Jamster/Ringtoneking scam

I am not being emotive when I describe PR txt suppliers who chargeback at will while ignoring stop txts thereby committing larceny on a large scale, as SCUM . Far from it me dears .

Thats because I know some of these PR operators personally and I even know where they have their racks in Tele City Docklands :) :)
 
RegTel speaks...

Dear Mr XXXXXXXX,

I refer to your email of 26th June 2005.

While children do access Premium Rate SMS Services, they are designed to appeal to a wide audience and are not specifically aimed at children. In accordance with our Code of Practice, Service Providers are required to state in all their promotional material that the service is available to over 16’s only. If a child decides to ignore this warning, there is no way of verifying if the child is over 16yrs of age. In the current review of our Code of Practice, we are contemplating the implementation of a second age verification via text by asking the consumer to confirm their age. In particular, the area relating to subscription services is being strengthened with new monetary limits being imposed for those under 18 years of age.

Part of the advertising requirements is that it must be made clear that "This is a Subscription Service". Other requirements include showing the cost per week / month, the age restriction (in this case 16 years or over), how to get out or "opt-out" of the service and the Service Provider helpline number. The first text message received should also outline the above. To simplify "opting-out" of any subscription service all consumers should have to do is reply to the shortcode number by texting the word STOP. This procedure should automatically disconnect you from the service.

The Regulator of Premium Rate Telecommunications Services is concerned solely with the content and promotion of Premium Rate Services. In relation to your comments concerning the facility to allow parents block Premium Rate Services from their childrens mobile phones, our remit does not extend to the Network Operators. In this regard, it is my understanding that following a consultation process, the three mobile carriers have published a Parental guide to mobile phones, which I believe is available on their websites. Its primary aim is to inform parents of some key safety tips that will encourage responsible use of mobile phones by their children.

Should an under-age child access the Ringtoneking / Jamster service, the policy of the company is to refund consumers without quibble. Therefore, with your permission we would like to forward your complaint to our contact within Ringtoneking to allow them address your concerns and organise a refund directly. If this is acceptable to you, I would appreciate if you could please respond to this email outlining your permission to do so.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

YYYYYYYYY
Complaints Executive

Regtel
3rd Floor
Crescent Hall
Mount Street Crescent
Dublin 2

++353 1 6767025 Tel
++353 1 6767035 Fax
Click to expand...
"Angry of Limerick" replies:
Dear Ms YYYYYYYY,

Many thanks for your detailed reply. With regard to the immediate problem described in my e-mail of the 26th, I'm glad to report that Jamba's Berlin offices replied to me almost immediately the following morning, confirming the cancellation, promising a full refund within 20 days and asking me not to contact their customer services again in the meantime. I assume that this written undertaking will be honoured, so that there should in principle be no need to forward my complaint to Ringtoneking's offices (wherever they are) - but please do feel at liberty to do so. As you'll have seen, my original complaint was e-mailed in the first instance to info@ringtoneking.ie and info@jamster.ie, so I would imagine that they must already be aware of it.

With regard to your comments about advertising and other requirements governing the provision and operation of these services, I would respectfully submit to you that observance of the law is apparently not yet quite as it should be among certain companies operating in Ireland (neither specifically nor exclusively Ringtoneking, Jamster, or their parent company Jamba/iLove GmbH). I refer you in this regard to the following recent discussion thread on the respected personal finance forum Askaboutmoney.com: http://82.195.144.147/showthread.php?t=11784, which you might care to bring to the attention of the Board of RegTel.

I am pleased to hear that RegTel is contemplating the introduction of further protective measures to prevent vulnerable minors from being taken advantage of by dubious marketing methods and obfuscatory 'inertia'-type subscription models, because I'm afraid I can't really accept that the methods and media channels employed 'are not specifically aimed at children'. Why are these ringtone services so copiously advertised in publications (eg. various comics) and on TV channels (eg. Nickleodeon) that quite clearly target an under-age audience?

Furthermore - the mobile network operators have told me that they're powerless to act; I quote:

'O2 has a regulatory obligation to open up access on its network to third party service providers once their service has been authorised by the Regulator for Premium Rate Services (RegTel). Regtel is an independent body whose responsibility it is to regulate the content and promotion of premium rate telecommunication services in Ireland. They authorise all Premium Rate SMS and have the responsibility for ensuring service providers comply with their Code of Practice.'

Comreg, the statutory body responsible for the regulation of the electronic communications sector, have similarly told me that they have no role in relation to Premium Rate Services.

And now RegTel are telling me that their own remit 'does not extend to the Network Operators'..?

I'm no lawyer, but there would seem to be something of a regulatory 'short-circuit' at work here (or 'loop-circuit', or whatever is the appropriate electronic metaphor) and that, for the time being, the Ringtone is indeed King...

Yours sincerely, [etc.]
Click to expand...

