Zamano

conner

why is it when a phone is in somebody's pocket that it nearly always 'accidentally' signs up to a subscription service offered by Zamano?

why is it that thousands of phones in thousands of pockets in the UK are 'accidentally' dialing Zamano's 'number'?

http://www.phonepayplus.org.uk/output/Search-adjudications.aspx

Last year the UK Regulator Phonepayplus finally admitted that the major cause behind this problem were unscrupulous companies obtaining 'third party' marketing lists of phone numbers from Marketing/Data collecting companies.

Also remember that the mobile phone companies take a sizable percentage of the revenue before passing the rest on to Zamano.

there is something in your pocket but it's not your phone.

Hydrosylator

My auld lad got scammed by Zamano, with a load of unsolicited text messages, including service messages. There was a charge of 2.50 per text, and when he texted stop he kept getting them. But the service texts can't be stopped lie normal texts, it seems.

Now how did Zamano get his number to send these unsolicited texts?

Well, here's a list of some companies Zamano deals with . Straight from the horse's mouth.

He voted on one of RTE's shows, the All Ireland Talent Show they had there a short while back, just once. He got no other texts from RTE.

MY best guess at the moment is this:
1. Companies pay Zamano to provide them a text voting service.
2. Zamano process all those text votes for their customers.
3. Zamano harvest all the numbers for their own use.
4. Zamano start spamming people, and hope enough people get confused that they turn a profit. (We all know how spam works, you just need to fool a few of the people, some of the time, when a computer does the leg work. )
5. Mobile Service providers don't kick up a fuss, because the scam nets them a tasty commision.
6. Regtel don't do a whole lot about it, because they're part of the industry, they get paid a levy from these services. Why would it bite off the hand that feeds it?

7. Bill payers get screwed, everyone else gets paid.

Currently awaiting a call from Zamano, they have 5-7 working days to get back. (Although we did ring Zamano already, they might as well have put a dog on the phone instead of the idiot whipping boy they seem to give these calls to. I think they get him from this company <== it's only a youtube video.

Hydrosylator

Quick update on the above post.
We got called back by Zamano, who are of the opinion that he subscribed to their service.
His phone bill would suggest otherwise, he never texted their service.

We contacted 02, his mobile provider, to see what they would do. Nothing.

It seems that 02 have two ways of looking at unsolicited subscription scams.

1. It's all your fault
2. It's not their fault

It's their policy that if you receive unsolicited premium messages, you get billed and you pay for them, and they do nothing to help. I got the woman on the phone to admit as much. This isn't a license to print money for the likes of Zamano so much as it is a license to rob people blind.

We just want a refund.

I'm not joking, they won't do a thing to help, won't dream of refunding money. Nothing.
As the texts go through their network, one can only assume they're getting a piece of this highly lucrative, completely indefensible action.

The people on the phone don't care about whether you threaten to leave 02 or not, so what do you do? I can tell you what we're going to do. We're going to go to an 02 shop and make nuisances of ourselves. Here's why this is a good idea (if like us, you're mad enough, or you've been severely ripped off through no fault of your own).

From a mate of mine who worked in an o2 store:
"what you do is go into an o2 shop and act stupid there, and if they cant help in the store say your leaving and go through the leaving process there with them, they'll sort it then, o2 hates losing customers. The shop will be held responsible, goes against their monthly shop stats, which affects sales commissions, bonuses etc."

If it works, they credit your account the amount. He also added that the more crowded the store is at the time, the better it will work, and the more "local" the store is, the better it will work. Outlets in big shopping centres typically won't give a damn. We're going to give it a lash, I'll let you know how it goes.

Sam Vimes

Hydrosylator wrote: »

We're going to go to an 02 shop and make nuisances of ourselves. Here's why this is a good idea (if like us, you're mad enough, or you've been severely ripped off through no fault of your own).

From a mate of mine who worked in an o2 store:
"what you do is go into an o2 shop and act stupid there, and if they cant help in the store say your leaving and go through the leaving process there with them, they'll sort it then, o2 hates losing customers. The shop will be held responsible, goes against their monthly shop stats, which affects sales commissions, bonuses etc."

