Caller ID shows "Unavailable 1"

AT&T can easily solve this problem and are obviously receiving money or some other benefit to not put a stop to it. They have chosen a higher power over their customers. More and more folks are getting rid of a home phone for this very reason. When everyone checks out I hope they will have someone left to turn out the lights.

---

@hikersc wrote:

AT&T can easily solve this problem and are obviously receiving money or some other benefit to not put a stop to it. They have chosen a higher power over their customers. More and more folks are getting rid of a home phone for this very reason. When everyone checks out I hope they will have someone left to turn out the lights.

---

ATT has no control over telemarketing, that falls under the jurisdiction of the FCC and the FTC. This may better explain.

http://epic.org/privacy/telemarketing/

---

@jfw wrote:

---

@hikersc wrote:

AT&T can easily solve this problem and are obviously receiving money or some other benefit to not put a stop to it. They have chosen a higher power over their customers. More and more folks are getting rid of a home phone for this very reason. When everyone checks out I hope they will have someone left to turn out the lights.

---

ATT has no control over telemarketing, that falls under the jurisdiction of the FCC and the FTC. This may better explain.

http://epic.org/privacy/telemarketing/

 

 

 So what you are telling me is that AT&T does not have folks that are intelligent enough to figure out how to let the software block an "Unavailable 1" caller ID. Give me a break. I understand that the FCC and FTC has no interest in solving this problem. My point is that the call blocking feature could be made to block calls to "Unavailable 1" and AT&T has chosen not to allow that option. The reason has to be that they are either not smart enough or have an interest in not doing so. So which is it?

---

All AT&T has to do is block all names (Private, Unavailable, Unavailable 1 or Name not Found) that don't include a legitamate phone number. Or AT&T could allow its users to enter these names under call blocking.

I have to agree...somewhat.  The technology *should* be there to allow U-Verse Voice to offer a service like Privacy Director/Manager, which was available with POTS.  The switch would identify that a call was coming through as "unavailable" with no number and allow the caller to record their name, message, etc. The line would then ring with a caller ID of "Privacymanager" and when you answer you would hear the recorded message and allow you to accept to reject the call.

---

@ncstewart66 wrote:

I have to agree...somewhat.  The technology *should* be there to allow U-Verse Voice to offer a service like Privacy Director/Manager, which was available with POTS.  The switch would identify that a call was coming through as "unavailable" with no number and allow the caller to record their name, message, etc. The line would then ring with a caller ID of "Privacymanager" and when you answer you would hear the recorded message and allow you to accept to reject the call.

---

POTS is a whole a whole different ballgame. VoIP has made it easier for companies to circumvent call blocking.  That and many of these telemarketers and other unwanted calls have multiple phone numbers.  I don't know of any provider that lets you block more than 20 numbers unless you use exclusive call forwarding which will allow you to set up 20 number to all to call your number.

Just spent over an hour discussing/complaining about the "Unavailable" "1" calls with about 4 AT&T reps.  They all say the same thing, nothing they can do about it because they don't know what the number is to allow us to block it.  Typical customer un-service response.  Bottom line is they are probably making money on the situation so there is no compelling reason for them to do the right thing.  I'm supposed to get a call back from a manager type.  I'll repeat my request if/when they call,  credit my account with a dollar for each one of these calls.

---

@lmike51b wrote:

Just spent over an hour discussing/complaining about the "Unavailable" "1" calls with about 4 AT&T reps.  They all say the same thing, nothing they can do about it because they don't know what the number is to allow us to block it.  Typical customer un-service response.  Bottom line is they are probably making money on the situation so there is no compelling reason for them to do the right thing.  I'm supposed to get a call back from a manager type.  I'll repeat my request if/when they call,  credit my account with a dollar for each one of these calls.

---

Your logic is so far out there.  There are too many ways to spoof call blocking that most good hackers can do it.  If you don't want to get those calls set up call screening.  That way only the numbers you decide actually get through.

lmike51b wrote:

Just spent over an hour discussing/complaining about the "Unavailable" "1" calls with about 4 AT&T reps.  They all say the same thing, nothing they can do about it because they don't know what the number is to allow us to block it.  Typical customer un-service response.  Bottom line is they are probably making money on the situation so there is no compelling reason for them to do the right thing.  I'm supposed to get a call back from a manager type.  I'll repeat my request if/when they call,  credit my account with a dollar for each one of these calls.

Your logic is so far out there.  There are too many ways to spoof call blocking that most good hackers can do it.  If you don't want to get those calls set up call screening.  That way only the numbers you decide actually get through.

I found this out from here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQ011aseohQ

The phone company didn't pay for it therefore doesn't show up.