Are there bogus charges on your phone bill?

Most people don’t realize it, but a telephone number is just like a credit card number. It can be used to pay for products and services. Con artists know this. For years, they’ve placed bogus charges on phone bills.

It’s a scam called cramming and from all indications it’s getting worse. According to the Federal Communications Commission, as many as 20 million Americans will get crammed this year. That is, they will be billed for products or services they do not want and did not knowingly order. 

Crammers bill for all sorts of things: credit repair, identity theft monitoring, Internet and e-mail service, psychic hotlines and diet programs, just to name a few. 

The FCC has proposed new regulations to tackle the problem. If approved, the rules would require landline phone companies to list third-party charges in a different section of the bill – to make them easier to spot. They would also be required to notify customers if they offer a service to block third-party charges. (I wrote about this in more detail in July:  FCC Proposes Crackdown on Phone-Bill Cramming.) 

“The common-sense rules proposed by the FCC will go a long way toward protecting American consumers from this abuse,” says Joel Gurin, chief of the FCC’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau. 

Maybe so, but the attorneys general in Illinois, Vermont and Nevada don’t think the FCC’s proposal goes far enough. They want the commission to ban phone companies from billing for third-party charges that are unrelated to a customer’s phone service. 

“We see this as a rampant, continuing, growing problem,” says Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan.

“Most victims don’t even know their phone bill has been crammed.” 

She’s right: an FCC study found that only 1 in 20 cramming victims realize they’ve been scammed. 

“We’ve worked for the last 10 years trying to address this issue,” says Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto. “We’ve put regulations in place working with our federal partners and most importantly notifying the public. But it’s not going away.” 

Phone companies say they can handle this
Phone companies don’t like the idea of more regulations and they totally oppose limiting their ability to bill for third parties. 

“It’s really a matter of convenience for the customer,” says Micah Caldwell, vice president of regulatory affairs for the Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance.

She says a lot of people feel more comfortable having a charge from an outside vendor placed on their phone bill rather than using a credit card or electronic transfer. 

The industry points out that its efforts to fight cramming are working. For example, AT&T reports cramming complaints dropped 89 percent between January 2010 and May 2011. 

AG Madigan does not believe the phone companies have been successful at cracking down on crammers.  She points to a recent case her office handled where the bad guys had billed nearly 10,000 customers in Illinois for credit repair services. The victims included a county coroner’s office, a restaurant and a public library’s automated dial-a-story telephone line. 

“It is not good enough to let the industry police itself because it’s not working,” Madigan says. “Instead, we’re saying we need to prevent the industry from having this problem in the first place by banning third-party charges that are unrelated to your telephone service from being put on your phone bill.” 

Walter McCormick, president of the United States Telecom Association, says phone companies are working to authenticate transactions and prevent bad actors from getting access to your phone bill.

McCormick says any customer who reports an unauthorized charge will receive “an instant credit” and be offered the option to block further charges. 

That’s not what I hear from people who complain about being crammed. For example, when David Blume of Peoria, Ill. found $35 crammed on his monthly bill, he contacted his phone company. 

“They said it had nothing to do with them and I would have to contact the companies myself,” Blume tells me. 

There’s a lot of money at stake here. Remember, phone companies get paid for handling the billing for third-party charges. According to a congressional investigation about $2 billion a year is billed this way, and most of this money goes to crammers. 

Senator Jay Rockefeller, chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, believes Congress must act. He plans to introduce legislation before the end of the year that he says will “stop this harmful practice once and for all.” (Read committee report on cramming

But for now – it’s still up to you to protect yourself. 

You do that by checking your phone bill every month. Look for charges that you don’t understand or did not authorize. This is especially important if you use automatic payment, since you’re probably less likely to look at your bill. 

Your best bet is to do what I did. Contact your phone company and see if you can put a third-party billing block on your phone line.  Then, you won’t have to worry about being crammed. 

My two cents
I commend the FCC for trying to do something about the growing problem of cramming. But the proposed rules only make it easier to spot the problem. We need to stop cramming. The proposed ban on third-party charges suggested by the AGs of Illinois, Nevada and Vermont would do that. 

I have another suggestion: make this billing an opt-in situation. Require phone companies to block all third-party charges unless you specifically agree to allow them on your phone bill. This would protect customers and give them ultimate control.

Keep in mind: The FCC’s proposed rules do not cover cell phone bills. As part of this rulemaking process, the commission is asking for comments as to whether they should apply to wireless companies. You know what I think: absolutely!

