| Author |
Message |
FAST FRED
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 6:18 am: | |
Recieved the following E mail,
"I checked this out at www.snopes.com and this article is true. Pass on this information, please!
Subject: Very Important Please read! DON'T EVER DIAL AREA CODE 809, 284 AND 876
We received a call last week from the 809 area code.
The woman said "Hey, this is Karen. Sorry I missed you--get back to us quickly.
Have something important to tell you." Then she repeated a phone number beginning with 809 . "We didn't respond".
Then this week, we received the following e-mail:
Subject: DON'T EVER DIAL AREA CODE 809, 284 AND 876
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION PROVIDED TO US BY AT&T.
DON'T EVER DIAL AREA CODE 809
This one is being distributed all over the US. This is pretty scary,
especially given the way they try to get you to call.
Be sure you read this and pass it on to all your friends and family so they don't get scammed!
MAJOR SCAM:
Don't respond to Emails, phone calls, or web pages which tell you to call an "809" area Phone Number.
This is a very important issue of Scam Busters because it alerts you to a scam that is spreading *extremely* quickly, can easily cost you $2400 or more, and is difficult to avoid unless you are aware of it.
We'd like to thank Verizon for bringing this scam to our attention.
This scam has also been identified by the NationalFraud InformationCenter and is costing victims a lots of money.
There are lots of different permutations of this scam.
HERE'S HOW IT WORKS:
You will receive a message on your answering machine or your pager, which asks you to call a number beginning with area code 809. The reason you're asked to call varies. It can be to receive information about a family member who has been ill, to tell you someone has-been arrested, died, to let you know you have won a wonderful prize, etc. In each case, you are told to call the 809 number right away. Since there are so many new area codes these days, people unknowingly return these calls.
If you call from the US, you will apparently be charged $2425 per-minute.
Or, you'll get a long recorded message. The point is, they will try to keep you on the phone as long as possible to increase the charges. Unfortunately, when you get your phone bill, you'll often be charged more than $24,100.00.
WHY IT WORKS:
The 809 area code is located in the British Virgin Islands (The Bahamas).
The 809 area code can be used as a "pay-per-call" number, similar to 900 numbers in the US. Since 809 is not in the US , it is not covered by U.S. regulations of 900 numbers, which require that you be notified and warned of charges and rates involved when you call a pay-per-call" number.
There is also no requirement that the company provide a time period during which you may terminate the call without being charged. Further, whereas many U.S. homes that have 900 number blocking to avoid these kinds of charges, do not work in preventing calls to the 809 area code.
We recommend that no matter how you get the message, if you are asked to call a number with an 809 area code that you don't recognize, just disregard the message.
Be wary of e-mail, or calls, asking you to call an 809 area code number. It's important to prevent becoming a victim of this scam, since trying to fight the charges afterwards can become a real nightmare. That's because you did actually make the call. If you complain, both your local phone company and your long distance carrier will not want to get involved and will most likely tell you that they are simply providing the billing for the foreign company. You'll end up dealing with a foreign company that argues they have done nothing wrong.
Please forward this entire message to your friends, family and colleagues to help them become aware of this scam.
Sandi Van Handel
AT&T Field Service Manager
(920)687-904"
Sounds crazy enough to be real!
Caviat Emptor
FAST FRED |
BillK.
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 7:20 am: | |
Thanks Fred: I have seen the 809 on my caller ID. several times but did not respond. |
airless in Mississippi (Airless_in_mississippi)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 8:00 am: | |
nternet ScamBusters™
By Audri and Jim Lanford
Copyright © Audri and Jim Lanford
Issue #34 September 15, 1999
Internet ScamBusters was reviewed in this week's online issue of Forbes. Check out the article and find reviews of a number of excellent anti-fraud sites: http://www.forbes.com/forbes/99/0913/6406108a.htm
Update on the "809 Area Code Scam" and What to Do if Your e-Zine Gets Changed and Then Spammed
We recently discovered that an issue of Internet ScamBusters - written in 1996 - has resurfaced and is being sent around the Net as spam. This email is about the 809 area code scam, and the "revised" version contains some important mistakes. It is being sent around as if it comes from Internet ScamBusters.
In this issue, we'll correct the mistakes and give you an update on how this scam has changed - and not changed - in the past three years.
We thought this is important for you for two reasons. First, the 809 scam is still thriving, so it's still important to protect yourself. Second, this kind of problem - where an email or e-zine you write is changed and then sent around as spam with you as the supposed author - could happen to you as well, and we'll present some ideas about what to do if this does happen to you.
