- Intruding into my privacy and letting the accused know my number. What-if the intruder goes violent and makes a physical assault? Would Airtel bear any or related charges? In this case, the accused is unnecessarily involving my corporate resources and divulging our valuable business hours into seeking remedy. This is despite a boldface note from Airtel to the offender that the number is shared only for internal evaluation and to attempt contact with me in any form.
I have elected for START 0 meaning summarily no UCC. Period. If the accused is doing any part time business, it is up to them but my only concern is ‘do-not-bother-me’ unnecessarily. I am not interested to be on sides with such unethical people who can not comply with laws of land.
- Expecting the accused to ‘resolve’ the issue and ‘seeking’ a withdrawal. With reference to one of previous incidences, the only remedial way is the UCC accused should give an undertaking to TERM cell and his cell phone company for review. No where, the ‘victim’ is involved to be present in the arena.
- I am in no-mood to go against TRAI mandate like drafting any email to firstname.lastname@example.org. In my view, unsolicited telemarketing is nothing short of sex marketing. And telemarketers should be treated on par prostitutes under Immoral Trafficking Act, 1956. That is a primary governance violation. If any such requests was found received by Airtel and Airtel is honoring the same it means they are also abetting a cheating offence besides NDNC violation.
- I have undergone umpteen mental stress because of this UCC and sequel of steps till this email. I would like an apology for the same and an emphasis that it wouldn’t recur in the future and if it recurs why should’nt the accused or the cellphone company of the accused should be challenged in a competant court for an appropriate remedy.