Federal Communications Commission DA 23-26 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of Discount Long Distance, LLC Complaint Regarding Unauthorized Change of Subscriber’s Telecommunications Carrier ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Complaint No. 5853364 ORDER Adopted: January 10, 2023 Released: January 11, 2023 By the Acting Chief, Consumer Policy Division, Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau: 1. In this Order, we consider a complaint alleging that Discount Long Distance, LLC (DLD) changed Complainant’s telecommunications service provider without obtaining authorization and verification from Complainant as required by the Commission’s rules. See Informal Complaint No. 5853364 (filed Nov. 9, 2022); see also 47 CFR §§ 64.1100 – 64.1190. We find that DLD has responded fully to the Complainant’s complaint and has taken action to resolve the complaint. 2. Section 258 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act), 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. 47 U.S.C. § 258(a). The Commission’s implementing rules require, among other things, that a carrier receive individual subscriber consent before a carrier change may occur. See 47 CFR § 64.1120. Specifically, a carrier must: (1) obtain the subscriber’s written or electronically signed authorization in a format that satisfies our rules; (2) obtain confirmation from the subscriber via a toll-free number provided exclusively for the purpose of confirming orders electronically; or (3) utilize an appropriately qualified independent third party to verify the order. See id. § 64.1120(c). Section 64.1130 details the requirements for letter of agency form and content for written or electronically signed authorizations. Id. § 64.1130. The Commission has also adopted rules to limit the liability of subscribers when an unauthorized carrier change occurs, and to require carriers involved in slamming practices to compensate subscribers whose carriers were changed without authorization. These rules require the unauthorized carrier to absolve the subscriber where the subscriber has not paid his or her bill. 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. See id. §§ 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. Where the subscriber has paid charges to the unauthorized carrier, the Commission’s rules require that the unauthorized carrier pay 150 percent of those charges to the authorized carrier, and the authorized carrier shall refund or credit to the subscriber 50 percent of all charges paid by the subscriber to the unauthorized carrier. See id. §§ 64.1140, 64.1170. 3. We received Complainant’s complaint alleging that DLD had changed Complainant’s telecommunications service provider without Complainant’s authorization. Pursuant to our rules, we notified DLD of the complaint. Id. § 1.719 (Commission procedure for informal complaints filed pursuant to section 258 of the Act); id. § 64.1150 (procedures for resolution of unauthorized changes in preferred carrier). Based on the information provided by DLD, it appears that DLD has fully absolved Complainant of all charges assessed by DLD in a manner consistent with the Commission’s liability rules. See DLD’s Response to Informal Complaint No. 5853364 (filed Dec. 15, 2022) (stating that DLD issued Complainant a full credit of all services billed and that the account was cancelled); see also 47 CFR § 64.1160. We therefore find that the complaint referenced herein has been resolved. If Complainant is unsatisfied with the resolution of its complaint, the Complainant may file a formal complaint with the Commission pursuant to section 1.721 of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR § 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 id. § 1.719. 4. 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 CFR §§ 0.141, 0.361, 1.719, the complaint filed against Discount Long Distance, LLC IS RESOLVED. 5. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order is effective upon release. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Kristi Thornton Acting Chief Consumer Policy Division Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau 2