If it works, they credit your account the amount. He also added that the more crowded the store is at the time, the better it will work, and the more "local" the store is, the better it will work. Outlets in big shopping centres typically won't give a damn. We're going to give it a lash, I'll let you know how it goes.

When I worked in a phone shop I had a very strong desire to murder people who did that. I was told to follow certain policies and no amount of screaming or crying or threatening etc suddenly gave me the power to do what the customer was asking. If I was able to do it, I would have done it. I would much rather be selling stuff than trying to deny somebody something that it was within my power to give

hatrickpatrick

I was involved in a prime time investigation into tne unsolicited text messages scams.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0210/primetime.html

The third link there, "Phone Problems", is the report we did. I got subscribed to an Opera ringtone service because I "apparently" consented to it on one of their WAP sites (which I never, ever use). I ignored the texts at first because I assumed they were actually trying to trick me into subscribing, and then went on a little crusade to try and get my money back.

They didn't show the entire phone call in that clip, but the woman who is talking to me got incredibly aggro after a few minutes, it was hilarious... I'd say they would have been a bit more polite had they known they were being bugged

A side note is the ethics of the company themselves. Their helpline is a paid phone number which they presumably make money from, and their offices close at something like half 4, not 5 as I would have assumed. The first day we were filming, I rang at 4:40, and was on hold for more than an hour before we gave up. The next day the informed me that they close at half 4 and therefore my call would never have been answered. Yet they had me on hold with a sickeningly patronizing voice chiming in every few minutes with "Your call is very important to us, please wait for the next available operator"

Crooks.

cormie

When I first made this thread, I was worried the title may have been mod-edited to be less "slanderous", but it appears they truly are thieves and deceiptful :mad:

I still think that I could somehow make the fact that they sent a text to my phone, permission for me to go and fleece their office, as me sending something to their number, gives them permission to fleece my wallet apparently! What ye folk think?

Hydrosylator

Sam Vimes wrote: »

When I worked in a phone shop I had a very strong desire to murder people who did that.

Well murder or not, it was indeed a waste of our time. We weren't aggro at all, we merely put all our cards on the table. What did piss me off was that yer man was talking about a "recent loophole", which made this scam possible, when it's been going on for at least four years, as far as I can tell.

Loophole my eye, the only loophole is that the phone companies are willing to let this happen because it makes them money to do so.

As for father, he's taking the last remaining option (outside of a court case without any Irish law to support it, as it would seem), and voting with his feet, changing network. I'd be doing the same (I'm also on o2) but I have to wait for my contract to run out.

This issue, it seems, is not going away. I feel a "cause" website coming on.
No really.

Gillo

Hydrosylator wrote: »

From a mate of mine who worked in an o2 store:
"what you do is go into an o2 shop and act stupid there, and if they cant help in the store say your leaving and go through the leaving process there with them, they'll sort it then, o2 hates losing customers. The shop will be held responsible, goes against their monthly shop stats, which affects sales commissions, bonuses etc."

If it works, they credit your account the amount. He also added that the more crowded the store is at the time, the better it will work, and the more "local" the store is, the better it will work. Outlets in big shopping centres typically won't give a damn. We're going to give it a lash, I'll let you know how it goes.

Maybe, I'm missing something but the could your friend have not just sorted it out for you??

There's very little the stores can do, nearly every day I have people coming in to me with premium texts, to be honest all I can do is get on to the companies sending the texts and get the customer unsubscribed.

As far as I am aware once Zamono, Opera or anyone else has a licence to operate then the networks can't block their services. If someone can prove me wrong and direct me to the relevant legislation I'd be more than obliged.

Edit: just for the record, I work for O2 but amy only expressing my own opinions. I'm also no on here as any sort of ambassador for O2.

Hydrosylator

Gillo wrote: »

Maybe, I'm missing something but the could your friend have not just sorted it out for you??

There's very little the stores can do, nearly every day I have people coming in to me with premium texts, to be honest all I can do is get on to the companies sending the texts and get the customer unsubscribed.

As far as I am aware once Zamono, Opera or anyone else has a licence to operate then the networks can't block their services. If someone can prove me wrong and direct me to the relevant legislation I'd be more than obliged.

Edit: just for the record, I work for O2 but any only expressing my own opinions. I'm also no on here as any sort of ambassador for O2.

