Number-to-name lookup for UK phone numbers?

Discussion in 'UK VOIP' started by Roger Burton West, Oct 9, 2010.

  1. As stated in the subject, really: does anyone have a pointer to a
    (preferably free) number-to-name web site that has UK phone book
    information? (Real time, because I want to apply this to incoming calls
    with a fairly short timeout.)

    R
     
    Roger Burton West, Oct 9, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Roger Burton West

    Bodincus Guest

    (09/10/10 11:13), Roger Burton West:
    > As stated in the subject, really: does anyone have a pointer to a
    > (preferably free) number-to-name web site that has UK phone book
    > information? (Real time, because I want to apply this to incoming calls
    > with a fairly short timeout.)
    >
    > R

    I'm afraid that for some BS "Privacy" gobbledygook this service is not
    available in the UK, unlike many other civilized first-world countries.

    And please don't get me started.
    --
    Bodincus - The Y2K Druid
    ************************
    Law 42 on computing:
    Anything that could fail, will break at the worst possible mom%*= ?@@
    # Access Violation - Core dumped
    # Kernel Panic
     
    Bodincus, Oct 9, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Roger Burton West

    andy Guest

    On 9 Oct, 11:38, Bodincus <> wrote:
    > (09/10/10 11:13), Roger Burton West:> As stated in the subject, really: does anyone have a pointer to a
    > > (preferably free) number-to-name web site that has UK phone book
    > > information? (Real time, because I want to apply this to incoming calls
    > > with a fairly short timeout.)

    >
    > > R

    >
    > I'm afraid that for some BS "Privacy" gobbledygook this service is not
    > available in the UK, unlike many other civilized first-world countries.
    >
    > And please don't get me started.


    Data Protection Act

    it's said that about 40% of BT landline numbers are ex-directory; the
    phone book people receive only includes BT and not other landline
    customers; most mobile networks barely have or certainly don't promote
    directory services,

    so your opinion that it is bullshit might put you in a minority, as
    most people don't have or don't want their details available
     
    andy, Oct 9, 2010
    #3
  4. "andy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 9 Oct, 11:38, Bodincus <> wrote:
    >> (09/10/10 11:13), Roger Burton West:> As stated in the subject, really:
    >> does anyone have a pointer to a
    >> > (preferably free) number-to-name web site that has UK phone book
    >> > information? (Real time, because I want to apply this to incoming calls
    >> > with a fairly short timeout.)

    >>
    >> > R

    >>
    >> I'm afraid that for some BS "Privacy" gobbledygook this service is not
    >> available in the UK, unlike many other civilized first-world countries.
    >>
    >> And please don't get me started.

    >
    > Data Protection Act
    >
    > it's said that about 40% of BT landline numbers are ex-directory; the
    > phone book people receive only includes BT and not other landline
    > customers; most mobile networks barely have or certainly don't promote
    > directory services,
    >
    > so your opinion that it is bullshit might put you in a minority, as
    > most people don't have or don't want their details available
    >


    The BT phone book does list numbers from other operators - I have two
    entries in my local phone book one for my BT line and another for my Virgin
    Media line.

    Peter
     
    Peter Andrews, Oct 9, 2010
    #4
  5. Roger Burton West

    Bodincus Guest

    (09/10/10 13:48), andy:
    > On 9 Oct, 11:38, Bodincus<> wrote:
    >> (09/10/10 11:13), Roger Burton West:> As stated in the subject, really: does anyone have a pointer to a
    >>> (preferably free) number-to-name web site that has UK phone book
    >>> information? (Real time, because I want to apply this to incoming calls
    >>> with a fairly short timeout.)

    >>
    >>> R

    >>
    >> I'm afraid that for some BS "Privacy" gobbledygook this service is not
    >> available in the UK, unlike many other civilized first-world countries.
    >>
    >> And please don't get me started.

