The FTC has a telemarketing sales rule which requires do not call telemarketer compliance
bject classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="https://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=6,0,29,0" width="740" height="298"> bed src="./template_pack/basic/flash/header.swf" quality="high" wmode="transparent" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="740" height="298" FlashVars="&site_host_clean=www.donotcallcompliance.com%2F&short=true">
The Federal Trade Commission protects consumers not telemarketing companies
National Do Not Call Registry and List Compliance News
DO NOT CALL STATE & FEDERAL REGULATORY NEWS

This newsletter (or material) is prepared by Copilevitz and Canter, LLC, (816) 472-9000, http://copilevitz-canter.com/, braney@cckc-law.com. Copilevitz and Canter, LLC, does not provide legal services to Do Not Call Compliance or donotcallcompliance.com and does not endorse our website or services. This information is not to be used as a substitute for legal counsel.
 
2018 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2017 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2016 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2015 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2014 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2013 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2012 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2011 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2010 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2009 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
2008 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2007 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2006 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2005 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2004 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
State Do Not Call
 

December 2018 - Call Compliance News

Federal Communications Commission

On December 13, 2018, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) issued a Report and Order (the “Order”) addressing calls to numbers which have been disconnected, then reassigned to a new subscriber.  See https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-18-177A1.pdf.

The Order adds two new subsections to the FCC’s Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) regulations that require carriers to maintain records of when each telephone number is allocated to a consumer or ported to another carrier and provide this database to the FCC monthly.

Callers would not be liable for violating the TCPA’s cell phone call ban if it could demonstrate that it checked this database prior to making the call and after the date prior express consent was obtained for that number.  Thus, the rule provides for a limited “safe harbor” if a company uses the database as directed.  If the company does not use the database, normal TCPA liability including class actions would apply if the company called a number which had been reassigned to a new consumer.

Comment: The FCC estimated the cost of the database (paid by the caller) to be less than one cent per query.  I expect that most business could thus expect to pay $10,000 to $50,000 per year for this access.  While substantial, this is much less than the cost of litigating a TCPA class action, so the “safe harbor” may be worth it.

The list will likely be available in 18 to 24 months.

Federal Trade Commission

A federal judge in Florida has issued a permanent injunction banning Kevin W. Guice from telemarketing and debt relief activities.  Guice allegedly used prerecorded calls to solicit consumers to purchase fraudulent debt reduction services.  The judgment of more than $23 million was not suspended as is often the case when large monetary awards are granted by courts.

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has issued a summary of the national “do-not-call” list data for the fiscal year 2018.  The list contains 235,302,818 numbers, up a small amount from 2017.  Consumer complaints from unwanted telemarketing calls decreased from 7.1 million in 2017 to 5.7 million in 2018.  The data can be reviewed at https://www.ftc.gov/reports/national-do-not-call-registry-data-book-fiscal-year-2018.

U.S. Senate

A bill has been proposed in the U.S. Senate which would omit the common carrier exemption to the FTC’s jurisdiction.  The intent of the bill is to allow the FTC to enforce unfair trade practices rules to require telephone companies to stop illegal robocalling.

Comment: The FCC already has this enforcement rule and adding another agency does not seem to be a solution, nor does it address TCPA litigation reform.

Alabama

An Alabama court has dismissed a TCPA case brought against a debt collector calling to collect a loan guaranteed by the United States Department of Education.  Green v. Navient Sols., Inc.

Comment: Debt collectors calling to collect a debt owed to or guaranteed by the federal government are exempt from the TCPA.

Illinois

An Illinois court held that an automatic telephone dialing system (“ATDS”) must use a random or sequential number generator, or it is not an ATDS.  Johnson v. Yahoo, Inc.

Missouri

Missouri Attorney General Josh Hawley has announced he has joined a group of 40 state attorneys general working to stop illegal robocalls.  The group is led by attorneys general from North Carolina, Indiana, and New Hampshire and seeks both a detailed understanding of what is technologically feasible to minimize illegal robocalls as well as enforcement options.

New Jersey

A New Jersey court dismisses a TCPA “set up” case.  Zemel v. CSC Holdings, LLC.  Plaintiff replied “HELP” to a message, then claimed subsequent messages were illegal.  The court ruled that “when an individual sends a message inviting a responsive text, there is no TCPA violation.”

Pennsylvania

A Pennsylvania court has ruled that an ATDS must have capacity to randomly or sequentially dial numbers.  Richardson v. Verde Energy USA, Inc.  Using normal rules of statutory construction, the court held the language of the TCPA includes those words and the court could not read them out of existence when determining whether a system is an ATDS or not.  The court then reviewed whether the calls were placed using an artificial prerecorded voice, and held that because some calls involved playing an abandonment message, there was an issue of fact as to whether the calls involved a prerecorded voice.

Comment: Although a substantial victory for the business, because the court ruled the abandonment message may constitute a prerecorded voice, I will carefully track the progress of this case.

 

The authors make every attempt to provide current, accurate information, but Telemarketing ConnectionS® is not intended to be a substitute for legal counsel, and readers should not use it in lieu of obtaining knowledgeable legal, or other professional, counsel expert in the field of commercial telemarketing law. References in Telemarketing ConnectionS® do not constitute endorsement by Copilevitz & Canter, L.L.C. or Telemarketing ConnectionS®. January 1, 2005, Copilevitz & Canter, L.L.C.
 
  Telemarketing Do Not Call Compliance - Avoid large fines by staying compliant.   NDNCR and SDNCR - National Do Not Call Registry and State Do Not Call Registry - Know the difference.
The Do Not Call Compliance Silver Plan offers an Automated federal and state do not call compliance solution. Scrub your list yourself using our automated list scrubbing system.
Telemarketing companies are required to enroll in the Federal Do Not Call Registry.
Do Not Call Compliance.com has the robust software technology and computer power to properly remove (scrub) the Do Not Call numbers from your telemarketing lists.
The National Do Not Call Registry is a list of phone numbers from consumers who have indicated their preference to limit the telemarketing calls they receive.
This Site is designed for use with MSIE 7+,FF 3.5+, Chrome, Opera and other modern browsers.
A Broadband Internet Connection is recommended for uploading and downloading files.


Terms of Use | User Agreement | Privacy and Security Policy

© Copyright 2003-2019 Do Not Call Compliance - Telemarketing Do Not Call List Compliance Service.
All Rights Reserved. Information on this site is not to be used as a substitute for legal counsel.

Do Not Call Compliance | | 800-930-7252