It's been a few years since he worked there. That said, from what I can surmise, even if he still worked there he'd be as useless in this situation as any other shop staffer, o2 policy being what it is. Even if it did make a difference, it would still be wrong for everyone else to be screwed like this.

I think this might be one of those cases where the problem isn't legislation, it's a lack of it. These services appear to be a law unto themselves, no matter what Regtel would have us believe.

They have carte blanche to take money from our phones. No matter what protestations of innocence the phone service providers make, I have yet to see a public campaign against this phenomenon being run by these same providers. Either it's not in their interest to do so, or it's in their interest to neglect to do so.

conner

Gillo wrote:

As far as I am aware once Zamono, Opera or anyone else has a licence to operate then the networks can't block their services. If someone can prove me wrong and direct me to the relevant legislation I'd be more than obliged.

Hydrosylator wrote:

I think this might be one of those cases where the problem isn't legislation, it's a lack of it. These services appear to be a law unto themselves, no matter what Regtel would have us believe.

As I understand it there are basically two sets of laws/regulations that cover this.

Communications:

The Network is considered to be a 'wire'. Companies and individuals can use that wire to communicate with any other company or individual.
If the Network is persistently used to cause harm then the offending party can be barred from using the Network.
In the UK the only body who can bar an individual or company from using the Network is Ofcom. Ofcom acts on behalf of the UK Government (Secretary of State). I assume it would be Comreg in Ireland.

In the case of communications, O2 and the other Networks do not have the authority to bar companies or individuals from using the Network in the same way as the postal service cannot refuse to deliver mail.

If a company does use the Network (postal service) to persistently cause harm the Network Operators can use the 'mere conduit' defense to avoid legal responsibility for anything illegal.

To use the 'mere conduit' defense the Network Operator should not be responsible for: sending the message NOR the content NOR who receives the message.

Commercial:

Reverse charge sms are not simple communications. They are billed services. The Network Operators have signed agreements with companies like Zamano to bill their customers for the receipt of these services

It's clear that the Network Operators are being allowed to use the 'mere conduit' defense for something it was not intended for. It was never intended to avoid responsibility for the unauthorised billing of accounts.

Opera Telecom barred in Australia:

A network does not have the legal authority to bar a company or individual from using the 'wire' to send communications (under the Communications Act) but they can refuse to do commercial 'business' with a company if that company breaks the terms of the commercial contract.

http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,25329470-15306,00.html

April 14, 2009

A Telstra spokesperson said: "Telstra has chosen to exercise its contractual right to terminate its contract with premium SMS service provider Oxygen 8 on 60 days written notice.
"This action was taken after Oxygen 8's services continued to generate a consistently disproportionate and unacceptable level of complaints over a sustained period. This was despite Telstra's attempts to work with Oxygen 8 to improve its complaint levels over many months."



Oxygen8 is the name Opera Telecom uses in Australia.

Hydrosylator

Well, a cheque from Zamano arrived today, refunding the full amount added to my aul lads phone bill.

There was however, no admission of liability. The letter went like this

REFUND FOR PREMIUM RATE SMS SERVICES

As per your recent query to our customer services department, please find enclosed a cheque for the amount stipulated above, to refund you for the costs incurred while using one of the Premium Rate SMS services provisioned on our platform.

Kindest Regards,
(illegible signature without typed equivalent)
Zamano Customer Services Manager

Our interaction with Zamano involved:

1. initally ringing them up and eating the bo**ocks off them over the phone
2. getting onto Regtel
3. getting a phone call from Zamano, who still insisted he subscribed (bull****)
4. complaining (a lot) to 02, on the phone and in a shop, and then leaving o2
5. getting a letter and cheque from Zamano

It's impossible to say for sure which of those actions had the greatest impact.
We shouldn't have had to any of this.

The problem of unsolicited premium sms services still exists, even if it no longer affects us personally, and the law still needs to change to protect the victims and not the perpetrators. But then, that seems to be a problem with a lot of Irish law these days.

legend73

Simply put people are muppets and do not read the T&Cs and small print on their texts, oblivious to the fact they have actually used a subscription service. FOLKS read the T&Cs and don't get caught out.

All the Premium SMS services are operated on regulations from REGTEL, if a service is opted in to then there is no come back in a lot of cases. Companines cannot send unsolicited premium SMS messages it is against the law.