    >
    > Data Protection Act
    >
    > it's said that about 40% of BT landline numbers are ex-directory; the
    > phone book people receive only includes BT and not other landline
    > customers; most mobile networks barely have or certainly don't promote
    > directory services,
    >
    > so your opinion that it is bullshit might put you in a minority, as
    > most people don't have or don't want their details available

    Do me a favour, don't add BS to the BS. Just - don't.
    The DPA doesn't say it's illegal to publish a reverse phone search.
    Your address and phone number are public domain, published in the Phone
    Book and other umpteen services online, so there's NOTHING interested by
    the DPA. You can't be covered by the DPA for data that's widely
    available to the public and YOU specifically *agreed* to be published.
    The DPA legislates about what the Data Controllers obligations are when
    the information they hold / collect / manage are other people's personal
    sensitive data.
    If you find ANY sections of the DPA that even simply inherit that a
    reverse phone search is covered by the same, I'll pay you a beer.
    But if you are wrong, you owe me 100'000 quid.
    I had this discussion with a high ranking police officer and an expert
    lawyer, and they had to agree that there's NO legal reason at all why
    there's no reverse search available.
    In fact, if you buy a CD from 192.com, at the cheap price of £800 a pop,
    you can do all the reverse searches you want.
    And for those that don't want their phone number published, I hope they
    are aware that this puts them in the "most likely to be dodgy" police,
    HMRC and Home office lists.
    A telephone is a way to get contacted, WHY do people get a phone line
    and ACTIVELY try stop other people contacting them?
    I don't get it. Truly, I don't.
    --
    Bodincus - The Y2K Druid
    ************************
    Law 42 on computing:
    Anything that could fail, will break at the worst possible mom%*= ?@@
    # Access Violation - Core dumped
    # Kernel Panic
     
    Bodincus, Oct 9, 2010
    #5
  6. Roger Burton West

    TheFug Guest

    Op 9-10-2010 19:30, Bodincus schreef:
    > (09/10/10 13:48), andy:
    >> On 9 Oct, 11:38, Bodincus<> wrote:
    >>> (09/10/10 11:13), Roger Burton West:> As stated in the subject,
    >>> really: does anyone have a pointer to a
    >>>> (preferably free) number-to-name web site that has UK phone book
    >>>> information? (Real time, because I want to apply this to incoming calls
    >>>> with a fairly short timeout.)
    >>>
    >>>> R
    >>>
    >>> I'm afraid that for some BS "Privacy" gobbledygook this service is not
    >>> available in the UK, unlike many other civilized first-world countries.
    >>>
    >>> And please don't get me started.

    >>
    >> Data Protection Act
    >>
    >> it's said that about 40% of BT landline numbers are ex-directory; the
    >> phone book people receive only includes BT and not other landline
    >> customers; most mobile networks barely have or certainly don't promote
    >> directory services,
    >>
    >> so your opinion that it is bullshit might put you in a minority, as
    >> most people don't have or don't want their details available

    > Do me a favour, don't add BS to the BS. Just - don't.
    > The DPA doesn't say it's illegal to publish a reverse phone search.
    > Your address and phone number are public domain, published in the Phone
    > Book and other umpteen services online, so there's NOTHING interested by
    > the DPA. You can't be covered by the DPA for data that's widely
    > available to the public and YOU specifically *agreed* to be published.
    > The DPA legislates about what the Data Controllers obligations are when
    > the information they hold / collect / manage are other people's personal
    > sensitive data.
    > If you find ANY sections of the DPA that even simply inherit that a
    > reverse phone search is covered by the same, I'll pay you a beer.
    > But if you are wrong, you owe me 100'000 quid.
    > I had this discussion with a high ranking police officer and an expert
    > lawyer, and they had to agree that there's NO legal reason at all why
    > there's no reverse search available.
    > In fact, if you buy a CD from 192.com, at the cheap price of £800 a pop,
    > you can do all the reverse searches you want.
    > And for those that don't want their phone number published, I hope they
    > are aware that this puts them in the "most likely to be dodgy" police,
    > HMRC and Home office lists.
    > A telephone is a way to get contacted, WHY do people get a phone line
    > and ACTIVELY try stop other people contacting them?
    > I don't get it. Truly, I don't.


    For these 800 quid you should also read the instructions that comes with
    this cd.
     
    TheFug, Oct 9, 2010
    #6
  7. Jono wrote:

    > Whatever happened to 192.com - I bought a CD from them that contained


    From what I've heard, their data is rather unreliable. It's obviously
    been pieced together from lots of sources, and I believe many entries
    are years out of date.
     
    David Woolley, Oct 9, 2010
    #7
  8. Bodincus wrote:

    > The DPA doesn't say it's illegal to publish a reverse phone search.
    > Your address and phone number are public domain, published in the Phone


    The phone book is subject to a database copyright in the UK, and like
    most publications subject to such copyrights (e.g maps) will contain
    bogus entries to detect attempts to make unauthorised derivative works.

    You can compile a reverse directory legally, you must do it from other
    sources.
     
