The FTC has a telemarketing sales rule which requires do not call telemarketer compliance
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.
 
2021 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
2020 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2019 Newsletters
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
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
 

July 2015 - Call Compliance News

8th Circuit

The Eight Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a trial court in a purported TCPA class action involving calls promoting a film.  Golan v. Veritas Entertainment, LLC.  The alleged messages were purported public surveys but actually promoted a film titled “Last Ounce of Courage.”  The Appeals Court ruled that the lower court made a mistake when it ruled these calls were not telemarketing and reversed the decision.

FCC

YourTel America has entered into a $3.5 million settlement with the FCC resolving an investigation into whether the company failed to protect the confidentiality of consumers’ personal information.  The FCC found the company stored consumers’ personal information on unprotected servers accessible via the Internet.

At 6:00 p.m. on Friday, July 10, the FCC issued its order implementing new restrictions on calls to cell phones under the TCPA.  The rule can be reviewed here https://www.fcc.gov/document/tcpa-omnibus-declaratory-ruling-and-order.

Comment: I would be happy to discuss the rule with you in more detail, but in my opinion, it will not “clarify” compliance issues and will more likely confuse legitimate businesses attempting to comply with the rule and encourage more TCPA litigation.

TCPA

A federal judge in Illinois has ruled against a TCPA class action defendant which argued that the proposed class was overbroad and thus should be dismissed.  Johansen v. GVN Michigan, Inc.  The defendant also argued that the TCPA is not enforceable as a class action.

Comment: Judge Posner, a very famous judge, ruled “The motion and supporting memorandum are intemperate and borderline frivolous, and I warn the defendant that if it persists in this vein of hyperbole and indignation it and its counsel will be courting sanctions, which I will not hesitate to impose.”  This is about as bad a loss as an attorney can imagine.

U.S. Congress

Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has recently proposed a bill which would require prior express consent for use of automatic telephone dialing system or prerecorded message to call any number, including land lines for commercial solicitation purposes.  A similar restriction in the TCPA currently applies only to calls to cell phones.

California

A California judge has supported sanctions against Verizon Wireless in a discovery dispute in a TCPA class action.  Lofton v. Verizon Wireless.  The case involved calls to persons who were not actually Verizon subscribers, i.e. wrong numbers.

Comment: The Court found Verizon “engaged in sanction-worthy conduct” by allowing its debt collector to destroy call records.  It required Verizon to pay half of plaintiff’s reasonable costs in seeking the discovery from the Court.  It is extremely important that a defendant notify its vendors that documents are not to be destroyed and that normal document destruction procedures be suspended for documents potentially relevant to the suit.  This includes all documents, electronic and paper, etc.


Florida

A trial court has refused to reconsider its previous ruling that a TCPA plaintiff could not sue Obama for America in a class action, and that she could only proceed as an individual.  Shamblin v. Obama for America.

New York

The New York Assembly proposed a bill (AB 6205) which would specify that entities marketing energy services are subject to the state and national “do-not-call” laws.  The bill would also require contracts for telemarketing services to require that any calling company register with the state prior to making calls.

Pennsylvania

A court has denied a TCPA defendant’s motion to stay a case based on FCC review of whether a consumer can revoke express consent.  Leon v. Target Corp.  The Court ruled that consumers have a right to revoke consent and businesses cannot require that the revocation be made in writing.

South Carolina

 

A South Carolina court has refused to dismiss a TCPA action against a debt collector which allegedly called the plaintiff’s cell phone without her express consent.  Williams v. Bank of America.  The Court ruled that the complaint did not need to include her telephone number to survive a motion to dismiss.

A South Carolina court has dismissed a purported class action against a nonprofit which allegedly violated the TCPA by sending a prerecorded call offering insurance services.  Fitzhenry v. Independent Order of Foresters.  The defendant argued it was exempt from the ban on prerecorded calls because it was a nonprofit organization.  The Court ruled that the plain language of the statute exempted calls by or on behalf of a tax-exempt organization and therefore dismissed the 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 2003-2021 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