 
I've only read through all the previous replies to this very quickly but my hubby got 'stung' by Jamster a few months ago too. One night, had a tipple too many and thought it might be funny to get the most freeking annoying frog tune on his phone, so he texted the number to get it. Two things:- a) the tune never actually arrived and b) he started to notice his phone bills getting higher. Further investigation into it showed that they were charging him for all the annoying text messages which we assumed were just spam and deleted as soon as they arrived, every Sunday morning he would turn on his phone and receive 3 texts from them in a row all of which he promptly deleted. What we didn't understand or know was he had signed up the Jamster club which if you look very closely at the TV screen it does say it but by no means it is clear. I rang Jamster to complain and I have to say there were very quick to send a full refund (in cash via normal post strangely enough). I also wrote a letter of complaint to Regtel, was quite disappointed and surprised by their very unsympathetic letter, they even referred to the fact that joining the Jamster club wasn't that expensive and good value!!!
 
was quite disappointed and surprised by their very unsympathetic letter, they even referred to the fact that joining the Jamster club wasn't that expensive and good value!!!
Click to expand...

I got a sense of approval from the RegTel mail posted above. Offering to send the complaint to their contact, etc. Sounds kind of like IFSRA defending PTSB lying about having the highest interest rates. It took quite a bit of shoving from Clubman before they reluctantly relented and accepted that PTSB was lying.

What is it with these bodies that supposedly regulate industries to defend consumers?
They become the best advocate for the worst practices.

-Rd
 
My own sense of all this is that 'these bodies that supposedly regulate industries to defend consumers' in fact serve to perpetuate/enhance the profit margins of the companies operating within or on the edges of said industries.

RegTel - who have been around since 1995 - state on their website that they are funded from an unspecified 'levy' applied on the Irish mobile network operators (the most profitable in the EU, remember?)

So whose interests would you expect them to serve...?

Something stinks, IMHO... :rolleyes:
 
I dont want to wreck your head but it is Comreg who regulate the number ranges that are open by defualt on a mobile network. Regtel deals with what happens when you get through to them . If Comreg mandated they be closed by default and operned on request (or on production of ID) then the mobile networks licenced by Comreg would generally so do ...after a moan and whinge.

"What is it with these bodies that supposedly regulate industries to defend consumers?
They become the best advocate for the worst practices."

Yes, Galbraith observed that they ALWAYS become part of the industy they are supposed to regulate and lose the detachment that they should have. This prediction was made about 1955 in the book The Great Crash but the profusion of regulators set up in Ireland in the past 15 years or so are true to his prediction . In 50 years they have learnt nothing and care less.

Comreg are a dreadful bunch of tossers . They will try and try again to kick this out to Regtel before they accept any responsibility at their end.

In a nutshell.

1. It is Regtels fault that the stop mechanism is not enforced and that the advertising is aimed at children and is misleading. Content based policing has failed .

2. it is Comreg' fault that 57 and 58 and 59 Premium Number ranges are open to all by default , thereby facilitating fraud against the consumer. Access based policing has failed.
 
tonka said:
2. it is Comreg' fault that 57 and 58 and 59 Premium Number ranges are open to all by default , thereby facilitating fraud against the consumer. Access based policing has failed.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that in a free and open society that we all be unconditionally banned from using a particular service (premium rate calls/messages) on our mobile phones?

Is this not a bad way to proceed? As I mentioned earlier, would such a course of action not be meekly facilitating the onset of the "nanny state"?
 
ronan_d_john said:
Are you suggesting that in a free and open society that we all be unconditionally banned from using a particular service (premium rate calls/messages) on our mobile phones?

Is this not a bad way to proceed? As I mentioned earlier, would such a course of action not be meekly facilitating the onset of the "nanny state"?
Click to expand...

In a free and open society the unwary is protected from scams and fraud .

In a free and open society we have some protection from usury, otherwise we are free to go into bonded labour because the human can be used to discharge a debt ...or their children can go for them.

In a free and open society we regulate moneylending !!!!!!

In a free and open society we are entitled to make rational decisions, buying a single ringtone because you want to is rational , the automatic chargeback authorisation is not.

In free and open society we band, inter alia, Dutch Auctions , Three Card Tricks, Betting Shops for the under 18 . Should we say This post will be deleted if not edited immediately it and open the lot up again, let them prey on the weak and the stupid and be a bit Darwinian about the whole thing .

I say no, dunno about you mate :(
 
Re: 'free and open society'?

Sorry, ronan_d_john, but I've just lost patience with your 'logic' altogether...

Tonka's right, 'colourful language' or nay. These guys are scumbags of the highest order, and the various cartels and quangos that facilitate/perpetuate their schemes are little better. You'd want to see-to-believe the poxy, mealy-mouthed, 'cover-my-ass' letter I got from the ASAI - through the snail-mail, why I don't know...:rolleyes: - last Friday. I couldn't even be bothered posting its contents here...
 
DrMorirty,
No need to post that letter. ASAI send them out to anyone who wants them.
Just write to ASAI on any topic and you can have your very own poxy, mealy-mouthed, 'cover-my-ass' letter.

ronan, nobody sugested that you should be banned from accessing premium rate services. Just that they shoudn't be enabled by default. There should be a minimal hurdle such as calling the phone company to enable the services.

-Rd
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top