    David Woolley, Oct 9, 2010
    #8
  9. Roger Burton West

    Graham. Guest

    "Bodincus" <> wrote in message news:NE1so.17$2...
    (09/10/10 13:48), andy:
    > On 9 Oct, 11:38, Bodincus<> wrote:
    >> (09/10/10 11:13), Roger Burton West:> As stated in the subject, really: does anyone have a pointer to a
    >>> (preferably free) number-to-name web site that has UK phone book
    >>> information? (Real time, because I want to apply this to incoming calls
    >>> with a fairly short timeout.)

    >>
    >>> R

    >>
    >> I'm afraid that for some BS "Privacy" gobbledygook this service is not
    >> available in the UK, unlike many other civilized first-world countries.
    >>
    >> And please don't get me started.

    >
    > Data Protection Act
    >
    > it's said that about 40% of BT landline numbers are ex-directory; the
    > phone book people receive only includes BT and not other landline
    > customers; most mobile networks barely have or certainly don't promote
    > directory services,
    >
    > so your opinion that it is bullshit might put you in a minority, as
    > most people don't have or don't want their details available

    Do me a favour, don't add BS to the BS. Just - don't.
    The DPA doesn't say it's illegal to publish a reverse phone search.
    Your address and phone number are public domain, published in the Phone
    Book and other umpteen services online, so there's NOTHING interested by
    the DPA. You can't be covered by the DPA for data that's widely
    available to the public and YOU specifically *agreed* to be published.
    The DPA legislates about what the Data Controllers obligations are when
    the information they hold / collect / manage are other people's personal
    sensitive data.
    If you find ANY sections of the DPA that even simply inherit that a
    reverse phone search is covered by the same, I'll pay you a beer.
    But if you are wrong, you owe me 100'000 quid.
    I had this discussion with a high ranking police officer and an expert
    lawyer, and they had to agree that there's NO legal reason at all why
    there's no reverse search available.
    In fact, if you buy a CD from 192.com, at the cheap price of £800 a pop,
    you can do all the reverse searches you want.
    And for those that don't want their phone number published, I hope they
    are aware that this puts them in the "most likely to be dodgy" police,
    HMRC and Home office lists.
    A telephone is a way to get contacted, WHY do people get a phone line
    and ACTIVELY try stop other people contacting them?
    I don't get it. Truly, I don't.


    At least I use my real first name on Usenet, you appear to prefer not to reveal
    any handle to your identity here, and I respect that.
    So why do you feel that telephone subscribers shouldn't manage what they make public
    in any way as they feel fit.

    Your comment about ex D people being deemed dodgy is duly noted, but be aware
    politicians and police officers are often paranoid about putting their own personal details
    in the public domain.

    --
    Graham.

    %Profound_observation%
     
    Graham., Oct 10, 2010
    #9
  10. In article <i8qicc$qb4$-september.org>,
    lid (David Woolley) wrote:

    > From what I've heard, their data is rather unreliable. It's
    > obviously been pieced together from lots of sources, and I believe
    > many entries are years out of date.


    Indeed, 192 gathered a lot of electoral roll and company information to
    create it's database, and rarely updates it.

    My company is listed in 192 at a registered address we never traded from or
    published, and ceased using 20 years ago when the accountants moved.
    No-one with any sense will rely on 192 information.

    Angus
     
    Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd, Oct 10, 2010
    #10
  11. Roger Burton West

    Bodincus Guest

    (10/10/10 01:25), Graham.:
    > At least I use my real first name on Usenet, you appear to prefer not to reveal
    > any handle to your identity here, and I respect that.
    > So why do you feel that telephone subscribers shouldn't manage what they make public
    > in any way as they feel fit.
    >
    > Your comment about ex D people being deemed dodgy is duly noted, but be aware
    > politicians and police officers are often paranoid about putting their own personal details
    > in the public domain.
    >

    If you Google my NG handle you'll find my real name, so it's not about
    hiding myself. I'm using this same nickname throughout many other forums
    and websites.

    Not using real names and email addresses on Usenet is just a protection
    against email harvester bots, and nothing else.

    Politicians are afraid to be targeted for their (obvious) political
    views, a subject that is protected under the DPA and other privacy law,
    so they're entitled to a certain degree of privacy about their public
    details.

    Same rule applies for members of the Forces, and for anybody that in
    force of its public figure can be subject to discrimination because of
    its position / religion / sexual tendencies / political position.
    These are protected by the DPA and the Privacy Act, and special
    provisions are in place.

    But your neighbour, officially - say - an accountant employed by a local
    company, doesn't have any obvious reasons to be ex directory, so this is
    flagged down, as it's also flagged not to be in the edited electoral
    register.

