Complaint Review: USBI, OPTICOM, ZPDI, ONECALLCOM - Carmel Indiana
Ripoff Report on CBS 19
Ripoff Report on CBS 19 - Global Marketing Alliance
Ripoff Report on ABC 15 - Smart Shopper
Ripoff Report - Girls Gone Wild
Ripoff Report on Fox 11 - Car Repair
- Author Confirmed
- USBI, OPTICOM, ZPDI, ONECALLCOM P.O. Box Carmel, Indiana U.S.A.
- Phone:
- Web:
- Category: Computer Fraud
USBI, OPTICOM, ZPDI, ONECALLCOM The insiders guide to beating the scam Carmel Indiana
*Consumer Comment: Jenny, I think you have done a great service, I do have to disagree on a couple of points.
*Consumer Comment: Jenny, I think you have done a great service, I do have to disagree on a couple of points.
*Consumer Comment: Jenny, I think you have done a great service, I do have to disagree on a couple of points.
*Consumer Comment: Jenny, I think you have done a great service, I do have to disagree on a couple of points.
*Consumer Comment: Bottom line is fraud is fraud......
Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...
listed on other sites?
Those sites steal
Ripoff Report's
content.
We can get those
removed for you!
Find out more here.
Ripoff Report
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
Okay, heres the thing, I have the inside information on how to succefully contest and dispute the charges incurred by these "billing companies". I, at one point, worked for the company that provided customer for several of these companies. There is an actual script that we have to follow when talking to the customer and there are certain avenues that we must take depending on the customers response.
The number one thing to do is to STAY CALM! Keep in mind the people who are answering your questions ARE NOT the ones who run the scam or even the ones who billed you. But, they are the ones who are yelled at ALL DAY LONG! Most of them are just young people trying to make a living.
Also, the more rude, or snide comments that you make the less likly they are to want to help you, and yes they can remove these charges from your bill.
So, this is how the conversation will go:
1)A customer service agent will answer the phone and ask for the telephone number that was billed, the name that appears on the phone bill and who they are currently speaking with.
2)Then they will ask for the dates and dollar amounts of the charges that you are questioning. It is important that you have this information, because without it they can do nothing for you.
3)They will then explain that this is a charge for "access to an internet service". And they will offer to block your phone line from these services. This block is valid, I never had anyone call with charges after a block was placed.
4)Then you will say something to of sorts to "Yes, please place the block. But what about the current charges?"
5)At this point we are required to tell you that that the charges are "valid" and you are responsible them. This is where most people really tend to blow up, I hated saying it. But, do your best to stay calm.
6)At this point you need to stay firm, but polite. Tell the agent that you simply refuse to pay these charges. They will then say something about the calls/charges being traced back to your phone line, and you are still expected to pay. Then some garbage about checking your computers history to look up which sites were actually "accessed".
7)Now, remember to be NICE or at least civil. Tell the agent that you still refuse to pay the charges and, tell them that you have spoken with your phone company and that they had agreed to remove the charges if we were unwilling to, do not say that the phone company has already issued credit!
8)At this point they have said everything they are trained to say and tried their best to get you to pay, the agent will offer a "one-time credit". Then they will ask for you billing address and send the credit to your phone company.
I know that this does not justify what how these charges were put onto your bill, but it does solve the problem of them being on your bill.
Things to keep in mind:
1)There is no need to cry FCC, better business bureau or D.A., weather or not you choose to contact these agencies is up to you, but they don't care, they are not involved in the scam and are not intimidated by this. Also it is not neccessary.
2)Don't lie and say "I don't even have a computer" or "I don't have internet access", they won't believe you and it just makes you sound silly. On a side note, even if you do connect through cable, it's not neccessary to tell the agent this as way out, becuase they do have a scripted rebuttle and it is not a quick way to credit.
3)Everyone has reasons why the charges should not be valid, they do not need to hear them. Our goal is to get you off the phone as quick as possible, and again it is not neccessary to tell them to the agents.
4)Don't go into virus, dialers or hijacking, we can't admit that it is anything other that a "charge from a computer at this phone number".
5)Keep in mind they cannot provide you with much information on the companies that are running this whole thing. They don't tell them anything about the companies. The only info they can give you is P.O. Box.
Lastly, please remember the people you are talking to are only doing their job. Maybe it's not real high up on the totem pole of moral turpitude, but everyone deserves to make a living and everyones kids need to eat, just like yours. So, try your best to be nice. Honestly, following these steps is the quickest way to get these charges off your bill with the least amount of trouble and time.
I hope that this info can help some people out, and maybe it's just my way of making peace to the people I had to stick it to just to make my way back home. I aplogize to them all, and still feel poorly about having worked where I had. But, desperate times do call for desperate measures, and honestly my kids will always come first.
