Why Won’t Wireless Companies Help Stop Cell Phone Thefts?

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Wireless carriers across the nation and the world for that matter, have it in their power to curb the growing cell phone theft epidemic. It’s not really rocket science: all the companies have to do is ban service on the stolen phones, but for some reason still have taken no positive action.

Yes, that’s right: In most cases, black market buyers or the thieves themselves can still buy service on that stolen phone.
Click to expand...
 
Obvious really - the carriers still make the money on the calls made on a stolen phone. So they have nothing to gain by adding in the expensive infrastructure to block stolen phones.
 
Also who is to say that the phone is stolen. Say the account holder claims her cheating husband "stole" the phone that he paid for, now he cannot get service until he buys a new phone. It would also really kill the second hand market, or at least add a new complication to it.
 
It is just about incentive. There is none for them to do it. It is super easy to do. In Australia we do it all the time and mobile phone thefts are low because of it.
 
#1 It's not to their interest. Even blocking stolen phones requires man power, and therefore money.
#2 Stolen phones means customers will buy new phones, or pay for better warranty.
#3 Selling used phones will become and issue. One that may require a lot of phones calls to their service department.
 
Funnily enough over here (Ireland) it's standard procedure for mobile operators to block stolen phones. Afaik they are legally required to do so.

That said it doesnt do much to help with phone theft. The thieves just get the phone unlocked and it can be used on another network that isnt blocking it.
 
Sprint has been doing this for years. Once a phone is flagged stolen it can only be re-activated on the original account (it is locked to it). Which is why it is always good practice to check the ESN/MEID of any used Sprint phone before purchase.
 
Well since your user agreement that you signed when getting cell phone specifically prohibits you from participating in any class action lawsuit it's up to the individual who lost $200 on a cell phone, to pony up and hire a lawyer ... see where this is going?
 
It's not about being expensive to block, it's about it being a new customer. They figure if the phone is locked to their service, you'll be forced get a new account with them. The person whose phone was stolen will still be under contract, so thereby they grow their customers number.

It's the same thing XM Radio does. When my XM was stolen out of my car I was pretty much told that when I asked why they couldn't black list the device.
 
I don't see how it can help a lot to block stolen phones because criminals could so easily take them out of the country.

Why is it so easy to steal credit/debit cards? It would be so easy to require a pin number for a credit card, but they don't do it. I think customers really don't mind paying extra to cover theft to avoid hassles of the measures to prevent theft. Even something so easy as punching in a few numbers on a keypad at Walmart seems too much to ask.
 
in the UK if an contract phone is stolen/not paid for 3-4 months it will become an brick in the uk (PAYG phones only become bricks if they registered it and reported it as stolen) not sure but think it mite extend to the EU as well

and other issue is Holding an found phone for ransom as if some one finds it i will Only pay £25 to get it back as it costs me £15-25 (depends on the phone make) to get it replaced with Orange Phone cover Next day before 12 as long as i reported it before 4pm


why I find it daft to rob phones in the UK as it be useless within 24 hrs or 5 min's if your ring them up right away

Personally I normally leave 2 peace of tracking software on the phone as some dumb person found the phone and rang my dad up demanding money for it, but i had forgot to reload the software back on 2 months before as the screen stopped working i am guessing he did not turn the data off but the second piece of software i use can Trigger the GPS with an Hidden text message command (phone does not show the message it receives) you can even Load an market app onto the phone from the Android web site remotely, called Plan B, this neat app once installed will try and find its location and then email you its location (only down side with Plan B is if you got back ground data ticked they also get the email as an notification)
 
my other 4-5 phones all had it on apart from that one (guess i was dumb for not doing it :) its my sisters phone so i do not care to much and the phone was backed up 1-2 weeks before so not much was lost any way)
 
I'm pretty sure Verizon blacklists stolen phones so they can't be activated on another account. I'm not sure if this different than what is being discussed here.

One common scam is someone sells a stolen phone before it is reported stolen to Verizon. The thief gets the money and then the rightful owner reports it stolen and the new owner can't activate the phone on their account.
 
Sounds like the carriers who refuse to block stolen phones have a vested interest in those phones being stolen, if you just look at the math and the profits. They can easily avoid the appearance of conflict by doing the right thing. If they felt any public pressure they would do it here in the US, like they do in many other countries. But since there is no pressure, no media interest, no bother really anywhere, I'm sure they have no problem cashing in on the benefits of some of their customers getting beaten up and robbed of their phones. Hey, new customers!
 
The Japanese cell phone system has been designed to ward off thieves right from the get go. All cell phones are locked and if you report it stolen, the cellphone companies disables service to that stolen cell phone and it ain't worth but 100 Yen for salvage. You can take a tour of Akihabara and you will see used cell phones in crates for sell as low as $1! The non saleable one gets scrapped for their gold contacts and plastics.
 
BlueMeanie said:
Obvious really - the carriers still make the money on the calls made on a stolen phone. So they have nothing to gain by adding in the expensive infrastructure to block stolen phones.
Click to expand...
x2. Since when are businesses supposed to start acting as the police? Criminal matter. Let the law do their job.
Llian said:
It is just about incentive. There is none for them to do it. It is super easy to do. In Australia we do it all the time and mobile phone thefts are low because of it.
Click to expand...
In Australia you ban/block everything, which is ironic, since it was a former penal colony.
 
Most smartphones still make cash even when blacklisted. They get sold for parts or for wifi use only and I've seen them easily sell for half as much as a good one in the same condition. Still seems like a pretty attractive market to me.

Anyhow as far as sprint blacklisting it seems more common for them to block a phone because the previous owner didn't pay their bills. Can't have other people signing up with that phone. Best if they buy their own. (Profit, profit, profit. The only motivator.)
 
sleepeeg3 said:
x2. Since when are businesses supposed to start acting as the police? Criminal matter. Let the law do their job.
In Australia you ban/block everything, which is ironic, since it was a former penal colony.
Click to expand...

Definitely. What SHOULD happen is to determine that at least some portion of cell phone theft is organized crime. Then, once you determine that, the cell phone companies are aiding and abetting organized crime. Thus under RICO laws, all it takes is a few lawsuits that they don't even have to lose, and the good old federal government can seize all their assets.

That's a lot of assets. I head the government needs more revenue. They should get right on this.
 
If you think that the motivation for not blocking is anything other than profit, you don't understand capitalism. Gross revenue minus costs equals profit. Increase costs and you decrease profit.
 
Coweater said:
Most smartphones still make cash even when blacklisted. They get sold for parts or for wifi use only and I've seen them easily sell for half as much as a good one in the same condition. Still seems like a pretty attractive market to me.

Anyhow as far as sprint blacklisting it seems more common for them to block a phone because the previous owner didn't pay their bills. Can't have other people signing up with that phone. Best if they buy their own. (Profit, profit, profit. The only motivator.)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if it has changed, but back when I used to work for AT&T Wireless/Cingular/AT&T Mobility, the company sold the customer the phones at a loss, with the expectation that after 4 to 6 months of service payments the company would then be profiting on that transaction. So the idea of getting people to purchase phones to set up new service might actually not be profitable, if the circumstances are the same today. Additionally, it may be to the carrier's best interest to allow the "hot" phones to be activated because they have already recovered their initial investment and can now start a new line of service at a profit.

Do they still use SIM cards? That was a big issue when I was still involved in the business, because all of your service details were stored on the SIM, but that could just be popped into a new phone and the system was none the wiser since your SIM details were still the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top