    Both statuses are noted on your files at Credit Rating Agencies
    (Equifax, Experian, CallCredit, etc) and severely affect your credit rating.

    At least you give grounds to people to think you *might* be slightly
    paranoid, misinformed or - simply - dodgy.
    --
    Bodincus - The Y2K Druid
    ************************
    Law 42 on computing:
    Anything that could fail, will break at the worst possible mom%*= ?@@
    # Access Violation - Core dumped
    # Kernel Panic
     
    Bodincus, Oct 10, 2010
    #11
  12. Roger Burton West

    Bodincus Guest

    (09/10/10 21:16), David Woolley:
    > Bodincus wrote:
    >
    >> The DPA doesn't say it's illegal to publish a reverse phone search.
    >> Your address and phone number are public domain, published in the Phone

    >
    > The phone book is subject to a database copyright in the UK, and like
    > most publications subject to such copyrights (e.g maps) will contain
    > bogus entries to detect attempts to make unauthorised derivative works.
    >
    > You can compile a reverse directory legally, you must do it from other
    > sources.


    You are referring to this:

    http://www.caret.cam.ac.uk/copyright/Page92.html#Topic54

    Nothing stops me to create a website where I collect names, addresses
    and phone numbers of people and companies that voluntarily subscribe or
    register, and to offer a reverse search.

    It's not Privacy, it's not Data Protection. It's Database rights, and
    applies ONLY to the specific database instance and format used by the
    company that manages it (BT, Yellow pages, Thomson, etc...).

    They might apply for copyright protection for the *format* they are
    publishing the information in, be it the Phone Book or the online database.

    But the data itself (names, addresses and phone numbers) is NOT
    automatically covered by copyright because it is published in a work
    protected by database rights. They *might* have copyrights individually
    because of different status (a brand name, or a trademark).

    If you google a number, you might get a search result for the business
    or individual that had its number published on its website, Facebook or
    My Space page, and indexed by the crawler. Google is not violating any
    law offering you a "reverse search".

    Again, debunking this myth that a reverse phone search is illegal
    because of Privacy or Data Protection is fairly easy... if you know the Law.
    --
    Bodincus - The Y2K Druid
    ************************
    Law 42 on computing:
    Anything that could fail, will break at the worst possible mom%*= ?@@
    # Access Violation - Core dumped
    # Kernel Panic
     
    Bodincus, Oct 10, 2010
    #12
  13. Roger Burton West

    alexd Guest

    Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, Roger Burton
    West chose the tried and tested strategy of:

    > As stated in the subject, really: does anyone have a pointer to a
    > (preferably free) number-to-name web site that has UK phone book
    > information? (Real time, because I want to apply this to incoming calls
    > with a fairly short timeout.)


    It contains mostly nuisance callers, but http://whocallsme.com might be of
    interest. Don't know how easy it is to parse out a name for a number. I
    think somebody has managed it though:

    http://pbxinaflash.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4387

    There are loads of other sites similar to whocallsme [eg
    http://telepest.co.uk] but they're all user-contributed, so potentially
    erroneous or even maliciously wrong. That Superfecta thing should give you
    some ideas on how to screen scrape, and what sort of data is available.

    --
    <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    14:08:01 up 4 days, 18:40, 6 users, load average: 0.05, 0.02, 0.00
    "I am utterly appalled at how I have been treated like a criminal"
    -- Andrew Crossley, ACS:Law, 13 August 2010
     
    alexd, Oct 10, 2010
    #13
  14. Roger Burton West

    alexd Guest

    Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, Bodincus chose
    the tried and tested strategy of:

    > And for those that don't want their phone number published, I hope they
    > are aware that this puts them in the "most likely to be dodgy" police,
    > HMRC and Home office lists.


    Really? Care to cite any references for this?

    > A telephone is a way to get contacted, WHY do people get a phone line
    > and ACTIVELY try stop other people contacting them?
    > I don't get it. Truly, I don't.


    I think you do get it - it's for the same reason that you have an email
    address and don't use it on Usenet.

    --
    <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    14:20:43 up 4 days, 18:52, 6 users, load average: 0.00, 0.14, 0.08
    "I am utterly appalled at how I have been treated like a criminal"
    -- Andrew Crossley, ACS:Law, 13 August 2010
     
    alexd, Oct 10, 2010
    #14
  15. Bodincus wrote:

    > You are referring to this:
    >
    > http://www.caret.cam.ac.uk/copyright/Page92.html#Topic54
    >
    > Nothing stops me to create a website where I collect names, addresses
    > and phone numbers of people and companies that voluntarily subscribe or
    > register, and to offer a reverse search.


