Is it time to call "air time credit" a day ?

[#1]

With the number of people who are being had by scam texts that they of course never willingly agreed to, stealing the bit of credit they keep over a long period of time to make the odd call here and there, or indeed taking multiples of £4.50 from people who need bigger air time credits for calling abroad or other services that they actually do wish to use, is it time to call air time credit a day ?

Hold the phone a sec before you think that's unfair, yes it is, but can we not get GiffGaff to implement a system update where they have a way to purchase a goody bag that fits the airtime credit costs so they get exactly the same deal but that goodybag has no expiry date.

I don't know for sure, but it could be possible to limit what these goodybags can be used for, maybe even have a set of tick boxes attached to the account that allow or disallow each type of use.

Something needs to be done to protect the small spenders as well as anyone else here who may well have very little money to waste on scams and it is ultimately unfair that they have to go through some long and arduous process to maybe even get a refund from said scamming company.

I must admit, I don't know the core of giffgaffs system but please support this idea if you think giffgaff could maybe look into creating a work around against these scams.

The fact is, the only guaranteed solution right now is to stop selling/buying air time credit.

Please support on behalf of those scammed and even more so, for those who don't have much money. I really don't like it when the poorer people of our world are punished, of course, the hardest. Not that I like it any other time but something needs to be advocated and done fast.

[#2]

Good idea however you need to allow premium tests just in case people want to donate money to charity I've done it before and it's really easy by text.

[#3]

i think airtime credit is good

[#4]

It doesn't make sense
How are people being scammed by using credit if they only use little things
Like anything, it's cheaper if you buy in bulk (I.e goodybag) but then the manufacturer has fewer costs per item
Those who only use their phone on occasions aren't going to want so many texts etc
Having a tick box for what you want it for, but then you might change your mind later and then why not just do that and get rid of goody bags
I only use mine for data really, my family are on giffgaff so it's free anyway and I don't make many calls to others

[#5]

What really needs to happen is tighter regulation of the premium text industry. One option would be that the user has to opt in twice before the service can start. Something along the lines of a second level opt-in consisting of a clear and unambiguous text message stating what the charges and frequency of the messages will be, and the user has to type 'START' in a reply to start the subscription. The wording and layout of the text would be standard across the industry and prefilled boxes not allowed so the user has to physically type the word START.

Furthermore the number used to start or stop the subscription should be free.

[#6]

Since it would be impossible to produce an undated product that would be flexible enough to fit every light user's needs this sounds like an extremely good way of losing lots of customers...

[#7]

The problem seems to be that giffgaff apparently might have legal difficulties if it sets up a system where people can intentionally bar premium text services.

The proper answer is probably for ofcom to totally rethink the way that premium services are paid.

We have a good and well tested model that ought to have been followed -- the banking industry has its Direct Debit Guarantee which could and should have been copied almost lock, stock and barrel when setting up the payment scheme for premium texts.

You don't hear too many frauds involving direct debits, because they were properly thought out in a way that was specifically designed to avoid fraudulent payments.

The provisions of the DD scheme include:

• Prior agreement -- using a standard form which the seller is not free to reword or disguise
• Advance notice of all payments
• The right to a "full and immediate refund" if the account holder challenges a direct debit
• The right to revoke a DD by notifying the bank

All of those provisions could and should have been built into the Premium Rate charging mechanism -- as they still can and need to be, but it is ofcom, not individual phone companies, that need to stipulate this.

Without ofcom's mandate, it leaves individual phone companies in the position of having to prove that a company is acting fraudulently rather than simply blocking the transaction as a customer right.

[#8]

@harrrrrry

I agree that this is an industry wide problem. Ofcom,or the mobile companies collectively, need to address this increasingly damaging problem and come up with a solution that protects consumers. I don't claim to understand the legal implications but there must be a way of blocking premium texts at network level by default and then if an individual want to unblock them then they would actively have to do so. To remove airtime would not solve this problem in the long term.

[#9]

all i use is airtime credit i get no scams the people who do is because of hidden links on dodgy websites porn etc.

[#10]

It shouldn't be beyond the networks to block such scams or any charges over and above the users set limit.