*Pages 1--4 from Microsoft Word - 32075* Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 3118 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D. C. 20554 In the Matter of WorldCom, Inc. Complaint Regarding Unauthorized Change of Subscriber’s Telecommunications Carrier ) ) ) ) ) ) ) IC Nos. 02- S68116 02- S74507 02- S79415 02- S79632 02- S79748 02- S80004 02- S80131 02- S80134 02- S81765 02- S81871 ORDER Adopted: October 8, 2003 Released: October 10, 2003 By the Acting Deputy Chief, Policy Division, Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau: 1. In this Order, we consider the complaint 1 alleging that WorldCom, Inc., (WorldCom) changed Complainants’ telecommunications service provider without obtaining authorization and verification from Complainants in violation of the Commission’s rules. 2 We conclude that WorldCom’s actions did not result in an unauthorized change in Complainants’ telecommunications service providers and we deny Complainants’ complaints. 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 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 WorldCom v. FCC, No. 99- 1125 (D. C. Cir. May 18, 1999); First Order on Reconsideration, 15 FCC Rcd 8158 (2000); stay lifted, MCI WorldCom 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' (continued….) 1 Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 3118 2 “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 Section 64.1130 authorization; (2) obtain 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’ (Continued from previous page) 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). 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. 2 Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 3118 3 telecommunications service providers had been changed to WorldCom without Complainants’ authorizations. Pursuant to Sections 1.719 and 64.1150 of our rules, 11 we notified WorldCom of the complaints and WorldCom responded. 12 We find that WorldCom has produced clear and convincing evidence of valid authorized carrier changes by Complainants. 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 WorldCom ARE DENIED. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Nancy A. Stevenson, Acting Deputy Chief Policy Division Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau 11 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). 12 See Appendix A. 3 Federal Communications Commission DA 03- 3118 4 APPENDIX A INFORMAL COMPLAINT NUMBER COMPLAINANT( S) DATE OF COMPLAINT DATE OF CARRIER RESPONSE 02- S68116 Sarah Hansel February 22, 2002 April 30, 2002 02- S74507 Sue Probus May 10, 2002 December 4, 2002 02- S79415 Yvonne McDonough July 22, 2002 December 6, 2002 02- S79632 Carl Hutchins July 23, 2002 December 12, 2002 02- S79748 North Park Baptist Church August 1, 2002 January 7, 2003 02- S80004 Beverly Layton August 12, 2002 January 7, 2003 02- S80131 David Raderstorf August 27, 2002 January 10, 2003 02- S80134 Lem Callahan August 27, 2002 October 3, 2002 02- S81765 Jeffrey Daesch December 4, 2002 February 4, 2003 02- S81871 Darryl Dykstra December 17, 2002 February 13, 2003 4