Register my name | Post with my account

Who Called Us

The phone is ringing, and I don't recognize the number,
All Caller ID says is, "NAME UNAVAILABLE".
Please help me figure out who is calling and what they want

CORP OFFICE1
Atlanta, GA
20 calls reported from this number. According to 3 reports the identity of this caller is CORP OFFICE1

Report a phone call from 706-844-1241

Comment on calls from 706-844-1241

18 Comments

April 10th, 2009 Jeff

Three steps to get them to stop bugging you:
1) Answer the phone and be excited that they have taken the time out of their busy day to contact you. How nice they are to alert to such an important thing.
2)Talk alot and LIE to them. Give them a different name, different car info. Pretend you want the warranty but when it comes time to give them your car info, make sure it is an old piece of crap. The do not give warranties to older cars.
3) Waste as much of their time as you can. If they can't warranty your first car, maybe they can warranty your second (even older) car. No? what about your third or fourth car. Do they offer warranties on ATVs? boats? scooters? mortocycles? homes? No. Dang, what about that collector car you bought at auction last weekend for a cool $417,000. You don't plan to drive it but it would be good to have a warranty anyway. No? Oh man, how disappointed you are that they can't help you. And if they can, then go as long as you can, giving fake info all the while. At then end when you find out how much it is, tell them it is too much and then haggle the price down. Remove features and options, you don't need a $50 deductible how about a $100. Still too much make it $500. At the end (AT LEAST 10 minutes later) tell them you changed your mind and to place you on there internal do-not-call list.

During this time you should be able to get all the info you need about the company that has hired them to solicit you. Numbers to call back incase you get disconnected, who to ask for, etc.

They get paid commssion for sales and will strike your number so they don't waste there time again.

Remember waste as much time as possible. It helps everybody else out - inlcuding yourself! This does actually take some practice.

April 9th, 2009 Ed CA

Not only am I getting calls from 706-844-1241 on my land line I am also getting them on my cell phone. have tried to get off there call list by pressing #2 but that does no good. Press #1 to get a live person to complain to, they just hang up. Tried to phone the number and all I get is lines are busy. I don't need a warranty

April 9th, 2009 Irritated NJ

I'm not only getting calls from this phone #, also 402-982-0464 and 603-214-3656. All with the same message. The idiot who I yelled at today said in the most rudest way is "all you had to say was take me off your list" and then she hung up on me. Yah, I've said that twice before!! My husband got the same call today from area code 704. How can we stop this? Isn't this harrasment? Can the FCC look into this?

April 2nd, 2009 Ryan PA

I think they are scamming. I've only answered 3 out of the last 8 calls from them. The first time I talked to someone and said the car is 13 years old and doesn't have a warranty, the guy hung up on me. Just now I got my second call in about 4 hours today and was more specific about not wanting anymore calls from them, the car's age, ect. and the guy hung up on me again! They might be fishing for personal info but enough is enough. Legitimate businesses would not hang-up if you stated to take your name off their calling list!

March 30th, 2009 Brandy

I pressed 1 at the recording, informed them my number was on the Federal Do-Not-Call Registry, his reply "You're kidding me". He then gave me some 'false' information (I mean, I guess his name really could have been "John Smith" and he actually works for "Pocahontis"). He then hung up on me. I went to the Do-Not-Call registry website and filled out a complaint. Maybe if they get enough official complaints from the FCC they'll quit.

March 27th, 2009 lbro MI

"Car warranty is expiring" (robocall) "Press one to talk to ..." BS

March 26th, 2009 BOB TN

CAR WARRANTY SEVERAL TIMES A DAY TRIED TO BE PUT ON DO NOT CALL- NO EFFECT

March 26th, 2009 Moi McNeely MI

I have recieved dozens of warranty calls from this number. When I asked for a supervisor today, the dumb porch monkey hung up on me....

March 26th, 2009 Varth_Dader FL

Called at 5:20p. Recording selling 'extended warantee's. This was to my work cel. Isn't spamming a wireless a federal offense?

