If you are a Canadian, and have experience problem with auto-payment taken off your phone bill by TechSOS, I suggest you write a complaint to CRTC.ca and get them to investigate.  I have contacted TechSOS several times in the past month and a half and it is all in vain.  I strongly this is a fraudulent company and is ripping off a lot of consumer out there.  Rogers told me it is a CRTC problem or I will have to report to police.I just reported to CRTC.

I got, so far, 2 months being charged for "collect calls" from TechSOS, each month's charge is CAD$49.95.  I first started reporting this to Rogers on July 25.  I was directed to call 1-+1 855-675-8289 to deal directly wiht TechSOS Online Service.  TechSOS sent me an email to confirm who had accepted the collected call from them.  The name is totally out-of-wack to me.  So I replied and said we want a refund on our Rogers' bill.  Jary of TechSOS, I spoke to, said a cheque will be sent out within 5 - 7 business days.  On August 31, I still haven't received that cheque.  Called again, the same accented male voice answered the phone.  This time he identify himself as Ricky and refused to give me his ID number.  When he gave his name as Jary, the ID was 19290.  He said the cheque was processed on August 25 and I should get it within a week.Today is Sept. 7 and nothing has arrived in the mail.  I called Rogers, I was told many people has the same problem.  But Rogers can to nothing about it.  It is a CRTC problem because they have allowed such third party to charge on Rogers, Bell, etc.  Consumer can only chase after the third party which in this case is TechSOS.  Such third party company can be big ones such as TeleGlobal, 1010 for long distance, etc.   The Rogers rep told me to contact police if I think this problem is a fraudulant practice.I called back 1-+1 855-675-8289 again.  The same male voice answer the phone and he identify himself as Richy this time.  I ask for the company's mailing address.  He said he is from Miami Florida.  I said, but you have collect called us from a Montreal phone number.  He said it is one of their offices.  He told me to wait for another week for the cheque to arrive.This is really a fishy issue to me.  I am going to report to CRTC and/police.  Not juet because of the small amount of money, but because there may be many victims out there and the practice is still allowed to be happening.

I received a bill from Bell for 56.44 for this number (514) 890-8808...what the hell is this and if bell does not who they are how can they collect money on their behalf and pay them

McDonalds-Fraud call

Same here.  Got charged $56.44 on my Bell bill.  Called Bell to complain and was directed to call 1-+1 888-985-2233.  That number is for Voxtel customer service (http://www.voxtel.com/?page_id=9&lang=en) and interestingly the same number for informationtelcharge.comBell also told me that there is nothing they can do.------------Called Voxtel customer service.  Was told that (514) 890-8808 is their client (TechSOS) and that you have to call them at 1-+1 855-675-8289 to get a refund.Ask Voxtel to block your telephone number for usage on their network.Sadly Voxtel is only one of the many resellers of bill to phone bill business (premium rate numbers).

Had multiple months with this billing amount under Other Carrier Messages with the phone number of (514) 890-8808.Phoned Bell and they advised that they didn't know where the calls and charges were originating from but they were investigating.Some months had two charges, some had one charge.Bell rep credited our account for these charges.I then phoned the number listed above +1 855-675-8289) and was told that a member of our staff approved a tech support contract from Tech SOS On-Line. The rep, Jean, was quite obnoxious and insistent that the charges were valid and would not be refunded.  After much insistence, he agreed not to charge us for the service in future and after some vulgarity assured me there would be no refund, then hung up on me.In a subsequent call to Bell asking them to block such charges in the future I was told they were working on it, but could not block such charges "at that time".