Mobile Phone Fraud in the UK

Mobile phone companies allow fraudsters direct access to your cash?

Do you own a mobile phone?

If yes, did you know that mobile phone companies allow fraudsters direct access to your cash?

How do they do this? Anyone with a premium rate ‘texting’ service can send you a text message. Even if you did not ask for the message to be sent, your account will be charged for the text messages you receive, or if you use ‘pay-as-you-go’ your balance will still be debited for each message received.

You could be charged around £1.50 for each message received. This is nothing more than straight theft.

This happened to me. I was receiving text messages, but when I went to read the message it said “message unable to be displayed”. At first I thought that they were just wrong numbers. However, I began to notice that after each message was received the balance on my ‘pay-as-you-go’ was being reduced.

I called O2, my mobile service provider; they told me that there was nothing that they could do. Neither did they have a system that would allow me to STOP all premium text messages to my mobile number. They told me to call ICSTIS, who are they regulator for mobile premium services.

I called ICSTIS, who gave me the name of the company who had been calling me and their phone number. Now remember, this is the company who had been stealing my money. ICSTIS want me to tell these (to my mind) criminals to stop stealing my money and to give me back what they have stolen. In order to do this I have to give these criminals more of my personal details. What lunatic thought up such a system?

This is the same as going to the police and telling them that you have been burgled and the police giving you the name and address of the burglar and telling you to go and talk to the burglar and ask him to give you your property back.

The system which allows mobile phone companies to charge you for receiving calls or text messages is fundamentally flawed and open to serious abuse.

The situation described above is one circumstance where you can be charged for receiving unwanted or fraudulent messages. It is like being told to open your wallet and let anyone who cares to text you to help themselves.

I have always thought that the system where the receiver of a call pays was unsatisfactory and open to abuse. I experienced a similar situation when I worked abroad as an IT consultant. Agents would call from the UK to determine my availability for new contracts or to find out if I knew someone who could do the contract. Well, because I was receiving this call whilst in another country, the phone company also charge me for receiving the call. Many times these calls were no more than nuisance calls or ‘spam’ to use a term that email users are all too familiar with.

The trouble with unwanted texts or mobile calls is that they cost you real money.

The only way to stop this absurd situation is to prevent mobile phone companies making any charges to the receivers account. In all situations the caller should pay for the call.

The people who have been ‘texting’ me without my permission should be charged with fraud or theft.

I have called both ICSTIS and OFCOM and neither organisation appears willing to do very much about the current situation.

Two things need to happen very quickly.

Mobile phone companies should be required to block all premium message text services upon a user’s request.
The charging system used by mobile phone companies MUST be changed so it is the caller that bears the full cost of the call. Callers must be made aware, in advance, of the call rate being charged.

Please write or email your member of parliament in the UK and contact the news media to ensure that this fraud (permitted by our government and watchdog bodies) can be stopped.

Who is running the asylum(EU)?

Citizens of the European Union (EU) have been considering this very question, and it appears that they are not very happy.

The populations of both France and the Netherlands had their say, and gave a strong thumbs-down to the proposals being made by the Brussels bureaucracy. There are many who feel the European Commission and the European Parliament is just an exclusive club whose members are not up to the task of National Politics and are put out to graze on greener pastures. There they can push their less than brilliant ideas, collect an undeservedly large salary, and not have to account for themselves.

After the resounding NO votes, the Eurocrats are still saying that Europe should push ahead with their plans. But now, the citizens of Europe have gotten smart, and said NO. Let us hope that NO means NO. Let us hope that those formulating their ill conceived plans are forced to cease and desist. Let us hope that the way forward is a more democratic and accountable Europe.

It was disturbing for those in the UK to hear that if France votes ‘NO’ then that is a problem for Europe, but if Britain votes ‘NO’ then that is only a problem for Britain. This is the type of arrogance and ignorance displayed by those in Brussels that will prevent their ever being unanimous approval of the current constitution.

There are some politicians who have derided the policy of referendums and have said that Governments should make the decisions without consulting the people and without the backing of the people. One has to remain suspicious of such people, who may be willing to ride the gravy train until they die.

The policy of referendums is fair, sensible and democratic. However, the execution of these European referendums was incompetent and nonsensical. It did not make sense to have a number of referendums spread out over several years thus creating the possibility that the first 24 countries could have voted ‘yes’ only for the last country to vote ‘no’ and have to start the whole process again. Fortunately, we did not have to wait for that final country. Nor did we have to wait for the people of Britain to vote ‘NO’. Both France and the Netherlands brought the fresh air of reality to Brussels.

During this ratification process we have had politicians tell us that we did not understand the constitution and for that reason we should not be allowed to vote. Maybe the bureaucrats should devise a constitution that we all understand; otherwise it would be entirely ill advised to vote for it.

Once there are some sensible, fair minded, democratically competent representatives in Brussels, we may get a constitution that we can all understand, can fully support, and all have our say in a European wide referendum, in which all countries vote on the same day. Until then, in order to safeguard our rights and our freedoms, we must continue to say ‘NO’.

Jeremy Paxman interview with George Galloway

The question repeatedly asked by Mr Paxman of Mr Galloway crossed the line in terms of professionalism, relevance, common courtesy and racism.

This sort of journalism has no place at the BBC.

I fully expect the producer and the interviewer to be called before a disciplinary board and a full review to be carried out.

Please do not misunderstand this complaint; the BBC has every right, and indeed a duty, to question Mr. Galloway about his actions. However, the actual question posed by Mr Paxman could not possibly yield any useful information.

Mr. Paxman may argue that he was only trying to provoke a reaction; however it is the BBC’s job to report the news, not to make the news.

If Mr. Paxman was interviewing a murderer, then he would have every right to ask a question such as ‘why did you murder John Doe?’

The question asked by Mr. Paxman was "Are you proud of having driven out of Parliament one f the very few black people there?"

Thousands Die! Blood Sucking Parasites cause chaos in Iraq

When reading a forum post on the web, I always like to read the little quotations people add to their signatures. A most topical one which I read recently was “Never have I seen a word as accurate as politics, poly meaning ‘many’ and tic being a blood-sucking parasite”.

Should we more properly refer to the US president, George Bush, or the UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair, as the chief blood sucking parasites?

The election process is one of these occasions when we have to endure these blood sucking parasites asking us to allow them to continue their plunder.

We should not mention, and maybe best forget, free train tickets, fast tracking nanny grannies, our need for one legged Romanian roofers, Andrew Gilligan, who appears to have been sacked for being as close to the truth as one may dare, or that little adventure in Iraq.

No need for headlines like “Thousands Die! Blood Sucking Parasites cause chaos in Iraq”.

Remember parasites do not mourn the dead. They just move on to their next victims. Thousand die, Tony and George move on. With nepotism rife and sycophants rampant, democracy will die!

An election is our chance to remove the parasites. We must remove the parasites.