Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday July 16 2018, @05:03AM   Printer-friendly
from the equal-justice-under-the-law...for-those-who-have-money dept.

Submitted via IRC for Fnord666

FCC plans to stop reviewing informal complaints—filing a formal one costs $225.

Ajit Pai's Federal Communications Commission is proposing that it stop reviewing the vast majority of consumer complaints about telecom companies. Going forward, consumers harmed by broadband, TV, and phone companies would have to pay $225 in order to get an FCC review of their complaints.

The FCC accepts two types of complaints: informal ones and formal ones. It costs nothing to file an informal complaint and $225 to file a formal one; given that, consumers almost always file informal complaints. Besides the filing fee, formal complaints kick off a court-like proceeding in which the parties appear before the FCC and file numerous documents to address legal issues. It isn't an easy process for consumers to go through.

[...] Chairman Pai's proposal to change the informal complaint procedure comes in a larger proposal about formal complaints; the change to informal complaints is explained in a footnote. "We delete the phrase 'and the Commission's disposition' from the last sentence of that rule because the Commission's practice is not to dispose of informal complaints on substantive grounds," the footnote says.

Customers will still be able to submit informal complaints, and telecom providers will still be required to respond to them within 30 days. But consumers who don't get what they want from the ISP will have to file a formal complaint and pay the $225 in order to get the FCC to take any action.

Even if the telecom provider fails to reply to an informal complaint, the only recourse would be filing a formal one. "[T]he Commission will notify the complainant that if the complainant is not satisfied by the carrier's response, or if the carrier has failed to submit a response by the due date, the complainant may file a formal complaint," the proposed version of the FCC complaint rule says. By contrast, the current version of the rule says that "the Commission will contact the complainant regarding its review and disposition of the matters raised. If the complainant is not satisfied by the carrier's response and the Commission's disposition, it may file a formal complaint."

Democrats from the FCC and Congress say the change will make it more difficult (and expensive) for consumers to get complaints resolved. "This is bonkers. It's unacceptable," FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said in a statement to Ars.

Source: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/07/ajit-pais-fcc-wants-to-stop-reviewing-your-complaints-unless-you-pay-225/

But, see also: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/07/11/no-fcc-is-not-forcing-consumers-pay-file-complaints/.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 16 2018, @03:38PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 16 2018, @03:38PM (#707917)

    There were plenty of young voters to swing things to a Sanders Presidency, it's just that there's no particular reason for young people to vote. The politicians offer young people absolutely nothing to entice them to vote. The old people get all sorts of benefits out of the government, but not the young people. They're the ones that are going to have to pay to clean up the mess that the older and extremely narcissistic Baby Boomers have left for them.

    We ended up with President Trump in large part because we have 2 right wing parties and it turns out that if people are going to vote for a rightwinger, they'd rather vote for somebody that's not a Clinton.

    The Democrats could easily clean up during the midterms, it's just that they refuse to do the thing that would work. Namely refusing corporate money and actually advocating for the voters. Things like medicare for all and national guaranteed employment are incredibly popular as are gun control regulations.

  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 16 2018, @04:53PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 16 2018, @04:53PM (#707943)

    The old people get all sorts of benefits out of the government, but not the young people.

    You may find this incredible to believe but we've been paying for those benefits, like social security, out of our paychecks for decades. These aren't freebies being thrown to aging voters to curry favor with them. You're damn straight I expect to get something out of that benefit I have been paying into when it comes my time to retire. And, no, I don't consider it "narcissistic" to get back out what I have been paying into since the first day I earned a paycheck. Just so you know.

    Things like medicare for all and national guaranteed employment are incredibly popular as are gun control regulations.

    *Snort* Umm...yeah. Do let us know when any gun control legislation manages to get through Congress. It will be a truly astounding achievement.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 16 2018, @06:40PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 16 2018, @06:40PM (#708008)

    we may just let you pass some gun control so we can kill you when you start the war to enforce it.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 17 2018, @12:41AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 17 2018, @12:41AM (#708152)

    Politicians pay attention to people who vote. Not voting because the politicians aren't paying attention to you is a nonsensical reason to not vote. It's a good reason to consider voting against that politican, sure. And if none of them appeal to you, hand in a blank ballot; no one other than you needs to know it's blank. You're still recorded as having voted.