Telcom yellow pages consisted of the order form accompanied by additional sales and marketing material fully describing the offer, terms and cost. The Telcom yellow pages solicitation package distinctly apprises the reader that the offer is for paid, recurrent advertising in the Telcom yellow pages.

From complainants report, one must presume that the signatory chose to not read the marketing packages sales letter, terms and conditions, disclosures and disclaimers before authorizing the order and faxing the order to Telcom. Such an action would not only be surprising, but also be reasonably considered imprudent.

The sales materials notify the recipient that he has (probably) not previously done business with the Telcom yellow pages, that he is not simply verifying that the information on the order form is correct, and that he is to give the order form and its accompanying information more than cursory attention before signing and returning the order form. I suggest that any reasonable reader will of course interpret this material to mean that an acceptance of the offer is the explicit and clear result of signing and returning the order form.

Curiously, despite repeated confirmations/invoices/correspondence from Telcom to complainants business subsequent to the order being placed by complainant's business, there is no record of any contact or inquiry from complainant or anyone else at his business to Telcom: no telephone call, no letter, no email, no fax regarding the order and/or the resultant invoices. Instead, complainant chose to take the time to prepare and post a specious internet report without ascertaining the facts. Odd. A brief and simple inquiry on his part would have saved a great deal of time.

As to the 1987 USPS case complainant cites: this civil action twenty three years ago (!) was the direct result of a printing error. The mistake was corrected and Telcom continued business. For the record, the United States Department of Commerce Patent and Trademark Office granted Telcom Directories, Inc., publishing yellow page directories annually since 1984, its federal service mark in 1990. In addition, Telcom has been granted several state trademarks (including Wisconsin). Reasonably, practices such as complainant alleges would not result in the longevity Telcom has experienced.

Apparently, complainant wants the order cancelled. Accordingly, the order is herewith cancelled. (Complainant could have obtained the same result if he had but requested it through any customary business communication.)

The facts are   (a) the invoice was pursuant to an order placed by complainants business   (b) complainant made neither an inquiry into the matter nor an attempt to resolve his complaint prior to his post at this site   (c) complainants unfounded allegations may be considered defamatory.

Therefore the complainants report should be promptly removed.