March 23rd, 2009 Diane NY

DK, didn't pick up

March 13th, 2009 Lyss PA

Car warrenty supposedly. They're clearly full of crap as they call even when requested not to and they have no information on your car. I got my car used and it's 11 years old. The warrenty isn't valid anyways, they're just reying to scam anyone gullible enough to listen to them. Jerks.

March 13th, 2009 SCAMMERS SUED CA

Lawsuit filed against Warranty SCAMMERS !

Many were found to be located in Missouri !

Article website:

ago.mo.newsreleases


Article:


Attorney General's News Release

March 6, 2008
Nixon’s “Operation Taken For A Ride” targets sellers of extended service contracts for vehicles who use high-pressure, misleading tactics

Jefferson City, Mo. — Attorney General Jay Nixon today took legal action against several businesses, most of them based in the St. Louis area, that used misrepresentation and deception to sell motor vehicle extended service contracts (MVESC) to consumers. Nixon said the coordinated filings of lawsuits and settlements, dubbed “Operation Taken For A Ride,” involve scores of consumers from across the country who were misled into paying for extended service contracts on their vehicles that, in most cases, they did not need.

“It’s rather insidious how these companies prey upon consumers’ fears, sending misleading letters informing them that their current motor vehicle warranties were about to expire, when in fact many of the consumers possessed factory warranties that wouldn’t expire for several months,” Nixon said. “That was the hook to sell these consumers unneeded motor vehicle extended service contracts for hundreds or thousands of dollars. When consumers canceled the contracts, many received only a partial refund or no refund at all.”

Nixon says the companies mislead consumers in letters and postcards with boldfaced statements such as “Notification of Interruption!” and “Important Dated Material Enclosed” — leaving the impression that they are sent from the manufacturers who produced the consumers’ vehicles or the dealers who sold the vehicles to them. In fact, Nixon said, the defendants fail to inform the consumers that they are not affiliated with the manufacturer, dealer or any local, state or federal government agency, and that the mailings amount to advertisements for the company’s MVESC.

“Many consumers — confused, but not wanting their car warranties to expire — went ahead and purchased the new, but in most cases unneeded, service contract the company was hawking,” Nixon said.

In one case, an elderly consumer received a postcard stating that her motor vehicle warranty was “expired or about to expire” in March 2007, even though her actual extended warranty through General Motors wouldn’t expire until November 2008. The consumer purchased a new MVESC for $1,898 from the company, and the company refused to issue a refund when it was requested.

Nixon filed one of his lawsuits against that company, Vehicle Services Inc., of St. Peters, in St. Charles County Circuit Court, requesting injunctions, restitution for consumers, penalties and other relief. In addition, the Attorney General filed lawsuits today against the following businesses:

* TXEN Partners, which does business as Service Protection Direct of St. Louis; and a related company, United Warranty Solutions, for using misleading notification letters to pressure, confuse and intimidate consumers into purchasing MVESCs they did not need. The defendants failed to disclose coverage requirements to consumers who purchased MVESCs (such as the requirement to use a specific brand of oil to receive reimbursement for repairs); failed to honor contract terms and perform repair on consumers’ vehicles; and failed to issue refunds to consumers, including one consumer who is owed as much as $3,800. The lawsuit was filed in St. Louis County Circuit Court.
* Dealer Warranty Services of St. Charles, for using misleading notification letters to pressure, confuse and intimidate consumers into purchasing MVESCs they did not need. The defendant also misrepresented to consumers the cost of purchasing the MVESCs and debited the bank accounts of several consumers without authorization. The lawsuit was filed in St. Charles County Circuit Court.
* Certified Auto Warranty Services Inc., of Lenexa, Kan., which promised a “100 percent Money Back Guarantee” to those consumers who purchased and canceled MVESCs, but then issued only partial refunds or no refunds at all. One consumer who paid $1,335 canceled her contract, but has received no refund to date. The lawsuit was filed in Greene County Circuit Court.
* National Dealers Warranty Inc., of St. Peters, which sent consumers postcards and letters informing them that they had limited time to purchase renewed, extended warranties for their vehicles. The company neglected to inform consumers that it was not affiliated with the dealers or manufacturers of the vehicle, or that it was actually offering to sell MVESCs instead of warranties. The lawsuit was filed in St. Charles County Circuit Court.
* National Auto Warranty Services Inc., of Wentzville, which also sent consumers postcards and letters informing them that their warranties were about to expire, and that it was offering them their final chance to purchase a renewed, extended warranty. The company failed to inform the consumers that it was not affiliated with the dealers or manufacturers of the vehicle, and that it was actually offering to sell MVESCs instead of warranties. In addition, the company violated the Missouri No Call Law by calling Missourians who were on the No Call list, as well as federal telemarketing laws by contacting consumers by phone and failing to honor their requests not to be called. The lawsuit was filed in St. Charles County Circuit Court.
* Smart Choice Protection of St. Louis, doing business as Direct Dealer Warranties, which also sent consumers postcards and letters informing them that their warranties were about to expire, and that it was offering the final chance to purchase a renewed, extended warranty. The company failed to inform the consumers that it was not affiliated with the dealers or manufacturers of the vehicle, and that it was actually offering the sell MVESCs instead of warranties. The lawsuit was filed in St. Louis City Circuit Court.