    True.

    >
    > They might apply for copyright protection for the *format* they are
    > publishing the information in, be it the Phone Book or the online database.


    They have database copyright, which means you cannot use them as a
    source for your hypothetical directory. As it is a copyright, you can
    independently create such a work. The restriction goes beyond the
    presentation of the data, it includes the data itself, but only to the
    extent that it is taken from that source.

    Database copyrights don't require creativity, only that some work went
    into the compilation.

    >
    > But the data itself (names, addresses and phone numbers) is NOT
    > automatically covered by copyright because it is published in a work
    > protected by database rights. They *might* have copyrights individually
    > because of different status (a brand name, or a trademark).


    The data isn't, provided it is obtained independently. The problem is
    that there is a massive amount of work involved in doing that and
    keeping it up to date.

    >
    > Again, debunking this myth that a reverse phone search is illegal
    > because of Privacy or Data Protection is fairly easy... if you know the
    > Law.


    Data protection comes in if the data wasn't provided for the purpose of
    a public directory and Google do sail very close to the wind in many
    intellectual property and privacy areas. Generally people who put phone
    numbers on web pages do so because they are businesses and want them
    disseminated. If, for example, Google were to construct such a
    directory from the signatures of gmail messages, that would be an
    invalid use.

    The basic problem is that you cannot produce a reverse directory that is
    useful for arbitrary home numbers without violating data protection
    legislation, because not enough people will give informed consent to get
    adequate coverage.
     
    David Woolley, Oct 10, 2010
    #15
  16. In message <OBfso.19597$2>, Bodincus
    <> writes
    >But your neighbour, officially - say - an accountant employed by a
    >local company, doesn't have any obvious reasons to be ex directory, so
    >this is flagged down, as it's also flagged not to be in the edited
    >electoral register.
    >
    >Both statuses are noted on your files at Credit Rating Agencies
    >(Equifax, Experian, CallCredit, etc) and severely affect your credit
    >rating.
    >

    You've scared me! I'm on the electoral roll as a registered voter but
    have opted not to be included in the commercial version which is sold to
    marketing companies. Why the f........ should opting out of receiving
    marketing stuff affect my credit rating? Has registration with the TPS
    also had an affect? Where does this crap end?
    --
    Malcolm
     
    Malcolm Loades, Oct 10, 2010
    #16
  17. Roger Burton West

    alexd Guest

    Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, Malcolm Loades
    chose the tried and tested strategy of:

    > You've scared me! I'm on the electoral roll as a registered voter but
    > have opted not to be included in the commercial version which is sold to
    > marketing companies. Why the f........ should opting out of receiving
    > marketing stuff affect my credit rating?


    I doubt it does. If appearing on the edited register and the phone book had
    a positive impact on your credit score, it would be mentioned here:

    http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/loans/credit-rating-credit-score

    --
    <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    17:46:22 up 4 days, 22:18, 5 users, load average: 0.19, 0.06, 0.02
    "I am utterly appalled at how I have been treated like a criminal"
    -- Andrew Crossley, ACS:Law, 13 August 2010
     
    alexd, Oct 10, 2010
    #17
  18. Roger Burton West

    Bodincus Guest

    (10/10/10 19:06), alexd:
    > Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, Malcolm Loades
    > chose the tried and tested strategy of:
    >
    >> You've scared me! I'm on the electoral roll as a registered voter but
    >> have opted not to be included in the commercial version which is sold to
    >> marketing companies. Why the f........ should opting out of receiving
    >> marketing stuff affect my credit rating?

    >
    > I doubt it does. If appearing on the edited register and the phone book had
    > a positive impact on your credit score, it would be mentioned here:
    >
    > http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/loans/credit-rating-credit-score
    >

    Have you *ever* cared to request your statutory credit file? If you did,
    you would have seen by yourself that these information are reported on it.

    Why do you think the credit rating agencies take the effort to keep the
    information other than to let lenders know - and therefore decide your
    creditworthiness?

    Lenders pay the credit rating agencies good money to access your file,
    and the agencies show them what they want to know.

    Being on a public register does not necessarily have a positive impact
    on your credit score, *not* being definitively impacts negatively.

    Take your head out of the sand, in this day and age to feed the culture
    of suspicion not being honestly open and transparent seriously affects
    your daily life.