"Even buzzards have to eat."
Jenny
Red Bluff, Nevada
U.S.A.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 01/28/2005 08:05 PM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/usbi-opticom-zpdi-onecallcom/carmel-indiana/usbi-opticom-zpdi-onecallcom-the-insiders-guide-to-beating-the-scam-carmel-indiana-129323. 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
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:
#5 Consumer Comment
Jenny, I think you have done a great service, I do have to disagree on a couple of points.
AUTHOR: Dale - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, May 27, 2005
First off, Jenny, I want to say I respect you a great deal for giving us all the information you did in your post. It had lots of detail. I *love* detail.
But I do have to disagree on a couple of points. Once again this isn't to take away from the things you have said. I think you have done a great service for having said them.
The first thing is if you think you have been fraudulently billed the FCC and FTC does need to know. They can't always respond to every complaint, but they do need to know when these things are occurring.
Even when they don't respond to an individual complaint they will sometimes respond to aggregate's of complaints. They did this in "FTC v. Verity International, LTD" for instance. See http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm And the FCC did respond to each of my complaints. :O)
It is also a good idea to make complaints to BOTH the FCC and the FTC, because they have different pervues. The FCC is good for dealing individually with a telecom company. The FTC will often act as a consumer advocate for aggregates of complaints. That is just my guess right now.
Also, you should tell the customer service rep of the billing company if you have been hijacked, gotten a virus, or such. In the past companies have 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".
The companies that gave the fraudulent bill might not seem interested in hearing the details, but it is in fact their responsiblity to investigate. You have to at least give them the opportunity to investigate. If they don't you can then complain to the FCC and the FTC that they did not investigate. If the companies don't live up to their responsiblities to investigate that in itself is a big problem.
Anyhow getting back to "FTC v. Verity International, LTD" That says that billing aggregaters are required "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 a charge is valid without showing that it was authorized! Do you see? They can't just say "someone downloaded a program"! They have to show that there was authorization. (see http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm).
That is what I put into my letter to the chief of consumer complaints at the FCC. Yes she is looking into it!
Having someone like you, an insider, who has left the company has often been a key part of cases against these companies. I implore you to send a letter to Martha E. Contee, the chief of "Consumer Inquiries and Complaints Division" at the FCC. Send the letter attention to her. Remember it is good kharma. The mailing address can be found at http://www.cfca.org/Documents/internet_switch_scam.doc and it is:
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
MContee@fcc.gov
#4 Consumer Comment
Jenny, I think you have done a great service, I do have to disagree on a couple of points.
AUTHOR: Dale - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, May 27, 2005
First off, Jenny, I want to say I respect you a great deal for giving us all the information you did in your post. It had lots of detail. I *love* detail.
But I do have to disagree on a couple of points. Once again this isn't to take away from the things you have said. I think you have done a great service for having said them.
The first thing is if you think you have been fraudulently billed the FCC and FTC does need to know. They can't always respond to every complaint, but they do need to know when these things are occurring.
Even when they don't respond to an individual complaint they will sometimes respond to aggregate's of complaints. They did this in "FTC v. Verity International, LTD" for instance. See http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm And the FCC did respond to each of my complaints. :O)
It is also a good idea to make complaints to BOTH the FCC and the FTC, because they have different pervues. The FCC is good for dealing individually with a telecom company. The FTC will often act as a consumer advocate for aggregates of complaints. That is just my guess right now.
Also, you should tell the customer service rep of the billing company if you have been hijacked, gotten a virus, or such. In the past companies have 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".
The companies that gave the fraudulent bill might not seem interested in hearing the details, but it is in fact their responsiblity to investigate. You have to at least give them the opportunity to investigate. If they don't you can then complain to the FCC and the FTC that they did not investigate. If the companies don't live up to their responsiblities to investigate that in itself is a big problem.
Anyhow getting back to "FTC v. Verity International, LTD" That says that billing aggregaters are required "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 a charge is valid without showing that it was authorized! Do you see? They can't just say "someone downloaded a program"! They have to show that there was authorization. (see http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm).
That is what I put into my letter to the chief of consumer complaints at the FCC. Yes she is looking into it!
Having someone like you, an insider, who has left the company has often been a key part of cases against these companies. I implore you to send a letter to Martha E. Contee, the chief of "Consumer Inquiries and Complaints Division" at the FCC. Send the letter attention to her. Remember it is good kharma. The mailing address can be found at http://www.cfca.org/Documents/internet_switch_scam.doc and it is:
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
MContee@fcc.gov
#3 Consumer Comment
Jenny, I think you have done a great service, I do have to disagree on a couple of points.
AUTHOR: Dale - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, May 27, 2005
First off, Jenny, I want to say I respect you a great deal for giving us all the information you did in your post. It had lots of detail. I *love* detail.