In addition to the lawsuits, the Attorney General filed assurances of voluntary compliance with two companies to settle allegations of misrepresentation in the selling of MVESCs:

* Carhill Enterprises, which does business as Consumer Protection Services, of 1232 Washington Avenue in St. Louis, will pay $7,209 restitution to eight consumers and $4,000 to the state to cover the costs of the investigation and enforcement of the case. The company also agreed to injunctive relief which requires them to inform consumers upfront of specific details of their product prior to purchasing. The agreement was filed in St. Louis City Circuit Court;
* Warranty Activation Headquarters, of 12244 Tesson Ferry Road in St. Louis, satisfactorily responded to all consumers who complained. The company will pay $5,000 to the state to cover the costs of the investigation and enforcement of the case, which was filed in St. Louis City Circuit Court. The agreement also requires the company to continue to provide full refunds to any consumers who cancel within 30 days.

Nixon encouraged consumers who have complaints about businesses selling motor vehicle extended service contracts to file complaints with his office, by either going online to ago.mo.gov or by calling the Consumer Protection Hotline at 1-800-392-8222.

Denotes bullet point Take the "All About Autos" online quiz

Inquiries from consumers should be directed to consumer@ago.mo.gov or 1-800-392-8222 (from within Missouri) or 573-751-3321 (outside Missouri).

All media inquiries should be directed to the Communications Office.

E-mail Phone: 573-751-8844 Fax: 573-751-5818

March 13th, 2009 LAWSUIT CA

Read This: "Vehicle Services, Inc. Sued"

Many others similar located in Missouri !

Here is the website for the lawsuit:
ago.mo.gov

Here is the Lawsuit's Detais:


Attorney General's News Release

March 6, 2008
Nixon’s “Operation Taken For A Ride” targets sellers of extended service contracts for vehicles who use high-pressure, misleading tactics

Jefferson City, Mo. — Attorney General Jay Nixon today took legal action against several businesses, most of them based in the St. Louis area, that used misrepresentation and deception to sell motor vehicle extended service contracts (MVESC) to consumers. Nixon said the coordinated filings of lawsuits and settlements, dubbed “Operation Taken For A Ride,” involve scores of consumers from across the country who were misled into paying for extended service contracts on their vehicles that, in most cases, they did not need.

“It’s rather insidious how these companies prey upon consumers’ fears, sending misleading letters informing them that their current motor vehicle warranties were about to expire, when in fact many of the consumers possessed factory warranties that wouldn’t expire for several months,” Nixon said. “That was the hook to sell these consumers unneeded motor vehicle extended service contracts for hundreds or thousands of dollars. When consumers canceled the contracts, many received only a partial refund or no refund at all.”

