Deflecting calls from certain phone numbers?

[Stephen Tashiro]

An interesting way to deflect calls from certain phone numbers would be to have a machine that would automatically answer calls from that number (without causing your phone to ring) and play a recorded message. Then the machine could either hang-up or take a recorded message.

This would encourage phone solicitors and pollsters not to call phones that deflect their calls since it would tie up the callers phone lines. People could be creative in the message they played. It could be matter of fact like "Please do not call this number again" or devious like some unintelligible mumbling "muh -all -wuh.... -ently" that would keep the caller occupied for awhile saying "What? I'm sorry I didn't understand you. Could you repeat that again?"

[Mike Henderson]

I called one person (home phone) and got a recording that said something like, "This home does not accept solicitation calls. If you are a solicitor, hang up. If you are other than a solicitor, press 1". I pressed 1 and their phone rang.

Since most solicitor calls do not have anyone on the line when you first answer, this probably causes the solicitor calls to be rejected. I thought that was a good solution. But I don't know if it was provided by the telephone company or was an add-on thing.

Mike

[Myk Rian]

The best way is to get rid of the house line, (we did) and install the Call Control app on your cell. (We did)
No more sales, political, scams, etc. I love it.

[George Bokros]

The best way is to get rid of the house line, (we did) and install the Call Control app on your cell. (We did)
No more sales, political, scams, etc. I love it.

What is the call control app? Is it available for the iPhone?

[Brian Ashton]

I called one person (home phone) and got a recording that said something like, "This home does not accept solicitation calls. If you are a solicitor, hang up. If you are other than a solicitor, press 1". I pressed 1 and their phone rang.

Since most solicitor calls do not have anyone on the line when you first answer, this probably causes the solicitor calls to be rejected. I thought that was a good solution. But I don't know if it was provided by the telephone company or was an add-on thing.

Mike

I prefer the message that says if this anything other than a personal call from a known individual either hang up or press one to talk to the occupant. But in pressing one you agree, as the agent for the organisation you are calling on behalf of, to pay the home occupant for their time. Hourly rate is $150/hour with a $100 minimum. Payment is due within 30 days of the call. All unpaid debts incur a 24%, compounded daily, interest charge. I followed a lady's blog where she did a similar thing where a collection agency was harassing her for someone elses debt and was actually able to collect from them. She used another collection agency to recover the money she was owed LOL.

I'm tempted to put something similar on the mailbox.

[Wade Lippman]

I don't think anyone would have to pay a fee for calling you; especially a collection agency that has a legal right and a legitimate reason for calling. As a general principle, you can't make someone pay for something they already have a right to. Technically it is called a lack of consideration.

I like Google Voice. They automatically screen out known spam, and you can numbers you don't want to ring through.

[Brian Ashton]

I don't think anyone would have to pay a fee for calling you; especially a collection agency that has a legal right and a legitimate reason for calling. As a general principle, you can't make someone pay for something they already have a right to. Technically it is called a lack of consideration.

I like Google Voice. They automatically screen out known spam, and you can numbers you don't want to ring through.

Thats why you give them the RIGHT to hang up to avoid any costs. When you give them clear instruction that states proceeding will incur costs they are on the hook if they VOLUNTARILY CHOOSE to proceed. Remember they are the ones initiating contact, no me. Just because I have a phone doesn't mean I have invited telemarketers to harassed me or have my mail box filled with garbage I didn't ask for.

[Curt Harms]

I know of a couple options. We have Verizon digital voice, a kinda sorta VOIP service. We can list numbers that we don't want calling. We don't use that, we use a service called nomorobo. Nomorobo does require simultaneous ring so I don't know that it'd work on POTS lines. It does claim to work on cell phones. It also requires 10 digit numbers in order to work so if the only thing on the caller I.D. is "private caller" the call probably won't be blocked. We did get a sales call pitching "natural health" something, she didn't get all the way through the first sentence. The number displayed was the same as nomorobo's voice/text number. Da sneaks.:p

[Wade Lippman]

Thats why you give them the RIGHT to hang up to avoid any costs. When you give them clear instruction that states proceeding will incur costs they are on the hook if they VOLUNTARILY CHOOSE to proceed. Remember they are the ones initiating contact, no me. Just because I have a phone doesn't mean I have invited telemarketers to harassed me or have my mail box filled with garbage I didn't ask for.