If you're wondering how we found out about this problem, we discovered it in two ways. First, we simply received a copy of one of the emails from a customer. Second, we visit Google's searchable Usenet discussion forums" (http://groups.google.com/) every couple of weeks to see what is being said about us and Internet ScamBusters in the newsgroups. We discovered that there has been a lively thread about this topic in the alt.folklore.urban newsgroup. It has also been discussed in the rec.arts.sf.fandom, alt.books.david-weber, rec.autos.makers.jeep+willys, and several other newsgroups.
Before we get to the mistakes and changes people made to our issue of Internet ScamBusters, here is a brief review of the 809 scam:
The "809" scam has many permutations but they all involve a message to you (either by email, phone or pager) that you immediately call or fax a number in the "809" area code or some other area code in the Caribbean. Examples of why you should call or fax the phone number include avoiding litigation, receiving information about someone who has been arrested or died, winning a wonderful prize, or getting a job.
The "809" area code is in the Caribbean, yet most people are not aware that they are making an international call when they dial the "809" area code, since you simply dial 1-809-xxx-xxxx to make the call. No international codes are required.
The problem comes from the fact that some phone numbers in the "809" area code are "pay-per-call" numbers (such as 900 numbers in the US) - but there are no legal requirements that callers be informed that they are being charged extra in the Caribbean. When you return one of these "pay-per-call" 809 calls, the scamsters try to keep you on the phone as long as possible, and you may be charged very high rates for the call, reportedly up to $25 per minute.
It is difficult to get credit for these charges if you do get scammed since you did make the call, and resolving the problem involves getting credit from international phone companies.
Since there are now many area codes in the Caribbean, this scam is no longer confined to just the 809 area code.
You can see the original ScamBusters issues about the 809 scam and more on the 809 scam.
OK, enough introduction. Now let's look at the mistakes in the new emails and posts about this topic:
Mistake: The beginning of the email says: "DO NOT EVER DIAL AREA CODE 809."
Comment: This is not our recommendation and we never wrote this. Most phone numbers in the 809 area code are legitimate.
Mistake: "Please forward this entire issue of Internet ScamBusters! to all your friends, family and colleagues to help them become aware of this scam so they don't get ripped off."
Comment: We never asked people to send the issue to everyone they know. This type of request is typical of spam, which we are very against. Please *don't* forward the bogus email message to anyone if you receive it. Just hit the delete key.
Mistake: The 809 area code is new.
Comment: The 809 area code is not new, and we never stated it was. It has been around for many years.
Mistake: Some spam versions of this email say that charges can be as high as $10,000.
Comment: This, of course, is very unlikely. We suggest charges might be as high as $100. $10,000 would mean the scamsters succeeded in keeping people on the phone for many, many hours.
Mistake: The new emailed version also includes a mistake in our first issue, which we corrected the second issue. We had mistakenly written: "The 809 area code is located in the British Virgin Islands (the Bahamas)."
Comment: Obviously, the British Virgin Islands and the Bahamas are not the same country.
Update on the 809 Scam
There are a number of changes that have occurred involving the 809 scam since we wrote about this in Internet ScamBusters three years ago.
Area codes have changed in many of the countries. Now, 809 is just for the Dominican Republic. For example, 242 is the area code for the Bahamas, 284 is for the British Virgin Islands, and 787 is for Puerto Rico. You can find all the new area codes at: http://www.lincmad.com/caribbean.html
Or you can go here to look up any area code in the world: http://www.usa.att.com/traveler/services/codes/index.jsp
You can also find area code maps of various regions in .pdf format at the North American Numbering Plan Administration site: http://www.nanpa.com/number_resource_info/area_code_maps.html
We have not been able to verify if charges are still as high as $25 per minute. It may be that the price today is significantly lower.
We spoke with Mr. Chavez at AT&T on September 12, 1999. He said that there have not been any changes lately regarding Caribbean area codes or scams that he is aware of. We have learned that AT&T did put out a bulletin that this scam continues to thrive, but we have not been able to locate this bulletin.
We'd also heard there are now new related scams using the prefixes 500 and 700. These prefixes can be used for adult entertainment and for pay per call numbers. Some of these numbers are in the country Vanuatu. Mr. Chavez confirmed this.
