Virgin Media Equipment has Been Compromised

[Russ]

You still need permission of that individual agent unless you remove any identifying information from the recording.

Originally Posted by Russ B

You still need permission of that individual agent unless you remove any identifying information from the recording.

Russ, are you sure about it being legal with the removal of the person's identifying info?

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Adam B

This must be an OFCOM matter surely?

Then why don't you speak to OFCOM then?

[Toto]

So, Adam B, have you raised with VM the issue about these numbers appearing on your bill that you have no recollection of making, and what are they going to do about it?

Just for the record, threatening to or actually withholding payment of any service places you in risk of credit default, which can result in other credit related services such as a credit card from being withdrawn, or having your agreement altered, such as increasing the monthly interest rate.

You can make yourself a cause célèbre if you wish, but it could hurt you in the long run.

[Adam B]

Toto I have raised the issue of calls on my bill with VM and they told me that I have to write in. I mentioned their claims of the equipment being compromised but they say that they would never make such a claim and the claim isnt true. I will post the recordings later.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Adam B

Toto I have raised the issue of calls on my bill with VM and they told me that I have to write in. I mentioned their claims of the equipment being compromised but they say that they would never make such a claim and the claim isnt true. I will post the recordings later.

Not interested in the recording, as most are speculative given that one agent within a company cannot speak for the organization it represents on things it knows nothing about - or has not been told about.

You also need to remember that this clause option may not be known in part or whole by every VM employee, particularly front line staff.

So, you've written to them by now, and they are looking into these billing charges - good.

[moaningmags]

If you're the MD of 3 telecoms companies why don't you know the rules and regulations surrounding telephone calls, what you can and can't do with them? Why don't you already know when it's time to call OFCOM?
I surely can't the only person wondering about this.

[BenMcr]

I certainly wouldn't go on a 3rd party forum that's not connected to VM in any way to complain about not getting paid for calls as part of my business?!

I also find the dual complaint about VM odd. They would seem to be mutually exclusive

If the calls have been made from the line then the calls are being claimed back incorrectly and then his business would need to take that up with the appropriate regulators

If however the calls haven't been made then the claimback is correct and then the refund of calls to his personal Virgin Media account is the issue which would need to be escalated within VM as per the standard process that customers have to make.

[webcrawler2050]

Originally Posted by Adam B

Toto I have raised the issue of calls on my bill with VM and they told me that I have to write in. I mentioned their claims of the equipment being compromised but they say that they would never make such a claim and the claim isnt true. I will post the recordings later.

Recordings mean nothing and can't be used unless you have told they person, you are recording the call at the very start of the phone call.

[Barry Issell]

Adam, PM me about this.

I've been watching this thread and had to make comment.

We had £250k's worth of July's revenue withheld on an 'AIT retention'. To be fair O8 are fighting it for us - but not holding our breath.
We had quite a lump in February as well, plus a whole number range barred from the network to add insult to injury.

Like yourself we've been in the business for quite a few years and this can certainly hurt - especially the smaller start-ups who are putting a load into advertisng etc..

Glad someone has had the balls to speak out about it - maybe a few more SP's will come out now and we can launch some sort of class action lawsuit after comparing notes ?

[Adam B]

We have had approx 100+ numbers barred from Virgin Network. Loss of revenue lawsuit is a must I think.

---------- Post added at 02:13 ---------- Previous post was at 02:11 ----------

the thing is as I keep telling people here, The end users are still being billed and are paying for these numbers???

What a scam

---------- Post added at 02:27 ---------- Previous post was at 02:13 ----------

Barry we must talk

[Toto]

This is getting stranger by the minute - is it me, or am I seeing the same person speaking to himself?

Bottom line - any MD worth his salt would know how to deal with this properly and professionally - using the appropriate channels. Listing these so-called AIT's in this manner just smacks of attention seeking.