But I do have to disagree on a couple of points. Once again this isn't to take away from the things you have said. I think you have done a great service for having said them.
The first thing is if you think you have been fraudulently billed the FCC and FTC does need to know. They can't always respond to every complaint, but they do need to know when these things are occurring.
Even when they don't respond to an individual complaint they will sometimes respond to aggregate's of complaints. They did this in "FTC v. Verity International, LTD" for instance. See http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm And the FCC did respond to each of my complaints. :O)
It is also a good idea to make complaints to BOTH the FCC and the FTC, because they have different pervues. The FCC is good for dealing individually with a telecom company. The FTC will often act as a consumer advocate for aggregates of complaints. That is just my guess right now.
Also, you should tell the customer service rep of the billing company if you have been hijacked, gotten a virus, or such. In the past companies have 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".
The companies that gave the fraudulent bill might not seem interested in hearing the details, but it is in fact their responsiblity to investigate. You have to at least give them the opportunity to investigate. If they don't you can then complain to the FCC and the FTC that they did not investigate. If the companies don't live up to their responsiblities to investigate that in itself is a big problem.
Anyhow getting back to "FTC v. Verity International, LTD" That says that billing aggregaters are required "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 a charge is valid without showing that it was authorized! Do you see? They can't just say "someone downloaded a program"! They have to show that there was authorization. (see http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm).
That is what I put into my letter to the chief of consumer complaints at the FCC. Yes she is looking into it!
Having someone like you, an insider, who has left the company has often been a key part of cases against these companies. I implore you to send a letter to Martha E. Contee, the chief of "Consumer Inquiries and Complaints Division" at the FCC. Send the letter attention to her. Remember it is good kharma. The mailing address can be found at http://www.cfca.org/Documents/internet_switch_scam.doc and it is:
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
MContee@fcc.gov
#2 Consumer Comment
Jenny, I think you have done a great service, I do have to disagree on a couple of points.
AUTHOR: Dale - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, May 27, 2005
First off, Jenny, I want to say I respect you a great deal for giving us all the information you did in your post. It had lots of detail. I *love* detail.
But I do have to disagree on a couple of points. Once again this isn't to take away from the things you have said. I think you have done a great service for having said them.
The first thing is if you think you have been fraudulently billed the FCC and FTC does need to know. They can't always respond to every complaint, but they do need to know when these things are occurring.
Even when they don't respond to an individual complaint they will sometimes respond to aggregate's of complaints. They did this in "FTC v. Verity International, LTD" for instance. See http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm And the FCC did respond to each of my complaints. :O)
It is also a good idea to make complaints to BOTH the FCC and the FTC, because they have different pervues. The FCC is good for dealing individually with a telecom company. The FTC will often act as a consumer advocate for aggregates of complaints. That is just my guess right now.
Also, you should tell the customer service rep of the billing company if you have been hijacked, gotten a virus, or such. In the past companies have 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".
The companies that gave the fraudulent bill might not seem interested in hearing the details, but it is in fact their responsiblity to investigate. You have to at least give them the opportunity to investigate. If they don't you can then complain to the FCC and the FTC that they did not investigate. If the companies don't live up to their responsiblities to investigate that in itself is a big problem.
Anyhow getting back to "FTC v. Verity International, LTD" That says that billing aggregaters are required "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 a charge is valid without showing that it was authorized! Do you see? They can't just say "someone downloaded a program"! They have to show that there was authorization. (see http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2002/11/integretel.htm).
That is what I put into my letter to the chief of consumer complaints at the FCC. Yes she is looking into it!
Having someone like you, an insider, who has left the company has often been a key part of cases against these companies. I implore you to send a letter to Martha E. Contee, the chief of "Consumer Inquiries and Complaints Division" at the FCC. Send the letter attention to her. Remember it is good kharma. The mailing address can be found at http://www.cfca.org/Documents/internet_switch_scam.doc and it is:
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
MContee@fcc.gov
#1 Consumer Comment
Bottom line is fraud is fraud......
AUTHOR: Donna - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, March 04, 2005
The problem with the charge that was put on my phone bill is that no one can explain how it got there. My long ditance carrier which is Bell South verified my phone did not dial the call to Israel and the bottom line is I DO have cable internet and there is NO phone line hooked up to the back of my computer and there is NO WAY POSSIBLE that my computer dialed the number in spite of the service rep at USBI insisting that having cable didn't stop my computer from dialing the number.
That is pure BS. I was scammed along with all these others and that's the bottom line. I don't care what excuses people give for doing what they know is morally wrong. What goes around comes around. Sure, people have to feed their kids but by your theory, being a prostitute would be okay as long as you think you've got a good reason. There is no good reason to scam anyone else, EVER!
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.