You can learn more about this scam at
* Better Business Bureau:
http://www.bbb.org/alerts/areacode.html
* National Fraud Information Center:
http://www.fraud.org/news/subject/900ind.htm
What to Do if Your e-Zine or Email Gets Changed and Then Spammed
It's a difficult situation to correct if this does happen to you. Here are a few things we are doing (or are about to do):
* Place an announcement on our home page about the problem
* Find all the newsgroups where the changed e-zine has been posted and reply with a simple, short, individual post explaining the problem and providing a link for more information
* Respond to all individual copies of the email we receive by explaining the problem and providing a link for more information
* Send a clear, short email to any reporters who emailed us about the new version
* Write this issue of Internet ScamBusters ;-)
Finally, check out the issue on how to deal with Lies and Misinformation about your company for additional tips. |
Philris
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 8:04 am: | |
Just what we need is spam spread on the BBS. Some of the spam Fred posted is true but not the $$ numbers. As a sailor Fred should know that the B.V.I. are not the Bahamas. The 809 area code is for the Domincan Republic. According to AT&T the message is not from them. While it is good to be aware of the scam, real information is better. The following is from the AT&T website (www.att.com):
The Facts About The 809 Area Code Scam
Fraudsters have been distributing bogus e-mails through the Internet that are purported to come from AT&T. The topic, a phone scam involving the 809 area code. The scam itself is real, however, the e-mail and warning contain erroneous information. AT&T would like to set the record straight and separate fact from fiction.
The 809 area code scam first surfaced five years ago and continues to victimize consumers on occasion, although much less frequently than in the past. And there have been far more inquiries recently than consumers actually being victimized.
How the Scam Works:
In most cases a message is left on an answering machine or pager requesting the recipient call a number immediately for one of several reasons. The most common involves calling for information about a relative who has died, been arrested or injured. When consumers fall prey and call the number, the scam artist attempts to keep the caller on the line for as long as possible to increase the caller's long distance calling charges.
The bogus e-mail claims the 809 area code sends calls to the British Virgin Islands, when in fact 809 is the country code for the Dominican Republic.
The e-mail also warns consumers that dialing the 809 area code will result in charges of $2,400 per minute. That simply isn't true. The basic rate for a call to the Dominican Republic is less than $3 a minute although some 809 numbers terminate with pay-per-call services that permit the levy of additional fees. Since numbers located offshore are not subject to U.S. laws, there are no legal requirements that consumers be informed in advance of the extra charge.
And lastly, the e-mail purports to originate within AT&T's corporate offices and includes the name and partial telephone number of an imaginary employee.
Defense:
To avoid falling prey to the scam, AT&T recommends consumers know where they're calling before they dial. When consumers receive such a message from someone they don't know they should simply disregard it.
Consumers should also be aware that it is usually necessary to dial 011 to reach an international location. However, there are some locations outside the United States, such as the Caribbean and Canada, whose telephone numbers resemble domestic long-distance calls, but carry a higher international rate.
If a consumer isn't familiar with a certain area code, they can visit www.consumer.att.com to look up any area code or country code in the world. |
John that newguy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 8:21 am: | |
Philris-
Good Job! |
JJJ
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 9:52 am: | |
Hey Fred,
Thanks for the heads-up on this one. I had not heard of it. I probably would have just returned such a call. |
James Maxwell (Jmaxwell)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 12:08 pm: | |
This scam has been floating for at least 2 yrs. Abt. 2 yrs. ago I had such a call on my bill, but the amount was only $24.00. I had not dialed the number and had never seen the number until it appeared on my bill, from ATT. I protested and they immediately credited it back.
My problem is this. Always associated with these notices is a glowing report of co-operation from Verizon or ATT about their warnings on this, yet they billed it, and obviously knowing that it is a scam number. My question is why don't they just block access to the numbers thru their switching gear, since it is obviously an unregulated call that they can block without repurcussions from anybody? I maintain that they are co-operating in proliferating this scam for the purpose of making some money, all the while claiming they can't do anything about it: sort of like plausible deniability, except it ain't plausible, since they are carrying the call on their equipment(a process they set up for these scammers), doing the billing, and collecting the money, some of which they pocket. |
bruce king
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 2:11 pm: | |
Does this have anything to do with buses? |
Lin
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 2:14 pm: | |
It's been around for many years. I'm suprised that it still going. My wife once answered one of the things probably 10 years ago. We did fight it and did not pay. When dealing with our local phone company, they admitted knowing about what was going on and yet continuing to collect for the crooks. We argued that they were complicit and probably actually getting some fee for the collection. They eventually agreed to remove it from our bill, although the bill would still be outstanding as far as the crooks were concerned. I do not remember how much it was for; probably around $100. Thanks for the reminder. There is an amazing amound of scams out there. We received an email last week from an Ebay impersonator that wanted us to click on their link to outdate our account info. The site really looked like Ebay, but I'm sure it was an application for identity theft. |
Gary McFarland (Gearheadgary)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 2:31 pm: | |
the phone co has to carry these calls, I could go into a discussion as to why but I can't think of any way to use the word "Bus" in the discussion.
