During an audit of our phone bill we discovered that a line item entitled Enhanced Service billing, Inc was not actually an ATT charge (we thought it was their Internet access charge), but rather a charge on behalf of a comany we never heard of, SBO Online. We further learned that this company had been charging our account for three years, more than $1100 total charges.
To the best of our knowledge we never authorized these charges, nor benefited from any services from SBO online at any moment in time. On their website they indicate they provide dial-up service (which we do not need), as well as some kit including shopping discounts, which we never were even aware of, much less received, nor made use of.
We called SBO online at their listed number 888-299-3724 and asked for an explanation of charges, as well as full refund. The rep on the phone could provide neither. She agreed to cancel future charges and indicated a manager would call us to resolve the issue. A manager called back and offered to refund one year of charges, which we did not accept. As for the authorization, she said they must have a phone acceptance from somebody at our office to start the service, however, was unable to provide any proof of such acceptance. We do not recall ever accepting such charges; none of our employees are authorized to accept any kind of charges on behalf of the company, either.in any case, it seems to me at the very least they should have the verifiable agreement of the account owner, not just anybody who might pick up the phone.
We consider these charges fraudulent, since they were neither authorized, not in return for the provision of any kind of service (SBO does not appear to be a charity). It is very surprising (and cautionary) that ATT allows such companies to rip-off their own, valuable customers under the ATT name. It is ONLY the inclusion under the ATT name that enables such fraudsters to prosper (a bill under the SBO Online name would get a much different scrutiny and response).in my opinion ATT bears direct responsibility for these charges, esp. As they most likely profit from them, as well.
0 comments