| Comment Number: | OL-105449 |
| Received: | 12/1/2004 2:22:00 PM |
| Organization: | |
| Commenter: | Jay Burton |
| State: | OH |
| Subject: | Trade Regulation Rule on Telemarketing Sales |
| Title: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| CFR Citation: | 16 CFR Part 310 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
Dear Organization, I read with dismay your proposal to allow recorded solititation calls to homes.I believe you have forgotten the overiding facts of all of this, phone service is a paid for service not something subsudised by telemartketers but a service which consumers pay for in full on their own accord.Since the no-call order went into effect my calls have gone down to about 3 'out of area' (foreign origin?)solitiation calls a day from an avg. of 15.This is STILL too many!Not to mention companies skirting the rules by saying we have done business with them.Remember this is a service which I pay for out of my own pocket, not contributed towards in any manner.If people want to get calls from companies perhaps you should consider a 'box to check' on material from that company to allow such calls, NOT a box to check to NOT get calls but a definate action that needed taken by consumers to allow calls to that person. Again the overiding factor in all this is that we pay for phone service and have the right to determine who is allowed to use that service.Call ads are no different than having a dealer who sold you a car come years later and put ads on it without your permission. Thank You in advance for your time in this matter Jay Burton