If you have a bogus call, just dispute the charge, don't budge.
On the other hand, don't call area codes if you don't know where they are.
Duh.
Gary |
James Maxwell (Jmaxwell)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 3:10 pm: | |
Gary: No, it does not have anything to do with buses, but it makes for interesting discussion and dissemination of information that may prove useful to someone; like saving them money that they can then spend on their bus. I also disagree that the phone company (local, ATT, Verizon, whoever) cannot do something about it. It is fraud in every sense of the word and you can drag out a law library and never convince me that the phone company "must" carry these calls. However, they are not going to make money on services they discontinue, now are they? If it were happening under the jurisdiction of a US regulatory body, it would be shut down in a hot minute and a phone company would be facing big-time class action. Therefore, what we have is phone services taking advantage of a money making scheme where they know they can't be had for it. |
Gary McFarland (Gearheadgary)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 - 11:59 pm: | |
jmaxwell--OK, I will try to make this as simple as possible, but that's not so easy.
I think this is the ruling is here:
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/International/Orders/1999/fcc99073.txt
(there's the law library you mentioned)
So you are saying that these area codes should not have international telephone service?
Ok, so we can probably agree that every international state can have inter-network exchange with other carriers, right?
Can we also agree that individual countries, acting as autonomous states, and having independent corporations within them, may persue the free and open market however they see fit?
I think we can. I doubt anyone can say that the US FCC has any jurisdiction in outer Botswana.
OK, so now we have all these independent countries with Telecommunication companies operating by their own rules governed by those countries. And I might add, many are nationalized companies, and of those that are not, many pay insane tarrifs to their own government.
Now Keep in mind That ol' Alex (Graham Bell) didn't setup shop in some of these countries and there is no century-old established infrastructure. This Makes deployment and operation of a telephone company very expensive, and of course, these operating expenses translate to usage fees.
OK, so NOW we can get to the heart of the matter.
Some countries cost more than others. Pretty sensible, huh?
If the telcos could cherry pick from international carriers that had greater and lesser profitibility, they would never make connections to the places that carried more expense. That is why ALL carriers are required to maintain connections to All participants in the PSTN (Publicly Switched Telephone Network).
OK so THAT is why all telcos have to carry traffic to all international networks and in exchange, pass-through the whatever charges are assesed by the regional telephone company.
Now, arguably, some telcos pass on "Unreasonable" charges, ostensibly taking unreasonable advantage of the telco's requirement to carry traffic.
That is why your telephone company is required, by law, to carry service that obviously abusive.
In the spirit of caveat emptor, dialing a phone number is a clearly overt action. If you dial a number, you are making an implicit contract to pay the associated fees.
So--Don't call a number if you don't know where it is. Again--Duh.
Now, You made me type all that, so now I will put you through a short story. The last Plant I put in Mexico required three-"T1" lines. From Calexico to Mexicali, $4,500/mo......each. and yes folks that is in US$ not Pesos. That's $13,500/mo in total. That is for the equivalent of 69 phone lines. That is $195/mo. You think it's cheap to run a phone company? That is about 13.6 cents per minute, per line. Now you add all the government graft, er I mean tarrifs, and you probably have twice that in operating cost (We're not talking about capital costs either). And THAT number is based on 100% usage. 50% usage = 200% cost. You think running a phone company is cheap? think again.
Oh, what did I do? I put in a 23GHz Microwave to cross the border, which cost me $63K, but gave me 50% more capacity and paid for itself in six months. Now it costs me about $600/mo in licensing fees to the Mexican Gub'ment.
I hope you are tired of reading, I am tired of typing.
Gary |
James Maxwell (Jmaxwell)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 2:36 am: | |
Gary: No, I'm saying that where fraudulent activity is being conducted, no US registered company or corporation can be compelled to engage in that activity, nor can they be allowed to continue to do so once they have full legal knowledge that the conduct is fraudulent. Foriegn businesses certainly may conduct themselves as they and their host country see fit, within the bounds of that country but they may not necessarily conduct that same type of operation or activity in the US.
There are numerous Federal Laws (superior to Agency Orders) that prohibit the conduct of fraudulent activity within the boundaries of the US. In addition, there are then State laws that do likewise. The most recent and sweeping law that specifically covers fraudulent conduct by any person or entity within the jurisdiction of the US is the RECO Act. I guess I have to disagree w/ you that Mr. Powell & Co., or his predecessor, can negate that law w/a contradictory Order. US Carriers are well aware of this scam and fraud, as admitted by their own publications. They therefore are bound by law to disengage themselves from complicity in it.