You just try and collect on that contract.
It is pretty much that same as my saying that if you post to SMC again you have to pay me $1,000; and by posting you have agreed to my terms. Doesn't mean anything at all, because you have as much right to post to SMC without paying me as I do to press one (while calling you) on my phone without paying you.

[Myk Rian]

What is the call control app? Is it available for the iPhone?
I have no idea, being an Android user. Check at the iStore, or whatever it's called.

[Brian Ashton]

You just try and collect on that contract.
It is pretty much that same as my saying that if you post to SMC again you have to pay me $1,000; and by posting you have agreed to my terms. Doesn't mean anything at all, because you have as much right to post to SMC without paying me as I do to press one (while calling you) on my phone without paying you.

No it isn't, you don't own SMC so you have no business demanding anything. However, the owner can lock it down so you can't even view it without paying a fee if he so choses. There are plenty of forums out there just like that. I suspect if you were found to have hacked in and using the forums facilities the owner could seek to recover the money you should have paid. You can't post to the classifieds on sawmill unless you're a paying member can you? You also, by simply becoming a member agree to abide by the terms of conditions which are essentially saying you can do this and you can't do that or you can be banned. If you don't agree with the TOC don't apply to be a member - in other words go away. Are you saying that's not binding?

Businesses have signs all the time that say "by entering this premise you agree to abide by our terms of conditions" are you going to tell me they're not binding. Or signs on private property that state "cars towed at owners expense" when a person has decided to park their regardless are not legally binding and that the car must be handed back without the fees being collected? So if I have a sign on my property that states this is how you must act (i.e. don't put your crap in my mailbox or you'll cop a handling fee) or don't enter the property isn't binding?

Or how bout a phone number that is private, i.e. it's unlisted and comes up as private on other phones and is on the do not call register... Pretty clear it's set up in a way that says don't cold call this number. So if I have a message that clearly states you wanting to talk to me will cost you money or hang up. How is that not binding?

Now don't get me wrong collecting is another matter altogether. But then again I'm back to being a student so I have all the time in the world to chase such notions.

I don't know the particulars of law but the blog stated the writer was able to collect using a collection agency. So I'd say there was some merit otherwise a collection agency, who's job it is to know the law, wouldn't have taken the job on and succeeded in collecting from another collection agency that obviously knew they had to pay...

It's been at least 5 years since I read the blog and it was a link from another forum I haven't been on for at least 3 but I'll see if I can dig it up.

[William Payer]

An interesting way to deflect calls from certain phone numbers would be to have a machine that would automatically answer calls from that number (without causing your phone to ring) and play a recorded message. Then the machine could either hang-up or take a recorded message.

This would encourage phone solicitors and pollsters not to call phones that deflect their calls since it would tie up the callers phone lines. People could be creative in the message they played. It could be matter of fact like "Please do not call this number again" or devious like some unintelligible mumbling "muh -all -wuh.... -ently" that would keep the caller occupied for awhile saying "What? I'm sorry I didn't understand you. Could you repeat that again?"

Ooma does what you are asking. You can enter numbers as "blacklisted numbers" and it will not ring on your end, but give them the pre-recorded message of your choice(about 5 options) Ooma maintains a blacklist of their own, made from customers' entries to that list, and does the same, eliminating most annoying calls.
My option for these numbers is a message that "the number you have reached is no longer in service" accompanied with computer generated tones that signal that status to electronic calling machines, so even the calmest can be informed the number is no longer in service.

Of course, the blacklist is part of there "Premium" package at a cost of $10/month, but I gladly pay that to stop most of those annoying calls.

[Pat Barry]

I rarely actually answer my home phone anymore. I just let the answering machine do the screening. By the way, why do I have a home phone? I keep telling myself to cancel that thing

[Jim Becker]

I use nomorobo with my FiOS Digital Voice...the number of calls that "only ring once" is pretty incredible and the variety of spoofed numbers is quite interesting at time. Very, very few calls get through at this point and I contribute to the community by reporting those numbers back to the nice folks at nomorobo, too.

