CONSUMER NEWS    RECALLS    COMPLAINT FORM    SCAM ALERTS  


Complain about a product or service

Small Claims Guide | Class Actions | Lemon Law | FAQ | Resources | Newsletters | Spanish
Automotive    Education    Electronics    Family    Finance    Health    Homeowners    Shopping    Travel   
NEWS   Latest |  Archives |  Auto |  Cells, etc. |  Computers |  Financial |  Health |  Homeowners |  Parents |  Privacy |  Scams |  Seniors |  Travel

AT&T Faces $780,000 Do-Not-Call Fine



AT&T
Slamming
Long Distance
Local
Wireless
Broadband
Telemarketers
---
News
AT&T Agrees to Refund Some Ringtone Charges
States Asked to Probe AT&T U-Verse Explosions
AT&T Exits Pay Phone Business
AT&T Changes Contract Policy
AT&T Changes Terms Of Service After Outcry
AT&T Agrees to New Stolen Cell Phone Rules
AT&T Stiffens Language Covering Objectionable Content
AT&T Adds Parental Controls To Mobile Phones
AT&T Slammed Over Rebate Policies
Appeals Court Shreds AT&T Arbitration Clause
Court OKs Rebate Lawsuit against Cingular/AT&T
AT&T Trashes Cingular Brand
AT&T Offers Net Neutrality Concessions To Win Merger Approval
FCC Delays Decision On AT&T/BellSouth Deal
Justice Department Green Lights AT&T-BellSouth Merger
FCC Clears the Way for AT&T-BellSouth Merger
AT&T Trumpets New TV Service
AT&T Web Site Hacked; Customer Data Exposed
AT&T Sues Calling Record Brokers
AT&T Declares Consumers' Personal Data "Corporate Property"
AT&T Plans to Kill Cingular Name
Report: AT&T Acquiring BellSouth
SBC Recast as AT&T
FCC approves AT&T, MCI Deals
Justice Dept. OKs AT&T, MCI Sell-Outs
SBC Will Keep AT&T Name
Consumer Groups Oppose Big Telco Mergers
SBC Buys AT&T
AT&T Will Pay Refunds to New Yorkers
AT&T Will Pull Out of 7 States
AT&T Teams With Sprint to Return to Wireless Business
Minnesota Sues AT&T
Class Action Charges AT&T With Slamming
Another AT&T Rate Hike
AT&T Hiking Minimum Fees
AT&T Faces $780,000 Do-Not-Call Fine
AT&T Will Run Do-Not-Call List
Supreme Court Denies AT&T's Appeal of Arbitration Ruling

November 3, 2003
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) wants to fine AT&T $780,000 for violating do-not-call provisions that have been in effect for more than ten years. The fine is for a long-existing but widely ignored rule that requires individual companies to delete the names of consumers who specifically ask a company to stop calling them.

AT&T should be able to afford the fine. It won a $3.5 million contract to set up -- you guessed it -- the Do-Not-Call registry a few months ago. The initial six-month contract can be renewed for up to ten years.

While the action is not part of the recently-enacted Do Not Call registry, it is an indication that the FCC has taken note of the political clout represented by the 54 million Americans who have signed for the Do-Not-Call list.

The irony was not lost on the telemarketing industry, whose spokesmen rushed to say that if the FCC had enforced existing regulations the broader Do-Not-Call registry might not have been needed.

"For a decade they haven't done their job. Now they're adding new regulation," Tim Searcy of the American Teleservices Association told The New York Times.

The commission says it received 360 complaints about AT&T from December 2002 to August 2003 from consumers who had previously informed AT&T that they did not want any more telemarketing calls from the company.

The fine is calculated at $10,000 each for 78 calls placed to 29 of the complaining consumers. The fine could have been as high as $250,000 per call violation under FCC rules but an FCC spokesman said that $10,000 was the figure it had used previously in cases involving unsolicited faxes.

The proposed fine is meant to be an indication that the commission, long derided by consumer advocates as being asleep at the wheel, has gotten the message that voters are fed up with incessant telemarketing calls.

"We have made enforcement of the Do-Not-Call lists our No. 1 priority," said David Solomon, head of the commission's enforcement bureau.

Since late June, 54.3 million Americans have signed up for the Do-Not-Call registry and have so far filed 56,000 complaints alleging they received calls after the cut-off date.


Consumer News

May 16 2008

Recent Recalls & Safety Alerts

READER SERVICES

Print, Email & More

Subscribe

Free consumer newsletters
Sign up now!



Back to the top | News

Advertisement


Home | Rogues Gallery | Good Guys | Complaint Form | News | Recalls | Search | Video | FAQ |
Consumer Resources | Small Claims Guide | Lemon Law | Newsletter | Contact Us
Advertise With Us | Testimonials | Newsroom | RSS Feeds | Radio | Job Postings




Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice.  ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof. 

Copyright © 2003-2008 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc.  All Rights Reserved.