Obviously, I see this matter from a different perspective than you, but I'm not convinced since I hardly consider an FCC Ruling & Order to be a law library, or anything that resembles one. I'll let it rest at that. |
Gary McFarland (Gearheadgary)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 8:35 am: | |
What Fraudulent activity is taking place?
Someone call you and says "Call me back". If you are stupid enough to call him without asking "whereinthehellis 809?", you're going to get charged for it. There is no fraud.
It's like the guy that runs an ad in the paper that says: "Send me ten dollars" and gives an address. You send him ten bucks, you're out ten bucks. No crime has been comitted.
However even if there were fraud, I don't think telcos could be compelled to monitor it. If they did, ther would be a "Government-mandated fraud filtering" surcharge on your phone bill, and you'd be whining aobut that.
Let's use another example. The Postal service. Are we to expect that the postal service will stop mail flow from Nigeria because it is a method to further fraud? I don't think so.
Jmaxwell, in your world then, carriers will be expected to filter Internet content for fraudulent activity? Who will be responsible to manage this?
You are operating under an impression that the phone company is responsible to protect you, and they are not. They are there to bill you till your eyes bleed.
Gary |
John that retiredbellguy
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 8:57 am: | |
James-
All of the phone numbers within that area code are not fraudulent
in nature. Banning or barring the entire area code is akin to banning
or barring an entire zip code when a mail order scam is found to be
among the millions of those that live within the zip area.
Ma' Bell took (and continues to take) the only correct action. They
refund the charges when they are notified of the problem. There
is no other "fix" that can be taken, since the scam perpetrator
can order a new phone number to use from his own country's
provider, at any time.
"Generic" legislation is not the answer; Ma' Bell's answer.... is. |
Gary McFarland (Gearheadgary)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 10:19 am: | |
I'm glad I'm not the only one that understands this.
Gary |
Bruce King
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 2:06 pm: | |
Gary, your math on t1s is a bit off. Assuming that it costs $4500 per month per T, and that you're installing PRI circuits which yield 23 trunks per T, you do get a cost of $195 per trunk per month.
You go on to say that assuming 100% usage that $195 per month is 13 cents a minute. That's where you went wrong. Assuming 100% usage,
each trunk has 43200 minute available. The cost per minute, figured this way, is one half cent per minute, not more than 13 center per minute.
(30 days, 23 trunks, 24 hours, 60 minutes)
And that's assuming PRI. You could probably get better efficientcy if you went bandwidth and used a VOIP solution; bandwidth only consumed
during calls, and not all the time during each call, so the bandwidth is usable for other stuff while call volume allows. |
bruce king
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 2:09 pm: | |
And you guys aren't mentioning that there is a balance of trade issue here that benefits the local third world phone companies. The net origination of calls is usually in favor of the US phone companies -- they terminate most long distance calls, and the local phone carriers have to pay our phone companies for this. If they can get calls to terminate on their systems it offsets payments they would otherwise have to make, and this means that their enforcement of scams is lackluster at best.
and this still doesn't have much to do with buses. |
Gary McFarland (Gearheadgary)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 2:20 pm: | |
You're right I missed something. It did sound high when I re-read it this morning.
You can't VOIP between PBX systems internationally, they use different electrical standards, you have to stay circuit switched.
Our PBX links from the us side to MI are VOIP, I also support remote sites with VOIP.
I have been doing In-band, packet switched voice for ten years and eleven months come to think of it.
Gary |
steve souza (Stevebnut)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 5:28 pm: | |
--FREE for the taking-
new bus, 800 horse cummins, ten speed automatic, fully converted with the best of everything--
just call 1 809----
hehehe
steve |
Jtng
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 8:07 pm: | |
CUT IT OUT, STEVE.
Merry Holiday! |
Stephen Fessenden (Sffess)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 11:56 am: | |
I just put a billing block on my Verizon home phone account. I had a bogus collect call from Connecticut and could not reach the offending long distance company. Phone always busy. I called Verizon and told them I had tried to call the company but their line remained busy so please remove the charge from my bill. They could do that. I then complained that I did not like being billed by them for charges from other companies and was asked if I would like to put a billing block on my account so only Verizon charges would be billed by them. YES, I said. I cannot think of any need for billing from another company. I use a Sams Club ATT calling card at 3.6 cents a minute and cannot imagine any need to use another service than that card, my cell phone and Verizon. You may need a supervisor to make the change to BILLING BLOCK. Funny they don't advertise this. I guess the money made on bogus billing is too important to them. |
|