[Kent Adams]

George, you don't need a special app on the iPhone, it has a built in phone blocker.

[roger wiegand]

+1 on NoMoRobo. It has cut our unwanted call volume by 95+%

[Curt Harms]

SWMBO had an item for sale and was concerned about legit calls being blocked by NoMoRobo. If in doubt, google the displayed number. All the 'local' blocked numbers we checked had a history.

[Rod Sheridan]

I rarely actually answer my home phone anymore. I just let the answering machine do the screening. By the way, why do I have a home phone? I keep telling myself to cancel that thing

Hi Pat, we dropped the home phone this year as we both carry cell phones...............Rod.

[Curt Harms]

I rarely actually answer my home phone anymore. I just let the answering machine do the screening. By the way, why do I have a home phone? I keep telling myself to cancel that thing

I guess it depends on what your provider offers but in our case when I looked at it, Verizon's "double play" (Internet & TV) cost the same as their "triple play" (Internet, TV & Phone.) Our only other option is Comcast and ............. no.

[Wade Lippman]

Businesses have signs all the time that say "by entering this premise you agree to abide by our terms of conditions" are you going to tell me they're not binding. Or signs on private property that state "cars towed at owners expense" when a person has decided to park their regardless are not legally binding and that the car must be handed back without the fees being collected? So if I have a sign on my property that states this is how you must act (i.e. don't put your crap in my mailbox or you'll cop a handling fee) or don't enter the property isn't binding?.

Towns frequently have laws authorizing property owners to post signs regarding parking. Those laws authorize the owner to tow cars. Without the town law, then no, the property owner does not have the right to tow a car.
The idea that you can post a sign in your store saying that by entering I agree to the store's terms and conditions is absurd. Since I do not reasonably know the store's terms, I can't possibly agree to them.
As long as I don't violate a law or a binding contract, I can do anything I want to your phone and mailbox. And no, a silly sign or a silly voice recording does not create a binding contract. You might want to look up the requirements for a contract before you try to assert non-existent rights.

We could agree that in return for my paying you $100 you will never post here again, with damages of $1,000 if you do. That is a legal binding contract. If you post, you will owe me $1,000 and I will be able to collect on it. It doesn't matter that I have no connection to SMC.
If this were the only woodworking forum it might be unenforceable as a violation of public policy, but since there are a dozen similar sights, you could easily go to one of them.

[roger wiegand]

I just got a notice today from a very large corporation with plenty of lawyers that said "if you continue to use our site after August 29, 2015 that will indicate acceptance of our terms and conditions". Are you suggesting that they are just making unenforceable noises? If so why would they bother? I suspect such terms are, in fact, enforceable, much like shrink-wrap licenses on software.

[Wade Lippman]

I just got a notice today from a very large corporation with plenty of lawyers that said "if you continue to use our site after August 29, 2015 that will indicate acceptance of our terms and conditions". Are you suggesting that they are just making unenforceable noises? If so why would they bother? I suspect such terms are, in fact, enforceable, much like shrink-wrap licenses on software.

Are you capable of continuing to use their site without specifically accepting their terms? If so, their terms are unenforceable.
Even if they can demonstrate you received both the notice and the terms (which is not clear from your statement), the fact that you can use the site without specifically accepting their terms makes then unenforceable.

The shrink wrap license is a bit different. You cannot claim (assuming they can demonstrate reasonable quality control) that you didn't receive both the notice and the terms; and since you had to tear the shrink wrap off to use the product, you cannot claim you did not take an affirmative action.
If you could convince a judge that your 6 year old tore the shrink wrap off before you got it, you might have a case, but you would also have to convince the judge that you were too stupid to know that shrink wrap usually contained a license.

[Jim Becker]

SWMBO had an item for sale and was concerned about legit calls being blocked by NoMoRobo. If in doubt, google the displayed number. All the 'local' blocked numbers we checked had a history.
Unless they are on "the list" at nomorobo, they shouldn't be blocked...and if they are, it's doubtful they are legitimate calls.