Federal Communications Commission DA 10-302
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
In the Matter of
Silv Communication, Inc.
Complaints Regarding 
Unauthorized Change of
Subscriber’s Telecommunications Carrier
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
IC Nos. 09-S002463
09-S002562
09-S0296891
09-S0297140
ORDER
Adopted:  February 23, 2010 Released:  February 24, 2010       
By the Deputy Chief, Consumer Policy Division, Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau:
1. In this Order, we consider the complaints1 alleging that Silv Communication, Inc. 
(Silv) changed Complainants’ telecommunications service providers without obtaining 
authorization and verification from Complainants in violation of the Commission’s rules.2 We 
conclude that Silv’s actions did result in unauthorized changes in Complainants’ 
telecommunications service providers and we grant 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 
“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, 
  
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); 
Third Order on Reconsideration and Second Further Notice of Proposed Rule Making, 18 FCC Rcd 5099 (2003); 
Order, 18 FCC Rcd 10997 (2003); Fourth Report and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 493 (2008).  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).
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-302
2
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; (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’ 
telecommunications service providers had been changed to Silv without Complainants’ 
authorization.11 Pursuant to Sections 1.719 and 64.1150 of our rules,12 we notified Silv of the 
complaints and Silv responded.13 In its responses, Inmark stated that authorizations were 
received and confirmed through third party verifications (TPVs).  We have reviewed the TPVs 
  
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.
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.
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-302
3
Silv filed with its responses.  In each case, Silv’s verifier stated that the purpose of the 
recorded conversation was for “quality control and data entry purposes.”  However, the purpose 
of a TPV recording is to verify a subscriber’s intent to change their preferred carrier. As we 
emphasized in the Fourth Report and Order, “any description of the carrier change 
transaction . . . shall not be misleading.” 14  We find that Silv’s actions were in violation of our 
carrier change rules, and we discuss Silv’s liability below. 15  We find that Silv’s actions resulted 
in unauthorized changes in Complainants’ telecommunications service providers and we discuss 
Silv’s liability below.16
5. Pursuant to Section 64.1170(b) our rules, Silv must forward to the authorized 
carriers an amount equal to 150% of all charges paid by the subscriber to Silv along with copies 
of any telephone bills issued from Silv to the Complainants.17 Within ten days of receipt of this 
amount, the authorized carriers shall provide a refund or credit to Complainants in the amount of 
50% of all charges paid by Complainants to Silv.  Complainants have the option of asking the 
authorized carriers to re-rate Silv’s charges based on the authorized carrier’s rates and, on behalf 
of Complainants, seek from Silv any re-rated amount exceeding 50% of all charges paid by 
Complainants to Silv. The authorized carriers must also send a notice to the Commission, 
referencing this Order, stating that it has given a refund or credit to Complainant. 18 If the 
authorized carriers have not received the reimbursement required from Silv within 45 days of the 
release of this Order, the authorized carriers must notify the Commission and Complainants 
accordingly.  The authorized carriers also must notify the Complainants of his or her right to 
pursue a claim against Silv for a refund of all charges paid to Silv.19
6. 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 against 
Silv Communication, Inc. ARE GRANTED. 
  
14 See 47 C.F.R. § 64.1150(d), Fourth Report and Order, 23 FCC Rcd 493 (2008).
15 See 47 C.F.R. § 64.1120(c)(3)(iii).
16 If any Complainant is unsatisfied with the resolution of this complaint, such 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 such 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 
such Complainant.  See 47 C.F.R. § 1.719.
17 See 47 C.F.R  § 64.1170(b)(1),(2).
18 See 47 C.F.R. § 64.1170(c).
19 See 47 C.F.R. § 64.1170(e).
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-302
4
7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Section 64.1170(b) of the 
Commission’s rules, 47 C.F.R. § 64.1170(b), that Silv must forward to the authorized carriers an 
amount equal to 150% of all charges paid by the subscribers along with copies of any telephone 
bills issued from the company to the Complainants within ten (10) days of the release of this 
order.
8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order is effective upon release.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Nancy A. Stevenson, Deputy Chief
Consumer Policy Division
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
Federal Communications Commission DA 10-302
5
APPENDIX A
INFORMAL  DATE OF  DATE OF AUTHORIZED
COMPLAINT  COMPLAINT RESPONSE CARRIER
NUMBER
09-S002463 July 6, 2009 November 19, 2009 None
09-S002562 September 24, 2009 October 14, 2009 Verizon
09-S0296891 September 24, 2009 October 28, 2009 Verizon
09-S0297140 November 17, 2009 December 9, 2009 Verizon