.
Feedback

Don’t Believe Viral Emails Suggesting Cell Phone Numbers Will 'Go Public'

Attorney General George Jepsen and Department of Consumer Protection Commissioner William M. Rubenstein say 'don't fall for it.'

The following is a press release:

Viral e-mails warning that cell phone numbers will soon be made public, that telemarketing companies will begin placing sales calls to cell phones and that customers will be charged for these calls are not true, Attorney General George Jepsen and Department of Consumer Protection Commissioner William M. Rubenstein advised.

“Emails that claim that cell phone numbers will ‘go public’ this month are simply false,” said Attorney General Jepsen. “Neither the government nor the cell phone companies have any intent to release cell phone numbers to telemarketers. Federal law prohibits telemarketers from using automatic dialers to call cell phones, which effectively prohibits telemarketers from calling consumers’ cell phones without consent.”

Attorney General Jepsen continued, “While consumers can certainly choose to register their cell phone on the national Do Not Call Registry, no consumer should believe an email warning that their cell phone number will soon be handed over to telemarketers or that their service plan will be billed for such calls.” 

“This myth resurfaces year after year, causing unwarranted consumer anxiety,” Commissioner Rubenstein said.  “Happily, it’s one consumer danger that is NOT real, so cell phone users may rest easy, and avoid acting upon any threat or warning about cell phone numbers going public.”

There is only one Do Not Call Registry. It is operated by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), with information available at DoNotCall.gov. The Do Not Call Registry accepts registrations from both cell phones and land lines. To register by telephone, call 1-888-382-1222. You must call from the phone number you wish to register. To register online, go to DoNotCall.gov; you will be required to respond to a confirmation email. Once registered, telemarketers covered by the Do Not Call Registry have up to 31 days from the registration date to stop calling.

Marketers with whom you have conducted business within the last 18 months are generally exempt from Do Not Call requirements, as are tax-exempt and nonprofit entities; political campaigns; businesses contacting about an existing debt, contract or payment; businesses that started within the past year; prerecorded messages or emergency calls needed for health or safety; organizations with whom you have given prior consent; or entities with which you have a preexisting relationship.

If you have already registered a cell phone number, or another telephone number, you do not need to re-register. Do Not Call registrations do not expire. Once registered, a telephone number stays on the Do Not Call Registry until the registration is cancelled or service for the number is disconnected.

The FTC investigates complaints about potential Do Not Call violations; complaints can be filed with the FTC through DoNotCall.gov. The state Department of Consumer Protection also accepts and investigates complaints about potential violations of Connecticut’s Do Not Call law. Complaints can be made at www.ct.gov/dcp or at 1-800-842-2649.

