Submitted via IRC for Fnord666
The FCC has approved new rules expressly banning unauthorized charges on phone bills, a practice that was already illegal under federal law but never formally codified within the agency. It’s the first time the commission is adopting an explicit rule.
The new rules ban unexpected phone bill charges, also known as “cramming” many services that a customer didn’t ask for onto a bill. The rules also ban the practice of tricking a customer into switching phone carriers. From now on, if a company is found to have used deception to obtain your consent to switch carriers, your consent will be deemed invalid.
Changes are also being made to how third-party verification services, which are supposed to validate a sale or carrier switch, confirm that a customer really intended to take action. The third-party verification process will no longer need user approval for every service purchased, in order to save customers time and streamline the process. It’s a change that’s supposed to be helpful, but it sounds like it could lead to unexpected charges when you aren’t paying attention. Finally, carriers that abuse third-party verification, such as by editing out parts of a customer’s phone call with a third party to make it sound like an approval to switch carriers, will be suspended from using them for several years.
Source: https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/8/17441426/fcc-bans-unauthorized-phone-bill-charges
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @01:34PM (2 children)
1995 will be very happy to hear this.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @03:00PM
You mean 1984
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @04:00PM
About time.
Now, will the FCC please give us a -1 Spam option for junk phone calls (enough down mods then appears on caller ID). Or do I have to say pretty please?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Sunday June 10 2018, @01:35PM
-e.
I got lots of those calls just a few days after registering a new domain.
Quite likely they dupe lots of newbie webmasters into paying for expensive design services. At least I hope they do - that is, do they work they promise.
It would be quite easy for such a boiler room operation to collect design fees then fall off the edge of the Earth.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 4, Informative) by Thexalon on Sunday June 10 2018, @03:00PM (5 children)
If you actually read your phone company's contract, you'll notice a section in there that says that you cannot sue them for any reason whatsoever. All you can do is go into a binding arbitration process where the phone company has picked the arbitrator. And the primary criterion for deciding which arbitrator to hire is how often they decide in favor of the company. So even if you're completely in the right, odds are you're screwed. And I'm sure Ajit Pai knows that.
And don't think you can get out of that by switching carriers, because they all do the exact same thing.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @06:10PM (3 children)
I'm pretty sure that the contract between you and the phone company doesn't apply to the FCC.
You may not be able to sue the company (though I question the legality of that), but the FCC can sue them and fine them. It won't get you your money back, but the company will be punished.
Of course, unless the punishment is greater than the illicitly gained profit, the deterrent effect is nil, but at least in theory it could keep bad practices in check whatever the contracts say.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Thexalon on Sunday June 10 2018, @06:17PM (1 child)
The reason these contracts include those clauses is that the US Supreme Court has not only said they're legal, but that they are legal even if your state's laws that say they're not legal. Most recently in a case involving a telephone carrier, namely AT&T v Concepcion [wikipedia.org].
Can, but doesn't have to. I think we can guess the odds of a "business-friendly" FCC like the current one actually taking such an action.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Spamalope on Sunday June 10 2018, @08:52PM
When a 3rd party upstart is transferring customers away from established whales like AT&T they may act.
Or if a 3rd party is cramming AT&T customer's bills without some sort of payout to AT&T they may act.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday June 11 2018, @12:05AM
Won't matter.
Your next bill will just include a tiny boilerplate saying "Paying this bill serves as your acceptance that all charges are authorized charges", or maybe they do another totally useless GDPR-like pop-up on your device saying you authorize the charges, and you need to pay off your phone and sign up again if you disagree.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 11 2018, @01:19PM
is that legal cause some employers try the same thing and find that yes their employee can take them to court usually on the grounds that said contract is not valid
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 10 2018, @04:01PM
WE ARE ALL DOOMED! All people should know when the are being hussled, otherwise they are all dumb idiots!
oh right, except i don't live in states.