    And I already said why I'm not using my name and email on Usenet.
    First, it's tradition - I'm a seriously old dog of the 'net, and I still
    have respect for this stupid little thing.

    Secondly, it's well known that posting your true email address on a
    newsgroup is bad practice - not for privacy or security, but to avoid
    your email address being harvested by spambots. They're fully automated,
    and in minutes your mailbox is filling up to the limit with junk. It's
    called self-mailbombing. It's stupid.

    Get a grip with reality. It's out there, if you dare to look for it.
    --
    Bodincus - The Y2K Druid
    ************************
    Law 42 on computing:
    Anything that could fail, will break at the worst possible mom%*= ?@@
    # Access Violation - Core dumped
    # Kernel Panic
     
    Bodincus, Oct 11, 2010
    #18
  19. Roger Burton West

    alexd Guest

    Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, Bodincus chose
    the tried and tested strategy of:

    > (10/10/10 19:06), alexd:


    >> http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/loans/credit-rating-credit-score
    >>

    > Have you *ever* cared to request your statutory credit file? If you did,
    > you would have seen by yourself that these information are reported on it.


    So what? My name appears on it too, but that doesn't mean being called Barry
    rather than Alex makes any difference to my creditworthiness.

    > Being on a public register does not necessarily have a positive impact
    > on your credit score, *not* being definitively impacts negatively.


    If you've got anything factual to back your deranged rantings up with then
    I'm all ears. I'm going to be trusting what MSE says rather than you, when
    it comes to issues around finance.

    > Secondly, it's well known that posting your true email address on a
    > newsgroup is bad practice - not for privacy or security, but to avoid
    > your email address being harvested by spambots. They're fully automated,
    > and in minutes your mailbox is filling up to the limit with junk.


    Not a problem I've experienced. My Hotmail addresses gets slightly fewer
    than 2 emails a day. Perhaps you need to use a spam filter?

    > It's called self-mailbombing. It's stupid.


    Groan, more nonsense. Surely it would only be self-mailbombing if I was
    emailing myself?

    --
    <http://ale.cx/> (AIM:troffasky) ()
    19:07:25 up 5 days, 23:39, 5 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.03
    "I am utterly appalled at how I have been treated like a criminal"
    -- Andrew Crossley, ACS:Law, 13 August 2010
     
    alexd, Oct 11, 2010
    #19
  20. Roger Burton West

    Bodincus Guest

    (11/10/10 19:23), alexd:
    > Meanwhile, at the uk.telecom.voip Job Justification Hearings, Bodincus chose
    > the tried and tested strategy of:
    >
    >> (10/10/10 19:06), alexd:

    >
    >>> http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/loans/credit-rating-credit-score
    >>>

    >> Have you *ever* cared to request your statutory credit file? If you did,
    >> you would have seen by yourself that these information are reported on it.

    >
    > So what? My name appears on it too, but that doesn't mean being called Barry
    > rather than Alex makes any difference to my creditworthiness.
    >
    >> Being on a public register does not necessarily have a positive impact
    >> on your credit score, *not* being definitively impacts negatively.

    >
    > If you've got anything factual to back your deranged rantings up with then
    > I'm all ears. I'm going to be trusting what MSE says rather than you, when
    > it comes to issues around finance.
    >
    >> Secondly, it's well known that posting your true email address on a
    >> newsgroup is bad practice - not for privacy or security, but to avoid
    >> your email address being harvested by spambots. They're fully automated,
    >> and in minutes your mailbox is filling up to the limit with junk.

    >
    > Not a problem I've experienced. My Hotmail addresses gets slightly fewer
    > than 2 emails a day. Perhaps you need to use a spam filter?
    >
    >> It's called self-mailbombing. It's stupid.

    >
    > Groan, more nonsense. Surely it would only be self-mailbombing if I was
    > emailing myself?
    >

    PLONK

    --
    Bodincus - The Y2K Druid
    ************************
    Law 42 on computing:
    Anything that could fail, will break at the worst possible mom%*= ?@@
    # Access Violation - Core dumped
    # Kernel Panic
     
    Bodincus, Oct 11, 2010
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Frisbee®
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    1,117
  2. Clark Mills
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    771
    thing
    Sep 21, 2004
  3. Amazon Shopping Mall

    Reverse Phone Lookup

    Amazon Shopping Mall, May 10, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    377
    Amazon Shopping Mall
    May 10, 2008
  4. STOCK TRADING

    Reverse Phone Lookup

    STOCK TRADING, May 15, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    372
    STOCK TRADING
    May 15, 2008
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,007
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page