*Pages 1--6 from Microsoft Word - 28629* Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 1970 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D. C. 20554 In the Matter of AT& T Corporation Complaints Regarding Unauthorized Change of Subscriber’s Telecommunications Carrier ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) IC Nos. 01- S51326 02- S73320 02- S73671 02- S79093 02- S79791 02- S80016 02- S80018 02- S80020 02- S80031 02- S80050 02- S80067 02- S80168 02- S80214 02- S80492 02- S80556 02- S80612 02- S81362 02- S81778 02- S81799 02- S81934 02- S82009 03- S82087 03- S82209 03- S82351 03- S82369 03- S82444 03- S82446 03- S82575 03- S82632 03- S82984 03- S83146 03- S83194 03- S83198 03- S83269 03- S83665 03- I0024777 ORDER 1 Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 1970 2 Adopted: June 13, 2003 Released: June 18, 2003 By the Acting Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau: 1. In this Order, we consider the complaints filed by Complainants 1 alleging that AT& T Corporation (AT& T) changed Complainants’ telecommunications service providers without obtaining authorization and verification from Complainants’ in violation of the Commission’s rules. 2 We conclude that AT& T’s actions did not result in an unauthorized change in Complainants’ telecommunications service providers and we deny Complainants’ complaint. 2. In December 1998, the Commission released the Section 258 Order in which it adopted rules to implement Section 258 of the Communications Act of 1934 (Act), as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act). 3 Section 258 prohibits the practice of “slamming,” the submission or execution of an unauthorized change in a subscriber’s selection of a provider of telephone exchange service or telephone toll service. 4 In the Section 258 Order, the Commission adopted aggressive new rules designed to take the profit out of slamming, broadened the scope of the slamming rules to encompass all carriers, and modified its existing requirements for the authorization and verification of preferred carrier changes. The rules require, among other things, that a carrier receive individual subscriber consent before a carrier change may occur. 5 Pursuant to Section 258, carriers are absolutely barred from changing a customer's preferred local or long distance carrier without first complying with one of the Commission's verification procedures. 6 Specifically, a carrier must: (1) obtain the subscriber's written or electronically signed authorization in a format that meets the requirements of 1 See Appendix A. 2 See 47 C. F. R. §§ 64.1100 – 64.1190. 3 47 U. S. C. § 258( a); Telecommunications Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104- 104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996); Implementation of the Subscriber Carrier Selection Changes Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996; Policies and Rules Concerning Unauthorized Changes of Consumers’ Long Distance Carriers, CC Docket No. 94- 129, Second Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 14 FCC Rcd 1508 (1998) (Section 258 Order), stayed in part, MCI Company v. FCC, No. 99- 1125 (D. C. Cir. May 18, 1999); First Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC Rcd 8158 (2000); stay lifted, MCI Company v. FCC, No. 99- 1125 (D. C. Cir. June 27, 2000); Third Report and Order and Second Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC Rcd 15996 (2000), Errata, DA No. 00- 2163 (rel. Sept. 25, 2000), Erratum, DA No. 00- 2192 (rel. Oct. 4, 2000), Order, FCC 01- 67 (rel. Feb. 22, 2001); reconsideration pending. Prior to the adoption of Section 258, the Commission had taken various steps to address the slamming problem. See, e. g., Policies and Rules Concerning Unauthorized Changes of Consumers' Long Distance Carriers, CC Docket No. 94- 129, Report and Order, 10 FCC Rcd 9560 (1995), stayed in part, 11 FCC Rcd 856 (1995); Policies and Rules Concerning Changing Long Distance Carriers, CC Docket No. 91- 64, 7 FCC Rcd 1038 (1992), reconsideration denied, 8 FCC Rcd 3215 (1993); Investigation of Access and Divestiture Related Tariffs, CC Docket No. 83- 1145, Phase I, 101 F. C. C. 2d 911, 101 F. C. C. 2d 935, reconsideration denied, 102 F. C. C. 2d 503 (1985). 4 47 U. S. C. § 258( a). 5 See 47 C. F. R. § 64.1120. 6 47 U. S. C. § 258( a). 2 Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 1970 3 Section 64.1130 authorization; (2) obtains confirmation from the subscriber via a toll- free number provided exclusively for the purpose of confirming orders electronically; or (3) utilize an independent third party to verify the subscriber's order. 