How to reduce your risk
Sometimes, there’s nothing you can do to prevent a determined crammer from adding fake charges to your phone bill. However, you can avoid giving would-be scammers the opportunity by being wise to some common ploys:

  • Enter to win: You think you’re entering a contest, but you’re actually giving your information to strangers who might be up to no good. Before you fill out a contest entry form, consider whether you know the company, and be sure to read the fine print. Shady promoters sometimes use an entry form as “permission” to enroll you in a service. You find out you’re enrolled only if you notice the fee on your phone bill.
  • Join the club: The ad says it’s free, and in fact, the number you call to join may be toll-free. All you have to do is say your name and “I want the service.” But you may end up enrolled in a club or service program that comes with a monthly charge on your phone bill.
  • File a complaint: If you are crammed and can’t get the problem solved, contact the Federal Communications Commission. They are one of the few federal agencies that will actually go to bat for you. You can reach themonline or by phone at: 1-888-CALL-FCC. You should also file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission which also prosecutes cramming cases.

More: Cramming: Mystery Phone Charges

 

Discuss this post

Don't worry...the private markets always work without government interference so we should expect the industry to self correct right republicans? Isn't that they way you think it works?

  • 5 votes
Reply#1 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:27 AM EST

Call your phone company today and ask, "Have I been crammed, and if so how have I been crammed?"

We need to get to the bottom of this.

  • 2 votes
#1.1 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:16 PM EST

"Thank you, sir! May I please have another?"

    #1.2 - Fri Nov 11, 2011 12:31 PM EST
    Reply

    Funny how corporations always claim they do something for "...the convenience of our customers". But if you review the situation closely, you see that it is really more about their making lots of money. Their constant claim that regulations will "cost jobs" doesn't fool me either. I have no sympathy for them at all...if they bothered to do a better job to protect their customers, no one would have to propose regulations. The price of their greed and indifference is government interference. Suck it up.

    • 11 votes
    Reply#2 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:36 AM EST

    Hell, I'm more upset with all the BS surcharges and fake tax charges and fees the Phone Company slaps on the bill. I think they are worried someone is horning in on their action.....

    • 2 votes
    Reply#3 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:39 AM EST

    Oh yes, those few cents are really annoying. I've had cramming happen to me month after month. You suddenly say "holy cow, why is my phone bill $130? It should be $10!" Then you find all these services and third party BS you didn't authorize and it takes weeks to straighten out.

    Suck up the few cents. They go toward actually providing you a service. Services like dialing 911 instead of separate 10 digit numbers for police, fire, and ambulance that it varies from town to town.

      #3.1 - Fri Nov 11, 2011 4:03 AM EST
      Reply

      Never heard of this until today. Simply filling out a form with your number on there seems like it shouldn't be enough to authorize a charge. Whatever happened to signatures? I had to use one when I signed my phone contract, my credit card bills, and the checks I send. There should be some alert when the first charge hits that allows you to accept or deny. If you deny but legitimately owe for a service, then you'll get a bill in the mail.

        Reply#4 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:44 AM EST

        You should get out more. Digital and verbal approval is getting to be common practice.

          #4.1 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:07 PM EST
          Reply

          My daughter got scammed on her cell phone. She received at text offering her a daily horiscope. She answered it, which meant she accepted, then one minute later, declined the service. I didn't notice there was a charge for it each month for almost a year. When I called, one of the automated prompts basically said "If you're a parent and your child signed up for our service, your are responsible for paying." I got to a human and argued, then demanded an accounting of the phone charges since they began. They made the mistake of sending me a print-out of all the "horiscopes" they'd sent to my 12-year-old daughter. And, some were of an adult nature. When I called them out on soliciting children and sending adult content, they finally got nervous enough to refund my money. After that I put a block on all my kids' cell phones. But even that does't always work.

          • 4 votes
          Reply#5 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:58 AM EST

          I agree with Kelly. All those taxes, fees and surcharges! What the heck are they doing with the 15.3% for the Federal Universal Service Fund? That organization has been mismanaged from the get-go. I would really like to be saving 15.3% to pay for my health insurance premiums and retirement. Instead, I'm subsidizing everyone else!

          • 2 votes
          Reply#6 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:58 AM EST

          Do you know what the Federal Universal Fund is on the Bill?Have you ever heard of the Assurance Plan?Well I have.That Federal Universal Fund goes to pay for this.

          Assurance is a plan set up by the government through that out rageous Federal Universal Fund.This gives free CELL PHONES to anyone on welfare!People qualifying have to be on medicade,food stamps and a whole host of welfare goodies in order to qualify!

          That Gauls the Hell out of me.I have to struggle to pay for cell phone, which by the way I use only for emergencies and these Clowns get it for free, out of mine and yours pocket book.

          I intend to call the phone company and DEMAND THEY TAKE THIS OFF MY BILL.If they don't then I plan to with hold that charge every month.

          The Federal Government has NO RIGHT to force people to give to this OUT RAGEUS FUND,TO SUPPLY THESE PEOPLE WITH CELL PHONES,AND I HAVE TO WORK MY FAT BACKEND OFF TO GET MY OWN.

          This has got to STOP!Absolutely Ridiculous.

          • 1 vote
          #6.1 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:04 AM EST

          how about putting a % of their property tax resposibility on the phone bill and cell phone ? They do it where I am at. I just refuse to pay for it. at 50 cents a pop a month X's all those that pay it adds up to alot of money. I have file a complant w/the FCC and no reponse. Of course they haven't cut off my phones...yet But I will not pay it .

          • 1 vote
          #6.2 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:32 AM EST

          I ditched my landed line a year ago and haven't missed it. I use my cell phone and MagicJack on my computer. I pay $15 every three months with Virgin (don't know if this is still offered). I seldom use my cell so I don't end up using more minutes than allowed. It is just used for emergencies (I have an 87 year old mother). The MagicJack is $20 per year with unlimited calls. They now offer one where you don't have to use it through a computer, but just plug into the wall. I've had my MagicJack for a year and use it just about exclusively. The only down side is there is no 911 (my mother has a landed line next door). I got fed up with the phone company and have learned to live without it.

            #6.3 - Mon Nov 14, 2011 5:36 PM EST
            Reply

            I was crammed by an "internet problem solving" company on my phone bill. The first month, I did not notice the charge, then the second month, I noticed it and called the phone company. They told me I had to call the number of the company listed on the phone bill. I called them and they readily withdrew the charges, but the kicker is, I do not have internet access at home, so why would I sign up for an "internet problem solver" service? I think that the phone company should stick to billing us for phone service, and the these other companies do their own billing!

            • 1 vote
            Reply#7 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:02 AM EST

            You know why there are none of these charges on my bill? Because I changed to a packaged VOIP plan over 5 years ago and told Qwest to stuff it. Qwest used to do these dirty tricks ALL THE TIME. They were terrible in every way imaginable. But I said asta baby and never looked back!

            • 1 vote
            Reply#8 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:12 AM EST

            Easy solution to all of this cramming and it can be used for ALL companies (not just phone).

            Companies/corporations can ONLY bill for services they directly do. No 3rd party billing.

            • 2 votes
            Reply#9 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:30 AM EST

            Just another reason why I'm happy I switched to VoIP. Landlines are so........1998.

            • 1 vote
            Reply#10 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:31 AM EST

            Cell Phone Bill Surprises?  Extra Fees and Bill Cramming?  Stop It...switch to a non-contract cell carrier....like Boost Mobile.  No more monthly cell bill surprises.

              Reply#11 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:31 AM EST

              The industry points out that its efforts to fight cramming are working. For example, AT&T reports cramming complaints dropped 89 percent between January 2010 and May 2011.

              If this is remotely true, I'd bet money that it's only because the phone company (AT&T) has gone to greater lengths to make your bill harder to decipher.

              As to the argument by the phone companies that they're somehow "doing customers a favor," I'm thinking the customers would tend to disagree. But, how about we institute an opt-out provision and let the customers speak for themselves?

                Reply#12 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:07 AM EST

                I was getting these cramming charges a few months ago, they add a few dollars to your bill every month, just barely noticeable, I called the phone company and they put a block on my line...no more cramming.

                • 1 vote
                Reply#13 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:46 AM EST

                Me too.

                  #13.1 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:09 PM EST
                  Reply

                  Micah Caldwell, vice president of regulatory affairs for the Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance.

                  says a lot of people feel more comfortable having a charge from an outside vendor placed on their phone bill rather than using a credit card or electronic transfer.

                  I wonder how many of those people understand that unlike a credit card, there is no reliable way to contest a charge.

                  The legal protections with a credit card charge are better than a debit card and hugely better than putting stuff on a telephone bill. This is also why I never use AUTO Billing. once a company has your bank account and access authorization, you can not stop them from drafting your account. There is no STOP CHECK option.

                  Using the phone bill is crazy dangerous compared to a credit card.

                    Reply#14 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:47 AM EST

                    I had an 'advertising' company do that to my business line. I NEVER spoke to them. They called and I ignored their calls (I am inundated with people calling for 'the owner'.) One time my husband picks up the phone and takes a name and number for them, which I didn't respond to. Next thing, there's a $30 charge on my phone line for advertising...They said one of my employees approved it. That's great, I don't HAVE employees! I googled them and found that they do that a lot...hoping that businesses won't notice from one dept. to another.

                      Reply#15 - Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:03 PM EST

                      Phone companies make a nice profit percentage off of these crammers. Now that they're getting caught, some of the phone companies are trying to move those services in house so it no longer appears as a 3rd party charge.

                        Reply#16 - Fri Nov 11, 2011 2:47 AM EST

                        I prefer pre-paid cell phones because if you don't keep any money on account, it's impossible for anyone to charge against it. Unfortunately, T-Mo has just forced all of us who were on certain pre-paid plans over to post-paid. I'm sad and looking at other options.

                        --mark d.

                          Reply#18 - Fri Nov 11, 2011 5:45 AM EST
                          You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                          As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.