Telemarketer Blows Whistle on Tape-Altering Scam

Recently, Florida-based telemarketing firm Epixtar is frequently accused of cramming an extra $30 onto phone charges of small businesses, yet has proof of legality by recording their calls. Until they laid off some people, one of whom has blown the whistle. The companies' cramming tactics become "legal" by altering those taped recordings to include a quick statement about the $30 charge. MSNBC has the article, including a short audio clip of a sample call.

Re:Morality?

[Jason1729]

As long as the employees were getting a big enough piece of the pie, they kept quiet. They should be charged with aiding in the crime.

Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]

Different ethic standards?

[WegianWarrior]

"The company feels it operates ethically and has not done anything wrong," Nasca said.

If you're getting anrgy phonecalls from the people who are giving you money (more or less by voluntarely), you're probaly doing something wrong and / or unethically. Wether you give a damn is another matter entirely... many a sucxessfull business (spammers etc) depends on pissing people off.

Re:Morality?

[Planesdragon]

Because once you air this sort of thing, it sort of kills your career.

It's often better to voice your concerns internally, and work to improve the system from within.

I find it very moral to give a company a chance to improve itself. (How long a chance? About as long as it takes for the would-be-whistleblower to find a better job.)

Reality

[Kris_J]

If you're working at one of these places you're doing it for the money, not for a warm feeling. Morality is a luxury many people can not afford.

Re:Morality?

[rodgerd]

People don't do telemarketing jobs because they have in-demand skills and a big pile-o-cash to fall back on if they get laid off and can't find another job once word gets out they rat on the boss.

It may be the right thing to do, but being in the right doesn't keep you off the streets, unfortunately.

Re:Morality?

[RWarrior(fobw)]

> Why do only former employees report this sort of
> thing?

I worked at a newspaper [fwst.com] once. In my state, it is legal to carry a concealed firearm if you are licensed to do so. An employer or business may prohibit even licenced holders from carrying their weapons on the premises, and this newspaper does.

My supervisor didn't have such a license, because she found it too restrictive to bother with, in part because she couldn't take her weapon into bars. Instead, she worked a couple of nights a month as a volunteer patrol officer and was certified and licensed as a peace officer in Texas (having had a previous career as a full-time police officer). As a peace officer, she could carry her weapon anywhere, anytime she wanted to. That included bars, restaurants, and her place of regular employment, despite the no-guns policy.

The employer's representative had a meeting with her and they let her know in no uncertain terms that, under the law, while they couldn't prevent her from bringing her weapon to work, there were lots of reasons to fire people.

As a consequence, she left her weapon in the car when she came to work.

People who work for telemarketers typically aren't well paid, aren't in it because they love it, and do have families to support and bills that way outstrip their meager incomes, especially in bust economies where unemployment is rising.

It is illegal to fire people for whistle-blowing under state and federal whistle-blowing statues. A person so terminated can recover in a number of ways. Regrettably, most people aren't aware of their rights and even if they are aware of them, do not know how or do not have the money to invoke and protect them.

Besides, there are lots of reasons to fire people.

Re:Fun things to say to Telemarketers

[evilviper]

That may be stuff that is amusing to individuals, but it isn't exactly legally binding material. When they ask you if you want to order something, and you say "yeah, just in time, the bank hates bounced checks", you still gave a positive answer to the question.

I find it much better to know the laws, and ask them a million and one questions that they legally have to answer.

"What's the name of your boss??? And how do you spell 'Bob'? Slower! Again! Didn't quite catch that... Okay, and his last name? How do you spell that?" etc.

Waste enough of their time, and you'll feel much better, partly because they'll never be stupid enough to call you again.

Of course, with the federal do-not-call list, we may just see the end of telemarketers.

Re:Morality?

[Billly Gates]

If you had bills to pay and a wife and a kid to support, what kind of morality would it be to scew them and yourself?

Unfortunatly we live under capitalism and we need to bendover when necessary to support ourselves and our families. If you are already canned then why not. But it will kill your career if you can not get a reference from a former employer if you do it while on the job.

