<div dir="ltr">I believe we may be miscommunicating on one detail... The number in question is not with us, and never has been. We believe the customer abandoned the number long ago. They have been with us 5+ years, and we had never seen that number before. So it's probably abandoned with the old carrier and we can't do anything about it.<div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 11:32 AM Mary Lou Carey <<a href="mailto:marylou@backuptelecom.com">marylou@backuptelecom.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">I would still check the ALI database because you pay monthly for every <br>
number in it. If the number is not in service, at the very least you're <br>
paying for numbers you're not using.<br>
<br>
MARY LOU CAREY<br>
BackUP Telecom Consulting<br>
Office: 615-791-9969<br>
Cell: 615-796-1111<br>
<br>
On 2021-01-22 12:13 PM, Carlos Alvarez wrote:<br>
> Even without the address, the CNAM would have told them the company<br>
> name. I will tell the customer that if this happens again, to ask for<br>
> much more detail from the police.<br>
> <br>
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 10:45 AM Mary Lou Carey<br>
> <<a href="mailto:marylou@backuptelecom.com" target="_blank">marylou@backuptelecom.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
>> I would think that the ALI database would still need to have the<br>
>> address<br>
>> associated with that phone number in order for the police to call.<br>
>> I'd<br>
>> check the ALI database to make sure the number has been removed if<br>
>> its<br>
>> no longer in service. Otherwise you could be getting fined big time<br>
>> for<br>
>> invalid ALI information.<br>
>> <br>
>> MARY LOU CAREY<br>
>> BackUP Telecom Consulting<br>
>> Office: 615-791-9969<br>
>> Cell: 615-796-1111<br>
>> <br>
>> On 2021-01-21 02:22 PM, Brandon Svec wrote:<br>
>>> That sounds unbelievable. Do you really have evidence that a<br>
>> damaged<br>
>>> cable somehow pulse dialed 911? I think the issue is something<br>
>>> upstream like what data the PSAP is getting has been spoofed or is<br>
>>> just inadvertently incorrect, for example.<br>
>>> <br>
>>> Brandon Svec<br>
>>> <br>
>>>> On Jan 21, 2021, at 12:08 PM, Dan Mostert <<a href="mailto:dan@delhitel.com" target="_blank">dan@delhitel.com</a>><br>
>> wrote:<br>
>>> <br>
>>>> <br>
>>>> <br>
>>>> We’ve run into similar circumstances before with ported in<br>
>>>> numbers. The losing carrier, either on purpose under the idea of<br>
>>>> “left in place dial-tone”, or laziness, leaves a copper PSTN<br>
>>>> line configured as the customer still. They also don’t<br>
>> maintain<br>
>>>> their aging copper, so particularly when the cable is wet, short<br>
>>>> outs and ends up pulse-dialling 911 for them. Same deal- police<br>
>>>> response for an unresponsive / hang up 911, and a<br>
>> confused/annoyed<br>
>>>> customer. In our case, the PSAPs involved see this so much from<br>
>> the<br>
>>>> losing carrier every time it rains, we just educate everyone<br>
>>>> involved, and the PSAP / public safety have to deal with it.<br>
>> I’m<br>
>>>> interested in anyone else’s suggestions too.<br>
>>>> <br>
>>>> Dan<br>
>>>> <br>
>>>> From: VoiceOps <<a href="mailto:voiceops-bounces@voiceops.org" target="_blank">voiceops-bounces@voiceops.org</a>> On Behalf Of<br>
>> Carlos<br>
>>>> Alvarez<br>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2021 3:01 PM<br>
>>>> To: <a href="mailto:voiceops@voiceops.org" target="_blank">voiceops@voiceops.org</a><br>
>>>> Subject: [VoiceOps] False 911 calls and old abandoned DID<br>
>>>> <br>
>>>> We have a customer who has received two calls from the police<br>
>>>> because "they" called 911, but they did not. The CLID shown is<br>
>> NOT<br>
>>>> one of theirs, but they think it might have been theirs many<br>
>> years<br>
>>>> ago. The CNAM on that number is their company name. Nobody<br>
>> answers<br>
>>>> the number, and it's with Qwest. Our logs show no calls to 911<br>
>> from<br>
>>>> them.<br>
>>>> <br>
>>>> Any advice on this? It's just two calls at this point, just this<br>
>>>> week. They've been our customer for over five years, and this<br>
>>>> number has never been on our system.<br>
>>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>>> VoiceOps mailing list<br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org" target="_blank">VoiceOps@voiceops.org</a><br>
>>>> <a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops</a><br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> VoiceOps mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org" target="_blank">VoiceOps@voiceops.org</a><br>
>>> <a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops</a><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> VoiceOps mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org" target="_blank">VoiceOps@voiceops.org</a><br>
>> <a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops</a><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> VoiceOps mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:VoiceOps@voiceops.org" target="_blank">VoiceOps@voiceops.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops</a><br>
</blockquote></div>