[VoiceOps] TF number ported out/re-assigned without authorization

[Alex Balashov]

I’m not a lawyer nor a legal strategist, but I see few downsides in going to war for it. At the very least, the matter will go to the general counsel and maybe get some actual attention.

— Alex

> On Mar 23, 2023, at 2:47 AM, Paul Timmins via VoiceOps <voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:
> 
> I can’t imagine why the new user of the number would want all those misdirected calls, it’ll probably cost them a pretty penny. What a mess for everyone.
> 
> 
>> On Mar 23, 2023, at 00:57, Peter Beckman via VoiceOps <voiceops at voiceops.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Have the customer sue Thinq, if they feel it is worth it.
>> 
>> Or ask Thinq to pay the customer some amount.
>> 
>> Otherwise move on, learn never to trust your carriers, constantly monitor
>> and validate them, and hope you'll avoid a similar issue in the future.
>> 
>> Beckman
>> 
>>> On Mon, 20 Mar 2023, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps wrote:
>>> 
>>> To get everyone updated, we were just told that nothing will be done, and
>>> our customer is just out of luck on what they have already spent
>>> publicizing the incorrectly assigned number.  I have no idea yet if/how
>>> they will try to pass this cost to us, or if/when lawyers will get
>>> involved.  Mistakes happen of course, but in this chain of events, who is
>>> liable for actual costs due to some amount of negligence?
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Mar 14, 2023 at 9:48:09 PM, Todd Wolf <twolf at wolftechgroup.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Bill copy and signed resporg documents...should show a clear path of
>>>> ownership. If your docs supersede the one after the fact and you didn't
>>>> release the number or lose it due to non payment with notice etc..
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: VoiceOps <voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org> On Behalf Of Peter Beckman
>>>> via VoiceOps
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 9:30 PM
>>>> To: Carlos Alvarez <caalvarez at gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: VoiceOps <voiceops at voiceops.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] TF number ported out/re-assigned without
>>>> authorization
>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, 14 Mar 2023, Carlos Alvarez via VoiceOps wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Mar 14, 2023 at 2:03:17 PM, Peter Beckman <beckman at angryox.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> We've also put numbers into production that our carrier provided,
>>>> 
>>>>> only to find out they should not have been in their inventory at all.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I’ve learned this lesson, hence the test calls.  But this is a new one
>>>> 
>>>> on me; how often should we have to test all of our numbers??
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Should you HAVE to? Never. How often do you NEED to, so you can avoid
>>>> situations like this? Once every 2 weeks in my estimation, unfortunately.
>>>> 
>>>> I tried to find an affordable way to ensure that the ILEC/CLEC/Resporg of
>>>> one of our numbers had not changed, but I couldn't find one. I also found
>>>> that if the number moved internally, e.g. one Bandwidth customer to
>>>> another, I'd never detect it. Test Calls and SMS messages seemed to be the
>>>> most deterministic indicator.
>>>> 
>>>> I will commend and recommend Alcazar Networks for offering a very
>>>> reliable, though about 24 hours out of date, LNP/LRN API at affordable
>>>> rates. USD$0.00025 per extended query, or a flat rate for higher usage.
>>>> 
>>>> https://www.alcazarnetworks.com/data_services_lnp_lrn.php
>>>> 
>>>> Anyone know of a RespOrg API that would tell us information about a TF
>>>> number?
>>>> 
>>>> That’s uglier than a Pontiac Aztek.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> But reliably detects carrier failures.
>>>> 
>>>> I just hope thinQ can handle this.  Looking at our call records vs
>>>> 
>>>> their TF number history, it’s clear when it was ours, then taken, then
>>>> 
>>>> given out again.  I believe someone else on the list suggested that
>>>> 
>>>> previous ownership is superior to current ownership?  If it comes down
>>>> 
>>>> to that, anyone know the process to enforce it?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The challenge here is what is ownership?
>>>> 
>>>> Really, nobody owns a phone number. NANPA leases it to carriers, and
>>>> carriers lease it to companies or individuals. It is up to the carrier to
>>>> lease it to only one entity. Thinq failed to do so. IMHO Thinq should be
>>>> working their butts off to fix this for you.
>>>> 
>>>> I do not know of an FCC rule that would help you scare Thinq into doing
>>>> the right thing and fixing this.
>>>> 
>>>> Beckman
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Peter Beckman                                                  Internet Guy
>>>> beckman at angryox.com
>>>> https://www.angryox.com/
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Peter Beckman                                                  Internet Guy
>> beckman at angryox.com                                https://www.angryox.com/
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------_______________________________________________
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops

-- 
Alex Balashov
Principal Consultant
Evariste Systems LLC
Web: https://evaristesys.com
Tel: +1-706-510-6800