I had a friend who was pissed off at a verbally abusive boss and he almost quit. His wife threatened to divorce him if he left and forced him to bend over. He eventually found another job and then quit to satisfy his wife and daughter. They recently just bought a house and had trouble selling the old one and they both had college loans to pay off. This was why his wife was frantic.

Its not fair and I believe it sucks but this is the way the system works. If I had kids they would be more important to me then a few pissed off people at my employer.

Also you need a good credit report for further employment and a future house or college loan. Even if your single and have no family. Which was the case with my friend since he was close to the edge. Otherwise his wife would of been more lenient.

Infact I was turned down from a job about a month ago because I forgot to mail a check to Linuxmagazine back in 1999 after subscribing. It came 2 months late. With a poor economy, HR can do whatever it is they want to filter you out. It sucks but if you have no job you still need to pay the bills or yourself and others in your family will be screwed.

Best way to handle telemarketers...

[Winterblink]

The best thing to do is to say nothing except that you're not interested, and hang up. Add some expletives for effect if you desire. I've had to deal with some real pushy ones too, and it's amazing how hard they'll try to keep you from hanging up until you say yes to whatever crap they're selling.

The worst was a local newspaper calling around for new subscriptions. He starts out saying what paper he's calling about and asks whether I receive their paper. I say no. Then he starts off on a sales pitch, which I interrupt to say that the reason I don't receive the paper already is that I don't WANT it, since I get my news from the net. The guy actually tries to continue on reading the script or whatever he's got in front of him... took a couple tries to be polite about not wanting what he's selling before I just flat out said "Listen to the words coming out of my mouth. Not interested." and hung up on the guy. In retrospect that should have been my first response.

I'm amazed people still sit on the phone with these bottom-feeders and answer their questions, unwillingly signing themselves up for a ton of crap. It's not hard to tell them to piss off instead of falling for their tactics.

Re:Morality?

[jimhill]

Stealing from people is never right. Doing it over the phone with credit card information doesn't make it right. Doing it because you have no useful skills in a down economy doesn't make it right. Doing it because your kid needs fed doesn't make it right.

This is not "vinyl siding salesmen piss me off." This is a company employing fast-talkers to act like phone company fact-checkers to rip businesses off. If you are willing to work for them, You Are A Thief. It really is that simple, folks. No amount of off-the-job fast-talking will change that.

Re:Morality?

[Billly Gates]

" It is illegal to fire people for whistle-blowing under state and federal whistle-blowing statues. A person so terminated can recover in a number of ways. Regrettably, most people aren't aware of their rights and even if they are aware of them, do not know how or do not have the money to invoke and protect them.

Besides, there are lots of reasons to fire people."

Problem 1 is that it costs money for justice or to prove your innocense in America. Since your fired you no longer have income to pay the legal fee's.

Problem 2 is you have to prove why you were terminated. The burden of proof is usually on the guy who has the least resources. A corporation can make shit up or can find a reason to can you.

I heard stories from other slashdotters of getting fired for leaving the lights on after work, coming in 5 minutes late, spending more then 30 minutes for lunch, being assigned something impossible to finish on purpose so you look bad during a performance review, etc. All of these cases had to do with things like threatening to join unions, complain about there bosses to hr, to threatening to quit, to just about anything.

After all this shit HR will force you to sign a self incriminating document as part of your pink slip to receive severance pay. If you refuse they will then terminate you for sub-ordination and disciplinary issues.

Either way in court they have documents to prove that your performance was the reason you were let go.

Last lets say by a miracle you won and your employer was forced to rehire you. Would you really want to continue to work there? Don't you think they will make you quit one way or another? Kind of like the weird guy in the movie office space. (they cut off his paychecks and moved him into the basement, and forced him to setup bug traps)

I was a merchandiser once and this lady came in late 3 out of 5 days a week and always complained. She filed a sexual harrasment complaint when my boss made her sign a document stating that she was about to be canned and she had 60 days to straighten her act or else. He fired her after she refused to sign it and cursed him off. HR forced him to rehire her after the complaint was filed. Anyway he gave her 3 times as much work to do as anyone else until she quit. Same is true here.

Poster didn't read the article...