Nixon says the companies mislead consumers in letters and postcards with boldfaced statements such as “Notification of Interruption!” and “Important Dated Material Enclosed” — leaving the impression that they are sent from the manufacturers who produced the consumers’ vehicles or the dealers who sold the vehicles to them. In fact, Nixon said, the defendants fail to inform the consumers that they are not affiliated with the manufacturer, dealer or any local, state or federal government agency, and that the mailings amount to advertisements for the company’s MVESC.

“Many consumers — confused, but not wanting their car warranties to expire — went ahead and purchased the new, but in most cases unneeded, service contract the company was hawking,” Nixon said.

In one case, an elderly consumer received a postcard stating that her motor vehicle warranty was “expired or about to expire” in March 2007, even though her actual extended warranty through General Motors wouldn’t expire until November 2008. The consumer purchased a new MVESC for $1,898 from the company, and the company refused to issue a refund when it was requested.

Nixon filed one of his lawsuits against that company, Vehicle Services Inc., of St. Peters, in St. Charles County Circuit Court, requesting injunctions, restitution for consumers, penalties and other relief. In addition, the Attorney General filed lawsuits today against the following businesses:

* TXEN Partners, which does business as Service Protection Direct of St. Louis; and a related company, United Warranty Solutions, for using misleading notification letters to pressure, confuse and intimidate consumers into purchasing MVESCs they did not need. The defendants failed to disclose coverage requirements to consumers who purchased MVESCs (such as the requirement to use a specific brand of oil to receive reimbursement for repairs); failed to honor contract terms and perform repair on consumers’ vehicles; and failed to issue refunds to consumers, including one consumer who is owed as much as $3,800. The lawsuit was filed in St. Louis County Circuit Court.
* Dealer Warranty Services of St. Charles, for using misleading notification letters to pressure, confuse and intimidate consumers into purchasing MVESCs they did not need. The defendant also misrepresented to consumers the cost of purchasing the MVESCs and debited the bank accounts of several consumers without authorization. The lawsuit was filed in St. Charles County Circuit Court.
* Certified Auto Warranty Services Inc., of Lenexa, Kan., which promised a “100 percent Money Back Guarantee” to those consumers who purchased and canceled MVESCs, but then issued only partial refunds or no refunds at all. One consumer who paid $1,335 canceled her contract, but has received no refund to date. The lawsuit was filed in Greene County Circuit Court.
* National Dealers Warranty Inc., of St. Peters, which sent consumers postcards and letters informing them that they had limited time to purchase renewed, extended warranties for their vehicles. The company neglected to inform consumers that it was not affiliated with the dealers or manufacturers of the vehicle, or that it was actually offering to sell MVESCs instead of warranties. The lawsuit was filed in St. Charles County Circuit Court.
* National Auto Warranty Services Inc., of Wentzville, which also sent consumers postcards and letters informing them that their warranties were about to expire, and that it was offering them their final chance to purchase a renewed, extended warranty. The company failed to inform the consumers that it was not affiliated with the dealers or manufacturers of the vehicle, and that it was actually offering to sell MVESCs instead of warranties. In addition, the company violated the Missouri No Call Law by calling Missourians who were on the No Call list, as well as federal telemarketing laws by contacting consumers by phone and failing to honor their requests not to be called. The lawsuit was filed in St. Charles County Circuit Court.
* Smart Choice Protection of St. Louis, doing business as Direct Dealer Warranties, which also sent consumers postcards and letters informing them that their warranties were about to expire, and that it was offering the final chance to purchase a renewed, extended warranty. The company failed to inform the consumers that it was not affiliated with the dealers or manufacturers of the vehicle, and that it was actually offering the sell MVESCs instead of warranties. The lawsuit was filed in St. Louis City Circuit Court.