If you're not sure dont use the services, such as ringtones, wallpapers, games, applications, balk texting, chat, tarot.... etc

conner

legend73 wrote:

Simply put people are muppets...............Companines cannot send unsolicited premium SMS messages it is against the law.

no.........just one or two :rolleyes:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/money/consumer_affairs/article5002795.ece
October 23, 2008
Beware of the mobile text pests
There has been an alarming growth in the number of people ripped off by premium-rate phone services

Even more worrying, however, is the growing trend among premium-rate companies to target people who have not given them their details. Most usually a company acquires contact details by buying lists of data from other companies. “Buying and selling of contact details is big business,” Mr Bates says. “Lists of phone numbers are passed around the industry. If your number is on one of these lists, you could receive a text about anything.”

so according to Simon Bates (Phonepayplus), people in the UK are complaining because they are being sent unsolicited premium rate text messages.



according to legend73, people who are complaining in Ireland are complaining because they are muppets.

Paddyo

I think you may have missed the point legend73.

People ARE being signed up for these services without ever actually signing up for them - even if it is against the law

So I ask you now - who is the muppet in this situation?

This happened my son a while back with funmobile - and I got his money back.

Paddyo

foggy_lad

Paddyo wrote: »

I think you may have missed the point legend73.

People ARE being signed up for these services without ever actually signing up for them - even if it is against the law

So I ask you now - who is the muppet in this situation?

This happened my son a while back with funmobile - and I got his money back.

Paddyo

the people operating these premium rate services are fully aware of the situation and will do nothing about it as it benefits them and they make a small fortune from their "mistakes" deliberate or otherwise

Hydrosylator

legend73 wrote: »

Companines cannot send unsolicited premium SMS messages it is against the law.

Oh yeah, I forgot that legislation works by making it physically impossible to break the law.

I suggest you read the rest of this thread to see what's actually happening. I know it would take longer than assuming everybody's retarded except you, but do it anyway.

To recap, people are getting unsolicited texts to their phones.
Be glad you're not one of them, and don't be a dick every day of your life.

legend73

Tutu - I dont get unsolicted txts because i've never subscribed to a service or contest or given out my number to anyone for use in advertising etc as i'm not a numpty.

The reason people get these txts are simple - they sign up for services or give out their numbers unwittingly. In the case of Paddyo your son signed up for something at some point. The fact he is a minor is probably why you got the money back.

As for the last post Hydroslater - I have read through the topic. All I can say is that it seems that 'dicks' dont read through the T&Cs or don't understand what they are doing.

I agree it is a generalisation that all people in these situations are muppets. However ignorance has never been an excuse and people should be responsible and accountable for thier own actions.

From what I understand the industry has been cleaned up somewhat in the past 6-9 months and in the US & UK markets there are now double opt in systems. Simply meaning you actually have to agree twice to the services, if that is introduced in Ireland by the regulators then this topic will be mute unless your name is Elmo, Kermit or Gonzo.

cormie

legend73 wrote: »

Tutu - I dont get unsolicted txts because i've never subscribed to a service or contest or given out my number to anyone for use in advertising etc as i'm not a numpty.

The reason people get these txts are simple - they sign up for services or give out their numbers unwittingly. In the case of Paddyo your son signed up for something at some point. The fact he is a minor is probably why you got the money back.

As for the last post Hydroslater - I have read through the topic. All I can say is that it seems that 'dicks' dont read through the T&Cs or don't understand what they are doing.

I agree it is a generalisation that all people in these situations are muppets. However ignorance has never been an excuse and people should be responsible and accountable for thier own actions.

From what I understand the industry has been cleaned up somewhat in the past 6-9 months and in the US & UK markets there are now double opt in systems. Simply meaning you actually have to agree twice to the services, if that is introduced in Ireland by the regulators then this topic will be mute unless your name is Elmo, Kermit or Gonzo.