[0x20]

The companies' cramming tactics become "legal" by altering those taped recordings to include a quick statement about the $30 charge.

That's not what the article says. It hints that the tape was cut off immediately after the person responded "Yes" to a group of questions asked quickly all at once, removing the rest of their response. Which is still bad but not nearly as bad as inserting bits into the conversation that never took place. I'm sure that's not far off, if it's not already happening in some cases, but it didn't happen here according to the MSNBC article.

Re:Fun things to say to Telemarketers

[Phroggy]

Of course, the best thing to say is:

"Please add this number to your Do Not Call list."

(Note the important difference between "add" and "remove" - many people ask for their number to be removed, which does nothing - the company has plenty of lists of people to call, so if you get removed from one list, you're bound to show up on several more.)

Re:Morality?

[Anonymous Coward]

"...the gun won't be there -- again, in the hands of a woman trained in its use -- in case it is ever needed."

You never know when raiding hordes are going to attack. Have you seen those credit card commercials? If those poor consumers in the commerical had an armed FEMALE around maybe they wouldn't be forced to switch to Capital One.

I don't know what being FEMALE has to do with anything, but Henry thought it was important so I'm emphasizing that SHE is an armed FEMALE!

The fact is, that the odds of that gun killing a innocent person went down when that idiot was told what would be obvious to a sane person: "Don't bring your gun to work." The odds of that WOMAN defending her office from some sort of attack were pretty much zero anyway, so HER coworkers are safer.

Having a gun, in what I assume is an office full of nerds and cubicles like most offices, increases the odds of a gun related incident from almost none to definitely some.

If SHE is so well trained in firearms use, why the hell is SHE leaving the weapon in the car, which Henry seems to think is not a secure place for a gun? Isn't keeping your weapon secure part of responsible gun ownership. Why not leave it at home, in a safe, where there is zero chance of it killing an innocent person? If she is dumb enough to leave it in the car under any circumstances I think that shows the management was right to not want her to have it in the office, because of the whole moron plus gun being equal to bad thing.

Henry seems to imply that it's the management's fault there is a gun in a car in the parking lot. I don't think the management wants the gun in the parking lot either. I'm sure the management is baffled why a gun is involved in such a setting in the first place, and so am I.

BTW if the management does decide to fire her, I suggest they call the swat team first. I mean that would be a time for her superiors to ask themselves: is she going out to her car to leave, or to get the gun?

Re:Morality?

[Ian Bicking]

No, that's wrong. What this company was doing was illegal and fraudulent. Companies like this cannot be reformed, you can't improve a system where people knowingly and willingly commit fraud. Hell, you can't believe them when they say they've improved, maybe they've just realized they have to hide their actions from you too.

Not to mention that in a case like this people have been wronged by the company, and deserve redress, which will never occur due to internal reform.

Maybe if you believe the company is doing things that are unethical but legal, then you can try to reform from within. But when it's illegal (or deeply unethical) you have a moral duty to blow the whistle, even if it's going to suck for you. You aren't allowed to put ethics aside because they aren't convenient.

Re:Morality?

[enkidu]

If she were to go crazy, would it matter if the company wanted her to leave her gun in her car? Does the sign "No robbing of the bank allowed" deter any bank robbers? Perhaps you think that you should simply fire all employees who have access to a gun? Heck, you knew that they were a potential danger to the company. Where does liability begin?

Also its illegal in most if not all states to bring a weapon to work unless its the military or a police department.

Uhmmm, not in most states, and especially not Florida. In fact the reverse is true, military and police departments are one of the places where concealed weapons are consistently not permitted (including courthouses, jails, legislative buildings and airports).

I think this is bs but lawyers make a living doing scummy shit as this.

No argument from me.

Re:Morality?

[HaggiZ]

You dang americans with your pro-gun propoganda.

The employers primary concern would be their employees. If she is so well trained in its use you would expect her to know better than to leave it in a relatively unsafe car.

Re:Morality?

[signifying nothing]

Stealing from people is never right. [...] Doing it because your kid needs fed doesn't make it right.