7 3. The Commission also has adopted liability rules. These rules require the carrier to absolve the subscriber where the subscriber has not paid his or her bill. In that context, if the subscriber has not already paid charges to the unauthorized carrier, the subscriber is absolved of liability for charges imposed by the unauthorized carrier for service provided during the first 30 days after the unauthorized change. 8 Where the subscriber has paid charges to the unauthorized carrier, the Commission’s rules require that the unauthorized carrier pay 150% of those charges to the authorized carrier, and the authorized carrier shall refund or credit to the subscriber 50% of all charges paid by the subscriber to the unauthorized carrier. 9 Carriers should note that our actions in this Order do not preclude the Commission from taking additional action, if warranted, pursuant to Section 503 of the Act. 10 4. We received Complainants’ complaints alleging that Complainants’ telecommunications service providers had been changed without Complainants’ authorization. 11 Pursuant to Sections 1.719 and 64.1150 of our rules, 12 we notified AT& T of the complaints and AT& T responded. 13 We find that AT& T has produced clear and convincing evidence of a valid authorized carrier change by Complainants. 14 Therefore, we find that AT& T’s actions did not result in an unauthorized change in Complainants’ telecommunications service. 15 7 See 47 C. F. R. § 64.1120( c). Section 64.1130 details the requirements for letter of agency form and content for written or electronically signed authorizations. 47 C. F. R. § 64.1130. 8 See 47 C. F. R. §§ 64.1140, 64.1160. Any charges imposed by the unauthorized carrier on the subscriber for service provided after this 30- day period shall be paid by the subscriber to the authorized carrier at the rates the subscriber was paying to the authorized carrier at the time of the unauthorized change. Id. 9 See 47 C. F. R. §§ 64.1140, 64.1170. 10 See 47 U. S. C. § 503. 11 See Appendix A. 12 47 C. F. R. § 1.719 (Commission procedure for informal complaints filed pursuant to Section 258 of the Act); 47 C. F. R. § 64.1150 (procedures for resolution of unauthorized changes in preferred carrier). 13 See Appendix A. 14 See 47 C. F. R. § 64.1150( d). 15 If Complainant is unsatisfied with the resolution of this complaint, Complainant may file a formal complaint with the Commission pursuant to Section 1.721 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C. F. R. § 1.721. Such filing will be deemed to relate back to the filing date of Complainant’s informal complaint so long as the formal complaint is filed within 45 days from the date this order is mailed or delivered electronically to Complainant. See 47 C. F. R. § 1.719. 3 Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 1970 4 5. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 258 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U. S. C. § 258, and Sections 0.141, 0.361 and 1.719 of the Commission’s rules, 47 C. F. R. §§ 0.141, 0.361, 1.719, the complaints filed by Complainants against AT& T Corporation ARE DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Nancy A. Stevenson, Acting Deputy Chief Policy Division Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau 4 Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 1970 5 APPENDIX A INFORMAL DATE OF DATE OF COMPLAINT COMPLAINTS RESPONSE NUMBERS 01- S51326 March 21, 2001 June 8, 2001 02- S73320 April 29, 2002 June 27, 2002 02- S73671 March 28, 2002 July 17, 2002 02- S79093 July 1, 2002 September 18, 2002 02- S79791 August 2, 2002 October 7, 2002 02- S80016 June 25, 2002 October 15, 2002 02- S80018 August 12, 2002 October 7, 2002 02- S80020 August 12, 2002 October 7, 2002 02- S80031 August 12, 2002 October 7, 2002 02- S80050 July 31, 2002 October 9, 2002 02- S80067 July 27, 2002 October 7, 2002 02- S80168 September 9, 2002 October 21, 2002 02- S80214 September 9, 2002 October 28, 2002 02- S80492 September 20, 2002 October 29, 2002 02- S80556 September 17, 2002 October 29, 2002 02- S80612 September 27, 2002 November 13, 2002 02- S81362 November 8, 2002 May 28, 2003 02- S81778 December 3, 2002 January 29, 2003 02- S81799 September 17, 2002 January 22, 2003 02- S81934 December 18, 2002 January 22, 2003 5 Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 1970 6 03- S82009 August 27, 2002 February 24, 2003 03- S82087 January 3, 2003 February 24, 2003 03- S82351 January 23, 2002 March 13, 2003 03- S82369 January 24, 2003 March 13, 2003 03- S82444 January 7, 2003 March 13, 2003 03- S82446 January 22, 2003 March 13, 2003 03- S82575 February 8, 2003 March 31, 2003 03- S82632 February 7, 2003 March 20, 2003 03- S82984 March 3, 2003 April 21, 2003 03- S83198 March 18, 2003 May 14, 2003 03- S83269 March 25, 2003 May 6, 2003 03- S83665 April 22, 2003 May 29, 2003 03- I0024777 February 6, 2003 April 24, 2003 6