Scam calls

We hardly ever use our landline. We’ve actually turned the ringer off, because so many of the calls we get on it are scams and it became a real annoyance even just to go to the phone check the number of caller ID, say, I don’t recognise that number, and leave it.

To test whether this was just a perception, or based in reality, I took the numbers off our call list which has a maximum of 80. The calls were in the period February to March this year.  61 of the 80 calls logged were from numbers I didn’t know. I checked each of these number on https://who-calls.me.uk .

Most of them are clearly scams, judging by the number of queries that have been made about them, and the comments left by unfortunate recipients. I wasn’t inclined to do anything more at the time, but I took the numbers as proof that, however well the Information Commissioners Office thinks it’s doing its job, it really is failing rather badly at preventing scammers from going about their business.

I used to report scam calls to the ICO. I don’t bother any more. It’s quite an effort to do, given the number of questions you have to answer just to register a complaint, and nothing ever seems to happen. Occasionally, in the past, I have quizzed the ICO – and OFCOM who share responsibility with them - about this, and their response is always – we’re doing a great job. In the last x months we’ve done this, we’ve done that, we have investigated y complaints and closed down z lines. I’m sure they’re telling the truth, but they don’t seem to be aware of how little effect they’re having.

I re-examined my list in September, six months after the first run through. The results are at the end of the blog. I found them really dispiriting. Nearly all the numbers I’d logged six months previously were clearly still in business and still making themselves a nuisance in people’s lives six months later. And the ICO and Ofcom are clearly as much use as a chocolate teapot. (A Which investigation, with numbers in the millions, makes this even more clear. Top 10 scam calls plaguing the UK.)

As I said, I’m sure their numbers about their own activities are accurate. But they demonstrate nothing more than impotence. Whatever action Ofcom prides itself on having taken, however many cases the ICO prides itself on having dealt with, the scammers have built the occasional manoeuvres, fines and closures into their business model. They are nothing more than a minor nuisance, an insignificant cost compared to the profits that roll in daily.

Scam call prevention in this country is a complete failure. 

Date	Number	Searches April	Searches Sept
28/03/24	02032 82	80357	84779
30/03/24	01332 79	17798	18611
11/04/24	01733 80	4319	4609
19/02/24	02031 29	3339	25584
06/02/24	02080 50	2343	34703
06/02/24	02039 36	1828	502
14/03/24	01225 53	1631	2037
20/03/24	02045 29	1272	1520
18/01/24	02039 36	1191	1254
01/03/24	02045 71	984	1104
12/02/24	02039 36	939	1034
27/01/24	02039 36	801	842
26/02/24	07956 53	723	909
24/04/24	01217 90	675	895
03/02/24	02039 36	674	832
26/01/24	02039 36	664	706
27/01/24	02039 36	661	720
06/03/24	02045 71	651	700
27/01/24	02039 36	606	672
07/03/24	01227 91	595	676
10/04/24	01615 24	586	744
19/01/24	02039 36	539	572
19/01/24	02039 36	532	554
19/02/24	01438 90	449	798
31/01/24	02039 36	429	521
03/02/24	02039 36	398	418
14/02/24	01205 63	355	406
26/03/24	01752 54	265	356
23/02/24	01182 18	221	277
20/02/24	01969 62	161	332
19/02/24	01702 41	142	180
08/04/24	01638 60	53	104
20/04/24	01789 20	44	76
11/04/24	01488 71	25	31
20/02/24	02031 29	20	28
04/03/24	01803 87	15	16
13/01/24	02039 36	7	8
06/03/24	07769 36	5	6
10/01/24	02034 88	0	1
11/01/24	07889 36	0	1
18/01/24	07876 59	0	1
22/01/24	02039 36	0	19
23/01/24	07746 67	0	1
23/01/24	02035 14	0	3
25/01/24	01216 36	0	1
01/02/24	07748 50	0	1
03/02/24	02045 87	0	1
09/02/24	07525 35	0	1
16/02/24	01389 38	0	3
19/02/24	07986 48	0	1
22/02/24	02392 46	0	1
24/02/24	07303 82	0	1
29/02/24	01341 36	0	1
11/03/24	07472 62	0	1
26/03/24	07801 69	0	4
03/04/24	07789 33	0	2
04/04/24	07900 95	0	1
20/04/24	07943 89	0	1
23/04/24	07740 78	0	1
25/04/24	07850 98	0	1

It's time for the National Trust AGM, again

 It’s that time of year again when thoughts turn to the National Trust AGM, and voting for the people who will determine the Trust’s continuing direction. Do we vote for people who will conserve our history, add to our understanding and increase year by year the numbers who benefit from it, or will we vote for people who do not have the interests of the Trust, or the nation, at heart, but are only interested in exaggerating problems that they can continue to exploit?

By the latter I mean Restore Trust – of course. I will be voting once again for the Council’s recommended picks, as that is the best way of ensuring that the Trust remains in capable and reliable hands. I recommend that everyone else does the same.

I wrote last year about how the existence of Restore Trust has changed the way I vote.  I reproduce it here.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Restore Trust has changed the way I vote, which is ultimately unhelpful for the long term robustness of the National Trust.

Several seats on the governing body come up for re-election every year. The council recommend those they think best. Up till now I have looked at all the candidates. I usually accepted most of the council's recommendations, but substituted one or two choices of new candidates who I thought would bring fresh thinking or fresh skills to the council.

I don't do that any longer. I accept the council's recommendations in their entirety. The danger of a Restore candidate getting in because of a council recommendation not getting votes is too great a risk.

I think that is a shame, but I will continue to do that as long as it thwarts Restore Trust's regressive, destructive, anti-democratic agenda.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * 

And I have written previously about what Restore Trust is after.