In the case of my original post and the topic starting post, I was charged because of a few random button presses while my phone was in my pocket (and yes I have auto-keylock enabled, so even more coincidental). I have never sent any texts to competitions or anything of that nature, ever, ring ring ringtone is fine for me, I use my phone for calls, texts and connecting to the net on my laptop, an odd photo here and there and that's it. The only 5XXXX number I get numbers from is the o2 blueroom, notifications of upcoming shows to the point. I highly doubt this is in any way related to what I was charged for, which according to the folks on the phone, I signed up for unknowingly about 3 minutes before I took my phone out of my pocket and saw that it had connected itself to my browser while in my pocket.

legend73

Yep and like so many posts on this forum and I didnt want to re-itirate those when they say you opted in, why is that the compaines fault. Some how you managed to opt in, they didnt send you an unsolicited txt as I was discussing. The dobule Opt in would probably stop that as you need to kind of do it twice in a row or it asks did you do this and you have to respond with a Yes to get the services. I'm not 100% on how it works as again I have never subscribed to anything.

I get your point and it sounds like you've sorted out your issue, so hope you've had no more issues since and that your not pocket phoning.

My niece got into a similiar situation, she swore black and blue that she did nothing, but in the end she had entered a competition via a website. Being a minor meant she got a refund as soon as she contacted the service provider.

I'm off the opinion that there are generally more then one side to a story.

Paddyo

Legend

You obviously dont really know what your are talking about. If you look at the regulations, people are not supposed to be charged unless they opt in by using the password/number which is given to them by the 'service' provider.

In my opinion, they should be able to provide proof of this opt in.

In my sons case, he is under age and that is probably why he got his money back. That is not to say that he signed up for it in the first place. I saw the original text sent by them which he did click on - but nowhere in the text did it say that by clicking here you are subscribing to their service.

What if someone else gave your number on a website - would you be the muppet then?

As you yourself said, there is always more than one side to a story and no matter what anyone says, in my opinion, what these companies are doing is plain and simple robbery.

Paddyo

legend73

I'm guessing that if someone was to put my number in to a website, you recieve a message giving the T&C's and if you agree you're opted in. I would simply not agree, or unsubsribe like what I do with unsolicited emails.

If what you are saying Paddyo is that they sent a message that said you are subscribed without any provication then you would be spot on (that is illegal), that is exactly what my niece said, but when the facts came out she was lying, she had opted in and had confirmed the service.

The process of getting a refund was fairly painless as she was a minor, but the time wasted because of her story telling was what was really annoying.

as forest gump said, thats all i've got to say about that.

Hydrosylator

legend73 wrote: »

I'm guessing that if someone was to put my number in to a website, you recieve a message giving the T&C's and if you agree you're opted in. I would simply not agree, or unsubsribe like what I do with unsolicited emails.

You keep having this problem where you assume that everything is always above board where the actions of the premium text companies are concerned.

Maybe you're naive or you're digging your heels in for the sake of it. The fact is you're talking like companies never do anything wrong, and all your arguments omit the possibility that in any of these cases, the company could be in the wrong.

You say yourself that you've never had this problem because you never use any premium services (because you're not a numpty). This suggests to me that you have a deep distrust of them, which seems at odds with some of your statements here.

The fact is my auld lad's been using the Met office's weather text service for years without any problems.
When he used a voting service on an RTE show, which I add, was explicitly labelled as not being a subscription service, on a state broadcaster, the problem began.

The problem was that he began receiving service texts which bore no relation to anything he had used, and for which no evidence of subscription could be provided. Indeed, his phone statement disproved that he had ever subscribed. The service (Ztarot I think it was) was run by the same company who apparently provide RTE's text services, Zamano.

So either they had a foul up on their end (maybe their resources were under strain) or they deliberately harvested phone data for premium spamming purposes.

I agree with you that the best approach to this problem is never to give your number to anyone running such services.

My reason is that these ****ers can't be trusted, and the law is far too often on their side.

Bob Z

legend73 wrote: »

I'm guessing that if someone was to put my number in to a website, you recieve a message giving the T&C's and if you agree you're opted in. I would simply not agree, or unsubsribe like what I do with unsolicited emails.

If what you are saying Paddyo is that they sent a message that said you are subscribed without any provication then you would be spot on (that is illegal), that is exactly what my niece said, but when the facts came out she was lying, she had opted in and had confirmed the service.

The process of getting a refund was fairly painless as she was a minor, but the time wasted because of her story telling was what was really annoying.

as forest gump said, thats all i've got to say about that.