It would seem then that if VM are not paying revenues to the companies involved, that would suggest they have had complaints from their customers about said telephone numbers, and they have upheld those complaints

Perhaps Adam and Barry would be willing to be forthcoming as to what businesses they are running, as full disclosure may give some credibility to their claims.

[Barry Issell]

10/10 Toto.

Of course it's attention seeking ! If you're not in the game then you can't expect to understand how it works.
'Using the appropriate channels' - WTF ! - This is the Premium Rate industry we're talking about here !!

One of the points the OP has made is that VM has withheld ALL revenue on the basis that ALL calls made were AIT.
This is clearly bul***it as the OP made calls to his own Premium Rate numbers (as do we - it's called a line test) and not been paid out for them.

Another point, and Adam will back me up on this - VM always round up calls to a full minute - yet they only pay over the exact amount of seconds made to BT wholesale. Again this is going on with every single call made on their network - a seperate issue I know and maybe a topic for another thread but I thought it important to mention.

Adam, we've been down the route of OFCOM and they are only interested in protecting the consumer - this is internal within the industry and rests mainly on the shoulders of BT Wholesale to address.

The point is, VM are sitting on £millions of unpaid revenue and some would perceive (ourselves included) that in itself to be fraudulently obtained.

Mux hacks are way off the mark and we had that excuse from VM. Adam, you will not get anywhere with the 'Cheif Exec', if it is who I think it is. The real VM players don't want to talk - you hit a brick wall.


So how do VM explain an 09 being promoted solely on National Television with perfectly natural organic traffic as being legit - the answer ? - they don't. They stick an AIT claim into BTW and hope to get away with it. FACT.

If there were legit customer complaints then BT, Voda, o2 etc. would all be banging in an AIT retention on the same number range - they don't, only VM.

Speaks for itself really..

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Barry Issell

10/10 Toto.

Of course it's attention seeking ! If you're not in the game then you can't expect to understand how it works.
'Using the appropriate channels' - WTF ! - This is the Premium Rate industry we're talking about here !!

One of the points the OP has made is that VM has withheld ALL revenue on the basis that ALL calls made were AIT.
This is clearly bul***it as the OP made calls to his own Premium Rate numbers (as do we - it's called a line test) and not been paid out for them.

Another point, and Adam will back me up on this - VM always round up calls to a full minute - yet they only pay over the exact amount of seconds made to BT wholesale. Again this is going on with every single call made on their network - a seperate issue I know and maybe a topic for another thread but I thought it important to mention.

Adam, we've been down the route of OFCOM and they are only interested in protecting the consumer - this is internal within the industry and rests mainly on the shoulders of BT Wholesale to address.

The point is, VM are sitting on £millions of unpaid revenue and some would perceive (ourselves included) that in itself to be fraudulently obtained.

Mux hacks are way off the mark and we had that excuse from VM. Adam, you will not get anywhere with the 'Cheif Exec', if it is who I think it is. The real VM players don't want to talk - you hit a brick wall.


So how do VM explain an 09 being promoted solely on National Television with perfectly natural organic traffic as being legit - the answer ? - they don't. They stick an AIT claim into BTW and hope to get away with it. FACT.

If there were legit customer complaints then BT, Voda, o2 etc. would all be banging in an AIT retention on the same number range - they don't, only VM.

Speaks for itself really..

OK, points made that can't really be corroborated, but I don't have a problem with that, its not my issue because I don't use premium rate services.

So again, are you and Adam prepared to divulge what your "telecoms" business is, something that can be checked as legitimate?

Oh,sorry forgot this bit:

Another point, and Adam will back me up on this - VM always round up calls to a full minute - yet they only pay over the exact amount of seconds made to BT wholesale. Again this is going on with every single call made on their network - a seperate issue I know and maybe a topic for another thread but I thought it important to mention.

Do your respective premium rate services charge by the second, no rounding up to the nearest 30 seconds or minute?

[Adam B]

Virgin have just put yet another AIT retention into BT Wholesale for August.

And yes, Virgin are still billing the customers for the calls.

This is mass fraud.