Go America, Inc Blocked Successfully Scammed Relay Calls
15 02 2008All..
Thanks to a California friend for this article.
I continue to get emails and phone calls from various companies and persons that they are being swindled by nefarious persons who are hearing and calling through Internet Relay Service. So when Internet Relay providers claim that they have fraudulent relay calls under control, my head shot up a balloon of question marks with one raised eyebrow and one lowered eyebrow with an exclamation "Really?"
I no longer order things via telephone much less via Internet Relay because the companies most of the time will hang up on me – thinking I’m a scammer. Instead, I opt for online orders via website. Many deaf/hoh people tell me they, too, do that as well.
I believe despite onslaught of scammed relay calls, Internet Relay providers really are trying hard to block the crime from happening. That link shows Go America, Inc may have successfully blocked most of scammed relay calls to the point that they have to lay off relay agents. Remember Go America has i711 and recently bought Verizon’s IP Relay as well as HOVRS. Anyway, "success" of blocking fraudulent relay calls means the nefarious people will re-focus on other Internet Relay providers that were not successfully blocking the scammers. If other Internet Relay providers start laying off their relay agents, we’ll know they’re successful as well. Both a blessing and curse, it seems.
One possible solution that I like which we all have been waiting with abated breath is the numbering system. This numbering system will make it possible for any Internet-enabled relay service providers assign a true telephone number to each relay users. Relay users can change their relay provider simply by calling different relay provider. OJO video user can call a Sorenson user simply by using the ph number (instead of [censored] IP Address. Nice. Keep in mind this solution is intended for accessing to e911; however, the positive side effect of this numbering system should minimize scammers big time. It is because Internet-enabled relay providers or database service companies will now have to verify the relay users are indeed from America because they need names & addresses as to where they can send police, ambulance, or firetruck to.
Unfortunately, my face is turning blue for holding my abated breath to see the number system be implemented. Internet Relay providers and database service companies all have come out with solutions. Good. Now need to decide on one and go with it ASAP. Hasn’t happened. I know bureaucracy in federal gov’t moves slowly, but seems to be as fast as speedy snail.
So really – it is now in the FCC’s ball park to move on.
In the meantime, kudos to GA for blocking the scammed relay calls. Hope it continues. Scammers will try to circumvent the blockage and I hope they will not be successful this time.
eyes open & thumbs up,
Ed
I can feel for you. I have the same predicament as well. I do order things online most of the time but when I do need to call in an order, I use VRS and I request a male operator and I instruct the operator NOT to ANNOUNCE! and it works! — R.
Thanks for passing the article along to everyone. I noticed the article from the newspaper seemed to have got a couple things muddied a little. Correct me if I’m wrong please…
The interstate relay fund is not funded by a surcharge like the state relay funds are. The interstate fund is paid by all common carrier telephone companies based on their interstate revenues. The basis being that they are required to make their services accessible.
In reality, does that mean that the price consumers pay includes that payment to the interstate TRS fund, yes. I’ve always questioned whether that really meant “taxpayer money” though.
If you think about a doctor’s office, a private employer, etc., that provides interpreters, accessible doors, etc. They are required to do so because they must make their services accessible and of course those costs are passed along to all their patients, customers, etc. We don’t think of those monies as taxpayer dollar though, do we?
In the case of interstate relay, yes the FCC regulates the provision of relay, they regulate the provision of state relay also by their certification of a state program. Yes, the FCC, through its’ contractor (NECA) collects those payments from the common carriers and distributes reimbursements accordingly. It seems to me that they’re not really collecting a tax per se, but more likely acting as a central clearinghouse for the funds that are simply going in and out of the system in what amounts to a “group buying” system. ABC Mom and Pop Telephone company doesn’t want to provide relay, they pay into the fund and buy the services of the providers in essence to satisfy their accessibility compliance.
It does not matter which relay I use – businesses still hang up on relay calls. It is very sad because those businesses loose customers ….
i dont think goamerica brought hovrs; they merged. two different things.
The numbering item seems to be stuck at the FCC while it gets studied to death. I would urge everyone to contact Chairman Martin and tell him to order the providers to implement numbering within X period of time, say 90 days. That appears to me to be the only way to get the providers off their rear ends.
Hi Ed,
Good Afternoon! Thank you for sending me in regarding this topic. Since I have my sidekick pager, I was annoyed to receive the e-mail message from IP-Relay Services and VP alert with missed calls and their phone number including no name providing. Then I looked up into http://www.google.com for this particular number. Good enough, these numbers were scammed by someone, who is trying to reach me through the relay services. I never give my videophone numbers anybody except my close friends and family. I wondered why these people are such as this kind behavior to make the calls through relay operators. It’s very frustrating. Whom can I report to?
Otherwise, I enjoyed viewing your vlog lately with the update of telecommunication issues that will enhance our lives better. Have a good weekend.
Nick Vera
Daryl,
Clarification on relay service surcharge. Because of a rule in the FCC regulation, telephone carriers are not allowed to “identify” the fee that has been passed on to the ratepayers. So to answer ur question, ratepayers pay for the interstate TRS fund via telephone carriers.
Ed
Dog Food,
Let me see I think “merging” bought HOVRS to the tune about 35 million dollars. Merger usually means to me no exchange of funds, just combine companies into one entity. Maybe I’m wrong. Those of you with business savvy, help Dog Food and myself know what kind of business transaction happened between HOVRS and GA? Did the CEO of HOVRS sell the business or merged with GA?
Thanks in advance,
Ed
Nick,
Good question you have. Did your video phone number get leased/sold to third party? Supposed not to without your permission. If you shared your video phone via email, it may have gotten around and someone salvaged ur video phone? As to who to report to? My first thought was the FCC, but I don’t think u will hear from them if u do report it.
Anyone who can answer Nick?
Ed
Maybe we need some sort of a system where people would need to submit audiograms to confirm they are deaf before getting a relay phone number….
Hello Ed,
yes, you are right. HOVRS benefited 35 million from this merger. What does GA get out of this? I’m curious to find out as well
.
Did you have to go to the Town Council to get an abatement for your breath?
PS .. it’s ‘bated,’ not ‘abated.”
Just Me,
I looked up dictionary and it turned out both of us are right.
bate 1 ( b³t) v. tr. bat·ed bat·ing bates 1. To lessen the force or intensity of; moderate:
abates v. tr. 1. To reduce in amount, degree, or intensity; lessen
Ed