Is it possible your niece wasnt lying? These things are a bit confusing. Intentionally so i think

foggy_lad

Bob Z wrote: »

Is it possible your niece wasnt lying? These things are a bit confusing. Intentionally so i think

most people only subscribe by accident because of the underhand tactics of the companies involved.

legend73

Compaines do make mistakes all the time after all they are full of people. Look at all the accusations, insuiations & assumptions in this thread from all in sundry including myself.

legend73

foggy_lad wrote: »

most people only subscribe by accident because of the underhand tactics of the companies involved.

According to this article they have over 500,000 subscribers - clearly that would mean this topic would probably bring down boards.ie if that was the case.

http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_1011906.shtml

Hydrosylator

legend73 wrote: »

According to this article they have over 500,000 subscribers - clearly that would mean this topic would probably bring down boards.ie if that was the case.

http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_1011906.shtml

Actually, according to the article, it was Red Circle, who Zamano acquired, that had over 500,000 subscribers, and those divided between UK, Australia, USA and Ireland. It the subscriptions were divided evenly by population, however unlikely, Ireland would have less than 2% of those subscriptions.

As Red Circle specialise in supplying porn to mobile phones, I'd agree that those subscriptions would be brought about by a different kind of fumbling to accidental texting.

However, this is no indicator of the success or otherwise of Zamano's in-house texting services. Neither it is an indicator of what strategies they may employ to profit from those same services.

legend73

As far as I’m aware all premium txt services are all governed by the same regs and rules, so it doesn’t matter if it’s a txt or porn or games or ringtones, chat services etc. They all have the same opt in methods and opt out methods.

So far as that article it is over 1 year old and the two companies are now 1 in the same. So the services people subscribe to could come from either entity in the exact manner.

OK so looking at Zamano pre Red-Circle. % is actually based on mobile units per capita, of which Ireland is higher then both Oz the UK in 2007. For Zamano to generate revenues of 24.7 million in 07 they would need to have sent 10,000,000 txts at €2.50 or 190,000 a week - that is the number of subscribers they have. I don’t know the breakdown of Oz, Eire and UK actually works. But on a per capita of mobile phone, it would be more like 5-6% attributed to Irish traffic. But being an Irish owned company I'm even guessing that they do a lot more than that here. 5-6% would only be 9,000-11,000 subscribers which seems low to me considering the comreg stats.

After writing this I read that Zamano are more of an application provider, so they would make maybe 10% of the charges, so you can actually times everything by 10. That would mean 90,000-110,000 Irish subscribers at a guess.


mobile per capita
http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/med_tel_mob_iel_percap-telephones-mobile-cellular-per-capita&date=2007
Zamano revenues
http://www.zamano.com/investors/investor-news.html
Phone subscribers
http://www.mxtelecom.com/uk/smsg/premium/ie
According to this website in Sep 2006 there were - 4,372,000 phone subscribers in Ireland for that month!

I 100% agree with the point that the way they go about getting business is questionable, but it is up to the consumer to read the fine print. Try buying a house in this country! It is buyer beware. So pocket phoning, not knowing you signed up for a subscription are not the problem of the companies involved here. People have to grow up & take responsibility for there actions and be aware that the world is not a fair place. 5,000,000 Irish phone subscribers at this stage can't be all getting duped it would be a conspiracy to match how Bush got 2 terms let alone 1 in the Whitehouse.

For those that have been subscribed without consent should take the bastards to court, TV, Radio & make sure they have the proof to back it up.

I'm also thinking that seeing how they somewhat doubled the revenues in 08 that is attributed to the Red-Circle subscription numbers and acquisition.

Anyway - long w/end awaits, enjoy and dont be subscribing to a service from a poster in the mens rooms at the pub!

conner

legend73 wrote:

For those that have been subscribed without consent should take the bastards to court, TV, Radio & make sure they have the proof to back it up.

Unless Irish law is completely opposite to UK law I think you will find the onus would be on Zamano and the Network Operator to produce evidence of a valid sales agreement.

condra

Personally, I would like to see all premium telephony services completely outlawed.

They are barely legal scams as it is, and they profit from vunerable members of society- stupid people, horny/lonely/drunk men, and naive kids.

It's an utterly cynical and deplorable way of making money.