I am not commenting on this particular case, but I can't agree with the above. It is only true if rights to property are more sacrosanct than human life.

In most civlised countries, people consider life more important, and would not convict for theft someone who had no other reasonable choice to feed themselves.

Re:Reality

[sould]

Morality is a luxury many people can not afford.

Fortunately, anonymity is a luxury everyone can afford.

There's no reason that the media couldn't have been tipped off earlier with an email from [e-mail].

Don't use morality as an exuse for their timidity.

Scary Paradigm

[anubi]

I find it scary when one incurs charges by just a quickie phone call. They have their script all rehearsed and phrased where they can blurt out so called binding agreements, and we are "socially expected" to be polite and give a "timely" response, like on the order of seconds.

What scares me is businesses are arranging with banks on direct account withdrawals, and checking account numbers are pretty easy to come by. I mean, if you have ever paid something by check, they have it. And now, they do not even need a signed check to get withdrawal. So you could see charges showing up on your checking account that you have no idea what is.

And dealing with a business is kinda scary, because they have links to Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian. They can mess up your credit and then you have to straighten that out too. You might as well pay them their money just not to have to argue about it. I mean, like me - if I get my credit all screwed up over some business that slipped a charge on me for some "professional services listing" and I refused to pay, I might be denied a job because of that stain. And they know this.

So, I try to keep any monthly billing I have to as few of entities as possible. Once a company has legitimate billing access, they have a foot in the door that a telemarketer can use to fool me into thinking I am doing business with somebody I am already doing business with... like the way they bamboozled the guy with the trick 4-in-one question that if he said "yes" ( which was the obvious answer to three of the questions - if the name, address, and number was correct ), he implies acceptance of the quickly stated fourth question - that he is authorized to modify his billing.

With a business model out now that depends on signing up monthly billing, I see the opportunity for scamming artists soaring, as the number of open accounts, ripe for modification, soars.

I continue all attempts to make purchases on a per-instance basis, meaning I pay full price for the product and close the sale, leaving no loose ends. None of this "support", "warranty", "revolving charge account", etc. I walk out the door with the product, and the vendor has been paid in full. That way things don't change after the agreement has been made.

I have done way too much business already with businesses ( especially insurance companies, and any company having anything to do with investments ) that love to send me tons of paper describing changes after I have agreed to something.

Damm, I just don't have time to read it all. I really *hate* to do business under that business model.

This is the thing that had me so worked up over the Lexmark Printer thing ( where Static Control Concepts tried to make an aftermarket replacement toner cartridge but ran afoul of DMCA because Lexmark put a chip in the toner cartridge, and SCC could not legally duplicate the chip. ). Once this paradigm catches on in the business community, I fear we will see the end of going to WalMart to get replacement aftermarket goods for our day-to-day expendables. Companies could demand and get agreements for monthly billings, and once that's in place, the door is wide open for rampant trickery to modify those agreements.

Re:Morality?

[Chief Crazy Chicken]

Because once you air this sort of thing, it sort of kills your career.

It's often better to voice your concerns internally, and work to improve the system from within.

. . .

Jesus of Nazareth did not die so we could enjoy eggs and chocolate bunnies!

Jesus of Nazareth did not voice his concerns internally and work to improve the system from within. True change requires true sacrifice, which few are willing to make.

Re:what are the stipulations?

[togtog]

One more thing, in the case of prostitution using the service is completely optional. Whereas in telemarketing it crosses the boundries of the home. There is little escape from it. It's really a complete reversal from prostitution in how unethical it is.

-tog

Re:Best way to handle telemarketers...

[darkmeridian]

I once got a telemarketing call from a woman who, after I said no to her first spiel, actually told me that she got paid by how far down the script she got. She sounded as if she really needed the money (why else would she be doing this?) so I listened for about a minute or two more. I said no again, and then she thanked me and hung up.

The point I would like to make is that the telemarketers are people too. They just aren't as fortunate as we are since they are stuck in a crummy job. Don't scream curses at them; imagine if that was your sister on the other end. Just say no, please take me off your list, and if you really are pissed say goodbye and hangup. If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

Or you can do what I do, say you're twelve and your parents aren't home.

