I get a call from this company stating I was eligable to receive a credit card with a gaurenteed $5000 limit. It was not secured. Blah. Blah... Blah. Now I have run telemarketing phone rooms, so I know what to ask. And this sounded really good. But the warning light went on when they recorded my verification, and I could stop and ask the representative questions during the verification. I pushed past this feeling that something was fishy.
The verification went as such... Yes i would get the card, yes 199.95 would be taken out of my account... Yes I would receive the packet for review before the payment would be taken out.
Then the big Boom. I agree to have my long distance switched... I said "NO! Hell NO!" I then preceeded to tell the representative that our home long distance is attached to our companies account, as I do most collections ect... From home. And it would devestate our livelyhood, and company if any changes were made to the account. And above that I do not have the authority to change the service. The representative stated that would be fine.
UNTIL. I decided to check my bank account on line. Not only was the 199.95 taken out of my account. So was 55.09 to EBS telecom. I am livid... I did not get my "packet" for review (even though i was told the funds would not be taken until i got the packet, and I was to call my rep as soon as i received it)
So I of course start the phone game. Not able to get ahold of Consumer Financial, but I could not find any information, anywhere, on this phone company, Until I got the mail and a bill.
So I call EBS. The first thing I did was ask to have this conversation recorded. The women in "customer service" said she did not have the equipment to record our conversation. I then preceeded to tell my story. This women argues with me that i agreed to the service. Then tells me I didn't make a payment yet. I get heated and said I know what was said and when and I have the bank information that proves different. I was asked to call back in 10 minutes, so she could listen to the verification. They never answered the phone the rest of the day. So I plan a road trip to St. George (about 3 hours).
Before I leave for St. George, I try to call back EBS, and I get thru this time. She starts to argue that I agreed to the service. I argued back that I did not. She then starts giving my information to someone within her office, then I hear, Oh you were the one who did say no. I then was told I had to fax an actual copy of my bank statement. Well they already had the info anyway.
I fax the information, and we get a call from my husband's company's supervisor. Now our toll free is not working... Critical in our line of business. I call back EBS customer service and tell them that we have a more serious issue regarding this phone situation, and i needed her to fix this NOW... She tells me to call my provider, she just had the same problem 3 weeks ago! And told me it was my problem!
Now I am really hot, and I finally get thru to Consumer Financial Resources. They tell me I must have agreed to the service. I explained that i had agreed to the credit card deal, that i out and out refused the long distance, but that "their company took the liberty of slamming me anyway" I was told that this was customer service, and they are not Consumer Financial Resources. I then asked if her company "customer service" was hired out to handle inquiries for Consumer Financial Resources because on the electronic check it said to call this number with questions. She stated they were. I asked then how come you just told me you were not affiliated with consumer financial resources.
She then puts me on hold to access the verification tapes. I wait and then get"let me see if quality control has the time to listen to this" just to be slammed back on hold. A while later she enters the line to say she is transferring me to quality control. Another voice, and this one asks me why i want to listen to the recording. I told her I did not want to I know what was said and when. I just wanted my money back and have all relationships with either company to end. Again I was put on hold.
Now a third voice. Trying to convince me that I didn't have a problem with Consumer Financial Resources, but with the phone company. I told I had a problem with both of them. I asked how this company got my bank account information, my personal information, and a copy of the verification tapes. I didn't give it therefore Consumer Financial Resources must have. And it has been verified by 4 different sources that i did in fact refuse this service.
The result is I was told i would get a refund of monies from both companies. But not because of my persistance, but because i did my home work. I provided them with the FCC and FTC laws. I showed them where all their mistakes were. And this is what i sent:
Wednesday, November 17
Dear Madam or Sir:
I, Tracey Chase Lazarus, request that all relationships between my self, my family, and Consumer Financial Resources aka Encore. And any association, organization, corporation, business entity, or affiliates (private or public) of Financial Consumer Resources be severed immediately. Due to the neglegence and unlawfull acts Consumer Financial Resources practiced, providing a separate company with 1) my name, address, phone number 2) my bank account information 3) a copy of a verification recording between myself and a representative of Consumer financial Resources. The recording verifies that I did NOT authorize any switching of long distance services, in fact actually became very definate that I did not have authority to switch carriers, that our home was attached to our business phone bill, and that any switch would cause irrepairable damage to our business. Yet, Consumer Financial Resources blatently disregarded this denial for services, my admittance to not having authority to make such a switch. Consumer Financial Resources still supplied the above information to a "private" long distance carrier, and inturn caused my services to be "slammed" an illegal act according to the FCC. I am sending with this the law set by the FTC in regards to telemarketing, I have underlined what my lawyer says is relevant. These are some of the infractions:
1. Did not inform me of any phone service offer until the recorded verification
2. Did not inform me of any funds to be removed from my account for phone service switch
3. Broke several privacy laws by giving my personal information, bank account information with my explicit refusal to allow such activity
I am sure that upon review of the submitted information, there will be no problem in immediate reinbursement of the monies taken out of my account by your company, plus the 85. Oo in incurred losses due to Consumer Financial Resources unlawfull actions. This does not include any losses incurred to XXXXX XXXXX as a result of this issue, and upon evaluation, XXXXXXX has the right to persue any actions for recovery of any losses as a separate party to the fact..
HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO THE FTC, YOUR NEGLIGENCE IS AS FOLLOWS: (note it is Consumer Financial Services that took my account information, and did not provide me with the information regarding the long distance switch as well as ignored my NO! No! No! To the switch)
IT'S THE LAW: Since December 31,1995, a seller or telemarketer is required by law to obtain your verifiable authorization to obtain payment from your bank account. That means whoever takes your bank account information over the phone must have your express permission to debit your account, and must use one of three ways to get it. The person must tell you that money will be taken from your bank account. If you authorize payment of money from your bank account, they must then get your written authorization, tape record your authorization, or send you a written confirmation before debiting your bank account. If they tape record your authorization, they must disclose, and you must receive, the following information:
The date of the demand draft;
The amount of the draft (s);
The payor's (who will receive your money) name;
The number of draft payments (if more than one);
A telephone number that you can call during normal business hours; and
The date that you are giving your oral authorization.
If a seller or telemarketer uses written confirmation to verify your authorization, they must give you all the information required for a tape recorded authorization and tell you in the confirmation notice the refund procedure you can use to dispute the accuracy of the confirmation and receive a refund.
What To Do If You Are A Victim
If telemarketers cause money to be taken from your bank account without your knowledge or authorization, they have violated the law. If you receive a written confirmation notice that does not accurately represent your understanding of the sale, follow the refund procedures that should have been provided and request a refund of your money. If you do not receive a refund, it's against the law. If you believe you have been a victim of fraud, contact your bank immediately. Tell the bank that you did not okay the debit and that you want to prevent further debiting. You also should contact your state Attorney General. Depending on the timing and the circumstances, you may be able to get your money back.
For More Information"Slamming" is the illegal practice of changing a consumer's telephone service without permission. New consumer protection rules created by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) provide a remedy if you've been slammed.
Your Rights if You Have Been Slammed
If you have been slammed and HAVE NOT paid the bill of the carrier who slammed you:
You DO NOT have to pay anyone for service for up to 30 days after being slammed. This means you do not have to pay either your authorized telephone company (the company you actually chose to provide service) or the slamming company. You must pay any charges for service beyond 30 days to your authorized company, but at that company's rates, not the slammer's rates.
If you HAVE paid your phone bill and then discover that you have been slammed:
The slamming company must pay your authorized company 150% of the charges it received from you. Out of this amount, your authorized company will then reimburse you 50% of the charges you paid to the slammer. For example, if you were charged $100 by the slamming company, that company will have to give your authorized company $150, and you will receive $50 as a reimbursement.
With these rules, the FCC has taken the profit out of slamming and protected consumers from illegal charges.
New Guidelines for Telemarketing Switches
Before a telephone company can place an order to switch a customer who agreed to sign up during a telemarketing call, the company must use at least one of the following methods to verify that the customer authorized the switch:
Obtain a written or electronic Letter of Agency (LOA) from the customer. Any written or electronic LOA used to confirm a telemarketing order must include: (1) the subscriber's billing name and address, (2) each telephone number to be covered by the order to change the subscriber's telephone company, (3) a statement that the subscriber intends to change from his or her current telephone company to this new company, (4) a statement that the subscriber designates this new carrier to act as the agent for this change, and (5) a statement that the subscriber understands that there may be a charge for this change. It must also be separate from any promotional material - like prizes, contests, and forms - that come with it.
The LOA provided by the carrier must be limited strictly to authorizing a change in telephone carrier and it must be clearly identified as an LOA authorizing the change. The LOA must be written in clear language and the print must be of sufficient size and readable style, generally comparable in type style and size to any promotional materials, and must make clear to the consumer that the document, when signed, would change his or her telephone carrier.
Only the name of the telephone carrier that will set the consumer's rates can appear on the letter of authorization. The LOA must also contain full translations if it uses more than one language.
0 comments