In addition to the lawsuits, the Attorney General filed assurances of voluntary compliance with two companies to settle allegations of misrepresentation in the selling of MVESCs:

* Carhill Enterprises, which does business as Consumer Protection Services, of 1232 Washington Avenue in St. Louis, will pay $7,209 restitution to eight consumers and $4,000 to the state to cover the costs of the investigation and enforcement of the case. The company also agreed to injunctive relief which requires them to inform consumers upfront of specific details of their product prior to purchasing. The agreement was filed in St. Louis City Circuit Court;
* Warranty Activation Headquarters, of 12244 Tesson Ferry Road in St. Louis, satisfactorily responded to all consumers who complained. The company will pay $5,000 to the state to cover the costs of the investigation and enforcement of the case, which was filed in St. Louis City Circuit Court. The agreement also requires the company to continue to provide full refunds to any consumers who cancel within 30 days.

Nixon encouraged consumers who have complaints about businesses selling motor vehicle extended service contracts to file complaints with his office, by either going online to ago.mo.gov or by calling the Consumer Protection Hotline at 1-800-392-8222.

Denotes bullet point Take the "All About Autos" online quiz

Inquiries from consumers should be directed to consumer@ago.mo.gov or 1-800-392-8222 (from within Missouri) or 573-751-3321 (outside Missouri).

All media inquiries should be directed to the Communications Office.

E-mail Phone: 573-751-8844 Fax: 573-751-5818

March 12th, 2009 J

Hold The Presses ! Dunn and Bradstreet (business info) shows that within the (706) area code this company is listed: "FIRST VEHICLE SERVICES, INC" and is NOT the one mentioned in previous posts located in Missouri (although a similar type company). This one IS located in Augusta, Georgia. They use the SAME area code of (706) as the area code on the scam phone messages left on my cell...it would be prudent to assume that THIS is the scam business name of the callers. Please feel free to call them, complain, write or ? Here is their info:

First Vehicle Services Inc

2316 Tobacco Rd, Augusta, GA 30906-9616

Contact Phone: (706) 821-2816
URL (web address):
Business Category: Automotive Services in Augusta, GA
Industry (SIC): Automotive Services, Except Repair and Carwashes

Ads by Google

Facilities Maintenance Quality facilities maintenance. Timely and efficient service.

Local Janitorial Service Professional On-site Cleaning Reliable High-Quality. Free Quotes!

Fleet Management Solution Comprehensive fleet management solutions with tracking and reports

The ads are not affiliated with First Vehicle Services Inc
Business Information

This company profile is for the private company First Vehicle Services Inc branch, located in Augusta, GA. First Vehicle Services Inc's line of business is automotive services.
Company Name: First Vehicle Services Inc
Is This Your Company?
Address: 2316 Tobacco Rd, Augusta, GA 30906-9616 (Map)
Alt Business Name: First Vehicle Services Inc
Location Type: Branch Location
Est. Annual Sales:
Est. # of Employees:
Est. Empl. at Loc.: 60
Year Started:
State of Incorp:
SIC #Code: 7549
Contact's Name: Mahoney A Butler
Contact's Title: General Manager
Parent Companies: First Vehicle Services Inc, First Group Investment Partnership
NAICS: All Other Automotive Repair and Maintenance
Data above provided by D&B.

March 11th, 2009 Tim NY

Trying to get me to replace my car's warranty. Total BS.

March 11th, 2009 MTgrandmabear UT

This is a pre-recorded call and when you try to call it, it is busy. Imagine that!! My phone numbers are all registered with Do Not Call and they just ignore it. Well, maybe it is time to look up the law on harrassing phone calls and SUE these people. The phony number is 810-742-6219 that has harrassed my 15 year old on his cell phone 5 times in about a 2 hour block of time.

March 11th, 2009 Adam NJ

I have been getting called from this scam car warranty BS for weeks now. This is the third time in the past 5 days. Did not answer, no message, but I assume it's the same pricks.

March 11th, 2009 Mooshellmum1 ME

I have tried to put my number on the do-not-call list for the factory warranty on my Honda Civic. Everytime I hit the button to be transfered to a rep they answer and ask me the info on my car. When I say that I would like to be put on the do-not-call list they just hang up on me. What kind of company has that kind of service. HELL NO I would not like your service, you rude and ignorant "service" provider!!!!