Assistant Attorneys General Sandra ArenasCharles and Phillip Rosario, head of the Consumer Protection unit, are assisting the Attorney General with this matter.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from South Windsor Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Gail Cloutier June 15, 2013 at 04:20 pm
One Mr. Yagaloff I was not rude to anyone else I was talking about you and was not in no mean rudeRead More to you. If you take it that way then so be it. Do I wish to talk to you no, cause it won't do any good. Everyone has given their own comment and the damage is done and now it's time for eveyone to learn from it and move on.
keith yagaloff June 15, 2013 at 05:11 pm
Gail, I agree that its time for everyone to learn from this incident. It is a teachable moment asRead More well. Both the Boy Scout and Cub Scout oaths can be the source of guidance in this instance. Scouting asks its youth to obey the rules of the pack and the law. Here is a direct quote "DUTY TO GOD AND COUNTRY: Your family and religious leaders teach you to know and serve God. By following these teachings, you do your duty to God. Men and women of the past worked to make America great, and many gave their lives for their country. By being a good family member and a good citizen, by working for your country's good and obeying its laws, you do your duty to your country. Obeying the Scout Law means living by its 12 points." The fundraising committee made a mistake. Choosing to adopt the mean spirited rhetoric of the Chair of the Republican Town Committee is not what these children expect or deserve. The BSA leadership stepped up and are leading by example. I met my responsibility as a community leader. Can you say the same?
Gail Cloutier June 15, 2013 at 07:11 pm
If you feel the same as me as everyone needs to stop and move on. I can clearly see you can't, causeRead More of the long letter above. I was always told by my wonderful parents to mind your own busy and not someone else. God Bless to us all and Good Bye.............
Rick Usifer June 11, 2013 at 06:38 pm
I agree that these statements seem inappropriate. I wasn't at the meeting and didn't see it, butRead More from this account an apology is certainly in order. I'm surprised that Dr. Anwar, a thoughtful and reasonable man, would say that to someone who absolutely did the right thing. One of South Windsor's biggest attributes is that is NOT a "large" town. That would have cost us revenue in other areas such as housing. I'm very disappointed in both men.
Dana June 12, 2013 at 09:22 am
It seems to me that Dr. Anwar and Mr. Delnicki do not like the truth and would rather the town liveRead More a lie than to let the public know reality. Hopefully the public sees this and votes for those who tell the truth.
Hank Cullinane June 12, 2013 at 03:45 pm
While I do think Deputy Mayor Bazzano said "funny" I think his opponents are trying toRead More take his statement out of context. I believe he said it was funny that the magazine has us in large towns. That is funny as is strange not it ha ha. Is he going to get an apology from Council Anwar I doubt it. As to losing business, I hope any business planning on coming to South Windsor is not doing it solely on a Hartford Magazine article. Now we can also publicize the integrity of our town officials who wanted the information to be correct.
Kevin McCann:  Don't we deserve better?
Darren DeMartino June 7, 2013 at 03:51 pm
Mike, While I too would like to address thew schools we cant change the fact that are town isRead More slipping in comparison to other towns around us. do you still feel the same way that the ratings didnt come at a convenient time? The truth is we need to invest in in our town to maintain the quality of life people are looking for today. If we dont do it we will not remain an attractive place to live. There are a number of towns in our area that have faced these choices. Some of those town have decided to look to the future and others have fallen behind, not very surprisingly some of our surrounding towns have fared much better over the past 15-20 years than others. The key questions is what does the town of South Windsor want to be? I want it to maintain the quality of life it had since I was a small child. That means growing and investing not letting others pass us by because people are short sighted. I think we need too challenge our town council to look at the towns around us and figure out how they do so much more yet our taxes aren't much different that ours. We pay a lot for very little in comparison to other towns in our area. We get trash and leaf pickup, not that big of a deal cost wise yet we dont get new schools, rec center, senior center, or neccessary fields. We should all want more for our tax dollar!
Michael Sullivan June 12, 2013 at 01:19 pm
Mr. DeMartino - I will stand by what I've said earlier, even after Mr. Bazzano corrected SouthRead More Windsor's rankings in Hartford Magazine. Yes I think this is (still!) good news and as such always welcome and convenient. My earlier comment was that these favorable rankings come at a rather inconvenient time for THOSE WHO PREFER to propagandize and insist that our salvation will come only in the form of more athletic fields and further that we must borrow more money to build them! These revised rankings don’t change anything in my opinion (with the exception of the crime statistic – that’s alarming if not an error!) and meanwhile the TC politics and propagandizing over our “status” is deplorable. I maintain these rankings STILL represent great news for South Windsor. We’re ranked no. 3 in our medium towns group (if not overall). We’re ranked no. 2 for families and schools in our medium group. And STILL we’re in top 10 overall for the county. And still that's just not good enough for some folks?!?
Michael Sullivan June 12, 2013 at 01:25 pm
WRT wanting more for our tax dollars - oh yes there we can agree! But how might we agree onRead More priorities? I don’t see the need for borrowing money NOW to build UNNECESSARY (there I said it!) athletic fields no matter which other towns are perceived to be better/worse than South Windsor by our athletics enthusiasts who might prefer to bypass public referendum to get their desires. I feel strongly that the Town has other priorities – particularly if we must borrow! You cite two prime examples in the elementary schools due to their obsolescence – and the need for taking care of our seniors for rec/community space and aged-care social services that will surely be needed with predictable demographic trends. Let’s do those before we talk about more athletic facilities.