|
Scam call from 08716641448
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:21:39 GMT, "Brian Gaff"
wrote: Are they not a bit thick actually allowing their number to be seen. They probably realise a lot of people are like me - if I see "withheld" on the CLI display I don't answer the 'phone. |
Scam call from 08716641448
Bob Moore wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:21:39 GMT, "Brian Gaff" wrote: Are they not a bit thick actually allowing their number to be seen. They probably realise a lot of people are like me - if I see "withheld" on the CLI display I don't answer the 'phone. You should be aware that some job agencies do this. I've told one or two they are being silly... Andy |
Scam call from 08716641448
"Bob Moore" wrote in message ... On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:21:39 GMT, "Brian Gaff" wrote: Are they not a bit thick actually allowing their number to be seen. They probably realise a lot of people are like me - if I see "withheld" on the CLI display I don't answer the 'phone. Ideally the phone should be programmable to say "This phone is programed so that it does not accept number withheld calls." Bill |
Scam call from 08716641448
"Andy Champ" wrote in message ... Bob Moore wrote: On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:21:39 GMT, "Brian Gaff" wrote: Are they not a bit thick actually allowing their number to be seen. They probably realise a lot of people are like me - if I see "withheld" on the CLI display I don't answer the 'phone. You should be aware that some job agencies do this. I've told one or two they are being silly... A lot of hospitals do it, so when their estates staff ring us we can't get back to them. Bill |
Scam call from 08716641448
In article , Bill Wright wrote:
Are they not a bit thick actually allowing their number to be seen. They probably realise a lot of people are like me - if I see "withheld" on the CLI display I don't answer the 'phone. Ideally the phone should be programmable to say "This phone is programed so* that it does not accept number withheld calls." I wouldn't have a problem with it being illegal to make a phone call that didn't declare its source. You can't drive down the road in a car without a number plate, anyone calling at anyone's door is expected to identify themselves, and for centuries any kind of social interaction has always been preceeded by introductions in which names are exchanged, so there seems no reason why anyone should assume the right to be anonymous on the phone. The technology may not be implemented everywhere yet, but the mobile phone companies manage it so it can't be impossible. Rod. |
Scam call from 08716641448
In article ,
Bob Moore wrote: Are they not a bit thick actually allowing their number to be seen. They probably realise a lot of people are like me - if I see "withheld" on the CLI display I don't answer the 'phone. Sadly this happens with lots of modern switchboards - doing a call back wouldn't get you to the person who had phoned. They can, for example, use dedicated outgoing lines. Although you'd have thought there could be a work round. -- *Gaffer tape - The Force, light and dark sides - holds the universe together* Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
Scam call from 08716641448
In article , Mike Henry wrote:
NB: The "TPS registration" part of BT Privacy is optional. And the third part of BT Privacy is a nice set of "go away salespeople" stickers for your front door. What I really need are some "go away Jehovah's witnesses I'm not in the mood for a religious debate and I'll probably put your leaflets through the shredder without even reading them" stickers. Rod. |
Scam call from 08716641448
Adrian C wrote:
Adrian C wrote: Remember to dial 1280-{number} once in a while.... Er... if your are switched out with another provider. ......then I think CLID etc has to be supplied by that other provider. If you're on CPS Override, then you should still be able to call via BT using 1280. -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
Scam call from 08716641448
Roderick Stewart wrote:
I wouldn't have a problem with it being illegal to make a phone call that didn't declare its source. You can't drive down the road in a car without a number plate, anyone calling at anyone's door is expected to identify themselves, and for centuries any kind of social interaction has always been preceeded by introductions in which names are exchanged, so there seems no reason why anyone should assume the right to be anonymous on the phone. The technology may not be implemented everywhere yet, but the mobile phone companies manage it so it can't be impossible. It's interesting that it's impossible to send an SMS text message without declaring the source number, yet you are able to hide your mobile phone's number when making the voice call. Why the difference ? -- Mark Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply. |
Scam call from 08716641448
On 17/07/2008, Bob Moore wrote in message
: wrote: Are they not a bit thick actually allowing their number to be seen. They probably realise a lot of people are like me - if I see "withheld" on the CLI display I don't answer the 'phone. Unfortunately I have relatives who withhold their numbers. But once I've figured out the caller is trying to sell me something I do tell them I don't buy from callers who don't have their numbers showing. I once got a call from someone who described themself as my local dealer. I was in London and the number that was showing was an 0161 number (Manchester). Not only that, but the phone he was calling me on was my mobile phone, with the same exchange number that everyone else with the same mobile company had. So how did he know where I live ? Simon. -- http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HomeCinemaBanter.com