Re:what are the stipulations?

[drinkypoo]

Actually, I think that a prostiute is lest morally detestable than a telemarketer - at least prostitutes can feasably enjoy their job, and it pays better.

Uh, your post made little sense in general (I hope English is not your first language) but this last sentence really takes the proverbial cake. The fact that you enjoy your job and get paid well does not make you moral. A CEO of an overly large software and operating systems company utilizing unfair marketing practices to crush hopes and dreams, and a contract killer could both have those things in common.

The moral defense of prostitution is that it is a victimless crime, which makes you wonder why it is a crime at all. As George Carlin says, "Selling is legal; fucking is legal. Why isn't selling fucking legal?" As far as I can tell, it is religious in nature, based on the prohibition of extramarital sex. Sex, even for money, is still a fairly beautiful and awe-inspiring thing. People not getting laid is probably a significant cause of misbehavior in this world, and so I favor anything outside of rape or coercion that lets more people have it.

Re:Morality?

[drinkypoo]

Cook County, FL, once had the highest occurrence rate of stranger rape. The NRA sponsored free firearms awareness classes for women, and helped them get a concealed carry permit thusly. A couple guys got shot, and the stranger rape rate dropped to basically nothing, but shot up in surrounding areas.

The world is a dangerous place, and women feel that they need additional protection. Such protection exists, and in the hands of a responsible and reasonably well-trained person with a sense of responsibility, can be a powerful weapon on the side of good, just as they can be on the side of evil. They are also the only way that a 120lb woman can fight off an attacker of arbitrary size without spending several years practicing martial arts, a commitment in time that most are not willing to make.

I know I shouldn't feed trolls like yourself, but I get upset when people make these blatant attempts to spread FUD. The world is a dangerous place. There are many people short on morality who would like to take the things you have away for whatever reason; They feel they deserve it more than you do, or they just want it and take it. It results from poor upbringing in which children are not punished for their misbehavior because their parents don't care enough about their future and that of the world.

Re:Morality?

[Anonymous Coward]

Just a hint: if what you're using for a moral system doesn't allow you to help people by reporting a crime that has been committed against them, then your moral system isn't worth spit and you should get a new one.

Re:Morality?

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, I think that's easier said than done in today's economy.

It is always easier said than done. But if your ethical standards change based on sheer convenience, then your "standard" isn't worth anything at all.

Is it okay to steal other people's money, even to feed your family, just because you don't want to try to have to find another job? So what if jobs are hard to come by?

The fact that you don't have, or might lose, a job doesn't give you the right to commit robbery.

Re:Morality?

[jedidiah]

It's time for you to move out of your mother's basement.

Simply put, blood is thicker than water and moral pomposity won't feed the kids.

While it would be nice if we could all live perfect lives. The sad truth is that most of us are little more than worker ants doing whatever necessary merely to survive. Unless you were born with a silver spoon so far down your throat it was coming back out your *ss, "moral superiority" is simply something else you can't afford.

Re:Morality?

[Planesdragon]

What are you talking about? This applies to priests, lawyers, and psychiatrists.

Those are the ones forbidden to come forth. It's a different state than "not being compelled."

It does not apply to employees. Being an employee does not absolve you of the responsibility to report crimes.

You DO NOT have a responsibility to report crimes unless you're a police officer or a lawyer. You have no right to impede investigation into crimes, but you are not compelled to come forth and testify about every "crime" you see.

By that standard no one in Enron broke the law -- they were all in eaah other's confidence. Your conclusion is absurd.

Y'know, you really should come up with a better model of absurdity.

No one in the Enron case who didn't have a special complusion to be honest--the CEO and the CFO and the auditor--broke any law by being silent about things that they may or may not have. And, similarly, those that did come forward didn't break any law either.

Please go look up the difference between 'compel', 'forbid', and 'allow.' They ARE different, you know.

Re:Morality?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Moral superiority"? I guess I missed the point where lying and stealing became acceptable business practices.

I guess it's too bad that you have to lug around that extra three pounds in your head as a spinal cord alone would suffice for your "worker ant" life.