VMS and Jay Gotra – Permanent Injunction and $3.4 Million Penalty

Here’s the wrapper on one of the main individuals and organization responsible for the TOM WITH HOME PROTECTION calls. Jay Gotra and VMS agreed to a FINAL ORDER which appears to have real teeth, revealing that at the high point VMS was buying 20,000 leads a month from the Stop Tom Dialers, with the call volume reaching two million (per year?).

Congratulations to Bikram Bandy and those with the FTC who pursued this case. Also to Jeff Rossen with NBC NEWS for the recent update, and best wishes to Diana Mey in her class action suit.

United States of America v. Versatile Marketing Solutions, Inc. and Jasjit Gotra Individually. (Case No. 1:14-cv-10612)

Stipulated Final Order for Permanent Injunction and Civil Penalty Judgment

VMS ORDER 2014- SNIP Cover










UPDATE: Oh, and of course they changed their name to ALLIANCE SECURITY.


AS REQUESTED: “Stop Tom” Contact Info

As requested via this site’s contact form asking for my individual contact info, please use the following email contact: helpstoptom@gmail.com

You can create a temporary or special use email address with Google or Yahoo for this purpose if you prefer to remain anonymous (i.e ” noname2012@gmail.com”)

I will email my telephone number to the valid email address you provide if you wish to talk over the phone.







Attention Dealers: Use a false name at your peril!

As you know, I’m just a Dad, business owner, and community leader who operates this blog as part of my individual efforts to curtail these home security calls. Like many of you I’ve been very busy handling my “regular” responsibilities, but rest assured there has been work behind the scenes.

I have found that a particular group, ISI Alarms of North Carolina, has been particularly aggressive in using a technique to disguise their identity and avoid sanctions such as litigation. They’re  very, very careful now, using the name “Security Call Center” or “Honeywell Call Center” or another name. This may be a short term barrier but it creates even greater liability for them. My state of Texas explicitly bans the use of any name or identity other than that of the licensed alarm company. Sanctions include criminal penalties to include a $10,000 fine and up to 1 (one) year in jail.

I’ll suggest to those alarm dealers and others in the industry who follow this blog, and I know that you do, you’ll continue this charade of phony names at your peril. Criminal investigations require resources but  carry more weight and more risk than a few thousand dollars paid to a pro se litigant.

More soon!



AT&T Unable to Stop Subscriber Database Theft; 300 Million Names and Numbers May Have Been Harvested

Claims made in a federal lawsuit (pdf) by AT&T against two individuals and a Utah-based group of companies, reveal what may be the largest so called data mining, name and phone number harvesting scheme to be conducted in the United States. If proven accurate, this suit completely disassembles the whole -we have permission to call- fabrication, which leads from Utah, through several states, and right to the front door of my home. Read more of this post

UPDATE: 253-246-8514 Calling John in Michigan

I briefly wrote about John from Michigan getting the Tom calls from the phone number 253-246-8514 last month, and I thought I would post an update on the activity surrounding this number. John emailed me a photo of his wireless phone’s call log screen which was filled with numbers associated with telemarketers.

Read more of this post

Important Phone Provider Survey


This informal, anecdotal survey doesn’t provide any data to support the claim that users of one single provider are more likely to get the “Tom” calls. However, it’s clear to me now that the bulk of readers are responding about calls to their wireless phones. This is what frustrated me as well; the relentless calls to my cell phone. And it helps explain the lack of caller ID information shared by readers, specifically what company names are displayed in the CID window, as wireless phones just show the number.

Thank you!


I have reason to believe that consumers using a specific phone provider may be more likely than others to receive the “Tom/Shawn/John with Home Protection” calls. Please take the survey below and help me collect some anecdotal data.

%d bloggers like this: