giffgaff = con-con
in [UK Mobile]
|
From: Martin Jay on 17 Mar 2010 05:50 On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:18:11 +0000, Martin Jay <martin(a)spam-free.org.uk> wrote: >Well, well, well. Despite all it's community based fully charm, >giffgaff is just another con. > >A few days ago I noticed my giffgaff balance had unexpectedly dropped >by GBP5, so I sent an email requesting a refund. > >Surprise, surprise it transpires that giffgaff have charged me for an >unrequested premium rate text message that was sent from a third >party. I had hoped the premium rate text message business had put its >house in order, but it appears not. And, sadly, it also appears that >mobile networks and their resellers are happy to cuddle up in bed with >premium rate text message thieves. You can follow the thread in con-con giffgaff's forums at <http://community.giffgaff.com/t5/Help-Ask-the-community-got-stuck/giffgaff-con-con/td-p/6538/highlight/false>. The general consensus of those who have posted seems to be similar to con-con giffgaff's own response: tough luck. An example is: ----- Begin Quote ----- Re: giffgaff = con-con 17-March-2010 09:21 Why don't people understand how to take responsibility for their own issues? As mentioned previously: GG have NO affiliation with the sender of the text. OK, so I agree that it wasn't your fault that the text was sent - but it wasn't GG's either, so why should they stump up? I may not have been your fault - but your number is your responsibility. How can it possibly be a con? Are you even reading what you type before hitting the "send" button? You either signed up for something by mistake, somebody hates you and gave this company your number, or they are simply spamming you. None of the above implicate GG, or indicate that they owe you money. You've been had. Put it down to experience and move on - just stop slandering a company because they won't clean up after you. ----- End Quote ----- -- Martin Jay Back the Ban: <http://www.backtheban.com/> League Against Cruel Sports: <http://www.league.org.uk/>
From: Brian Gregory [UK] on 17 Mar 2010 06:30 "Martin Jay" <martin(a)spam-free.org.uk> wrote in message news:812.1268815966.20100317(a)spam-free.org.uk... > On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:42:47 -0700 (PDT), andy > <andy.ggrps(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > >>Stop accusing giffgaff of complicity in theft... > > But that's exactly what it is. > >>...when neither they nor any other network have no way at all of >>directly knowing whether you actually subscribed or not > > That's what the mobile networks and their resellers have brainwashed > customers into believing. However, the contract exists between > con-con giffgaff and myself. It is their responsibility to ensure > that all charges are accurate and to investigate any that are > disputed. > >>Complain to the service provider, which you can find by looking up the >>number, and get a refund from them > > I have complained. I have complained to the company that charged me: > con-con giffgaff. It's not up to me go running around begging for a > refund from a third party I have no relationship with. I tried it once. They were expert in fobbing me off with lies, swearing at me, threatening me and accusing *me* of harassment. > -- > Martin Jay > Back the Ban: <http://www.backtheban.com/> > League Against Cruel Sports: <http://www.league.org.uk/>
From: Brian Gregory [UK] on 17 Mar 2010 06:31 "Steve Terry" <gfourwwk(a)tesco.net> wrote in message news:hnpcho$686$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > "Theo Markettos" <theom+news(a)chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message > news:jcl*wwa6s(a)news.chiark.greenend.org.uk... >> Steve Terry <gfourwwk(a)tesco.net> wrote: >>> "Martin Jay" <martin(a)spam-free.org.uk> wrote in message >>> news:807.1268777125.20100316(a)spam-free.org.uk... >>> > And there should be an explicit and traceable opt in process for >>> > reverse charge premium rate text message services. >>> > >>> That would end reverse SMS as hardly anyone would opt in. >>> I like the idea >> >> But is there no audit trail for the subscribing text? If they claim you >> sent 'Scores ManU' to 81234 they should have a log of when this was sent, >> including all the metadata? Or can someone sign up to premium rate texts >> in >> some other way than using the phone? >> >> It shouldn't be too difficult to produce this log in case of dispute. >> Though >> I suppose you might have to get into crypto to prove whether the log >> entry was actually sent from your SIM or if the network made it up. >> Theo >> >> > It's always been possible to fake SMS headers Paypal by phone assured me it was impossible. > > Steve Terry > -- > Get a free Three 3pay Sim with �2 bonus after �10 top up > http://freeagent.three.co.uk/stand/view/id/5276 >
From: andy on 17 Mar 2010 07:11 On 17 Mar, 09:50, Martin Jay <mar...(a)spam-free.org.uk> wrote: > > You can follow the thread in con-con giffgaff's forums at > <http://community.giffgaff.com/t5/Help-Ask-the-community-got-stuck/gif...>. > > The general consensus of those who have posted seems to be similar to > con-con giffgaff's own response: tough luck. > Actually, the general consensus is that you should complain to the number provider company, and report this the to regulator Phonepayplus, which has imposed sanctions on cases in the past Your refusal (so far) to do so, and your general abuse towards the suggestion, is starting to look rather less reasonable than the tone of the vast majority of replies you've had
From: Martin Jay on 17 Mar 2010 09:14
On Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:18:11 +0000, Martin Jay <martin(a)spam-free.org.uk> wrote: >Well, well, well. Despite all it's community based fully charm, >giffgaff is just another con. > >A few days ago I noticed my giffgaff balance had unexpectedly dropped >by GBP5, so I sent an email requesting a refund. > >Surprise, surprise it transpires that giffgaff have charged me for an >unrequested premium rate text message that was sent from a third >party. I had hoped the premium rate text message business had put its >house in order, but it appears not. And, sadly, it also appears that >mobile networks and their resellers are happy to cuddle up in bed with >premium rate text message thieves. The mystery deepens. I responded to con-con giffgaff with this: "I have not subscribed to any premium rate text services. If you believe otherwise, I'd be grateful if you would let me know when and how I did so." And I have received this response: ----- Begin Quote ----- As I previously stated this is a premium text service that had to be signed up to from yourself or someone who had access to your details could have actually requested this I'm afraid. Only after a full investigation did I provide you with all the correct information and how to stop these texts from using up your credit again in the future but unfortunately giffgaff is not responsible for this charge and are in no way connected to the text service that is charging you. As I understand it on the forum thread you created headed "giffgaff = con-con" a few members have tried to help you in the right direction towards getting refunded from the actual premium text service provider and I'm sorry to inform you but this is the only way you will be refunded for this credit loss as how your SIM is used is completely your own responsibility. ----- End Quote ----- Note that they dodged the point I raised about letting me know "when and how" I subscribed to the premium rate text service. -- Martin Jay Back the Ban: <http://www.backtheban.com/> League Against Cruel Sports: <http://www.league.org.uk/> |