[asterisk-biz] The Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre Demands DID Disconnected: Is that legal?

Wed Jun 4 12:19:28 CDT 2014

I guess it all depends how big and how important customer you are for your
vendor. For us we get email from our vendors and they work with us.
Of-course if we find the end user doing some kind of fraud, we disconnect
the number and account.
Again we also take the action on how big the customer is and how good
history he has. If one number out of 500, we work with them, if the new
customer and have only one number, then we got the bad guy.

Best,

Jai Rangi
www.didforsale.com.

On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Rick Orford <rick at comcanada.ca> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We've had this already a few times… its not an easy one!
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Rick Orford
>
> ComCanada Communications Inc.
> www.comcanada.ca
> Tel: (604) 998-4500 *x6008*
> Fax: (604) 998-4501
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Peter Beckman <beckman at angryox.com> wrote:
>
>> So one of my carriers today informed me that they had disconnected one of
>> my DIDs. They got a letter from the "Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre" that said
>> that someone complained about a call they received from that DID and that
>> they should disconnect it.
>>
>> Here's the letter.
>>
>>     "Good morning,
>>
>>     Please find below telephone number(s) that have been reported to the
>>     Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC) The CAFC is a police run centre that
>>     collects complaint information with regard to fraud. The CAFC is
>>     working with numerous telephone service providers to advise when
>>     suspected fraudsters are using their company to facilitate a criminal
>>     offence - fraud. It is important to note that it is a Criminal Offence
>>     contrary to Section 140 of the Criminal Code of Canada to make a false
>>     complaint to the police.
>>
>>     The attached information provides your company notice that the
>>     telephone number(s) is subject of a fraud report. It is being provided
>>     to your company as our report indicates it is being used for unlawful
>>     purposes and as such may be in contravention of your terms of
>> services.
>>     We are asking that if you deem it is being used for an unlawful
>> purpose
>>     (fraudulent activity) that consideration be made to terminate the
>>     number.
>>
>>     This information is being supplied to your company and is intended
>>     solely for the addressee. It is not to Be Reclassified, Copied,
>>     Reproduced, Used in Whole or Part or Further Disseminated, Without the
>>     Consent of the Originator.
>>
>>     CAFC - [Some six digit number] [Carrier Name] [DID In question]
>>
>>     Fraud Analyst / Analyste de fraude
>>     Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre / Le centre antifraude du Canada
>>     Royal Canadian Mounted Police / Gendarmerie royale du Canada
>>
>>     Fraud…Recognize It…Report It… Stop It
>>
>>     This email and any attachment it includes is subject to third party
>>     rule. It is not to Be Reclassified, Copied, Reproduced, Used in Whole
>>     or Part or Further Disseminated, Without the Consent of the
>>     Originator."
>>
>> First off, the CAFC used to be called "PhoneBusters"[1] and was started by
>> a citizen, Barry Elliott, in January 1993[2]. They don't do
>> investigations,
>> just accept complaints[3].
>>
>> Additionally, they don't even include the complaint, just that someone
>> complained. Is getting someone's phone service turned off as easy as a
>> single complaint to the CAFC and the telecom carriers bend over?!?
>>
>> As a US-based carrier, unless I get a judge-signed subpoena and verify it
>> with my legal representative, I don't do anything. I don't even attempt to
>> judge what my customers are doing with their phone numbers, because if I
>> do
>> for just one call or one customer I open my business to legal liability
>> for
>> EVERY CALL and EVERY CUSTOMER.
>>
>> According to the Telecommunications Act of Canada[4]:
>>
>> * Except where the Commission approves otherwise, a Canadian carrier shall
>>   not control the content or influence the meaning or purpose of
>>   telecommunications carried by it for the public.
>>
>> * No Canadian carrier shall, in relation to the provision of a
>>   telecommunications service or the charging of a rate for it, unjustly
>>   discriminate or give an undue or unreasonable preference toward any
>>   person, including itself, or subject any person to an undue or
>>   unreasonable disadvantage.
>>
>> Has anyone else had their carrier shut off DIDs based on a non-verified
>> consumer complaint? `
>>
>> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Anti-Fraud_Centre
>> [2] http://www.antifraudcentre-centreantifraude.ca/english/
>> cafc_aboutus.html
>> [3] http://www.antifraudcentre-centreantifraude.ca/english/
>> stopit_faq.html#investigate
>> [4] http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/sc-1993-c-38/latest/
>> sc-1993-c-38.html
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---------------
>> Peter Beckman                                                  Internet
>> Guy
>> beckman at angryox.com
>> http://www.angryox.com/
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---------------
>> --
>> _____________________________________________________________________
>> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>>
>> asterisk-biz mailing list
>> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
>>
>
>
> --
> _____________________________________________________________________
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>
> asterisk-biz mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-biz/attachments/20140604/172ec841/attachment-0001.html>