How To Cancel Mci Long Distance Service

2. SUMMARY OF STAFF ALLEGATIONS

Staff has prepared a written report documenting its investigation to date, including declarations from victims documenting their experiences with MCI and documents obtained from MCI. The report is released today and shall exist placed in the Commission's public formal file for this proceeding. The post-obit is a summary of Staff'southward allegations to date.

A. MCI's Minimum Usage Fee Programme

Kickoff in June 2002 and continuing to date, MCI began a policy of imposing a blazon of monthly service charge, which MCI refers to as an MUF, on previously inactive or closed accounts. Staff has adamant that MCI's harvests data from 2 sources in order to identify inactive accounts and starting time billing. One method of harvesting inactive business relationship data is when MCI regularly engages in an action referred to as the "LEC Reconciliation Process". In this procedure, MCI first determines the identity of telephone numbers that are still assigned to MCI in the LEC'south organization, and then identifies those that it is not actively billing. Once MCI identifies the inactive telephone numbers, it creates a new account for these telephone numbers and begins billing an MUF.

A second method of harvesting inactive account billing information is when MCI obtains data regarding which phone numbers are assigned to MCI through the transmittal of "Transaction Code Status Indicators" (TCSIs). TCSIs are electronic codes that telecommunications carriers routinely utilise to transmit subscriber assignment information to each other. In some cases, the codes inaccurately indicate that a customer has designated MCI as their long altitude provider. Staff has adamant that MCI knowingly takes reward of these "coding errors" by billing inactive or closed accounts for an MUF, despite the fact that the LECs provide the TCSI codes "for data only" and do non intend that the codes be used to establish a new subscriber account for that particular customer ⁱⁱⁱ . Staff believes that MCI is knowingly misusing the TCSI codes to inappropriately plant new accounts.

Through either the LEC Reconciliation Process or through TCSI codes, MCI creates a new account (which it calls the Bones Dial-1 plan ⁴ ) and imposes the MUF without first contacting the customer to verify the client's intent to switch, or first checking its records to decide if the customer previously cancelled the account with MCI. Substantially, MCI is acting on the subscriber information (TCSI codes) it receives from other carriers without checking to make certain that the subscriber has really called MCI to be its long altitude provider, and despite the fact that the TCSI code used by MCI is designated as "for information only" and is non the right TCSI lawmaking to found a new subscriber business relationship.

MCI reports that between June 2002 and June 2004, approximately 500,000 California consumers have been billed a MUF pursuant to the Basic Dial-1 default calling programme. Prior to June 2002, consumers did not complain because MCI did not have an MUF associated with the default calling program.

Staff has plant that the procedure of calling MCI, removing the charges, and canceling the account frequently takes several months. Consumers who are billed an MUF typically call MCI repeatedly over several months, experience difficulty getting through to an MCI customer service representative and experience difficulty in having the charges reversed. Consumers complain that MCI refused to honor the initial request for counterfoil and forced the consumers to go to nifty lengths to have the charges reversed, fifty-fifty though the charges were improper to brainstorm with. Consumers state that MCI did in fact (somewhen) cancel the account and discontinue billing, but some consumers limited outrage because MCI sent the consumer's unpaid charges to a collection agency. The sections below describe different situations in which MCI billed consumers for an MUF.

B. Some Customers Switched From MCI To Some other Long Distance Carrier, Yet MCI Billed an MUF to This Non-Customer

In some cases, Staff's investigation reveals that MCI imposed MUFs on MCI customers who switched abroad from MCI to another long distance carrier. Consumers mutter that after switching away from MCI the old MCI customer receives a pecker (in many cases after several years have passed) from MCI for an MUF. MCI imposed this accuse even though the consumer used a different long distance carrier and no longer had any contractual relationship with MCI.

MCI refuses to change its behavior in these sorts of circumstances. MCI alleges that it imposes these charges because the consumer's new carrier fails to notify MCI of the switch. Withal, Staff believes that the consumer should non exist held responsible considering MCI refuses to honor the request for counterfoil directly from the consumer, which ways that the consumer has no command over whether MCI is notified of the switch asking. ⁵ Staff believes it is MCI's responsibility to take the steps necessary to ensure that information technology is not sending out bills to customers who take chosen another carrier.

C. Some Customers Cancelled Their MCI Service With No New Carrier Selection, Yet Are Billed Past MCI For An MUF

Consumers in California have many different options for making long distance calls, such as the Cyberspace, cellular phones, dial-around, calling cards, etc. Increasingly, consumers are choosing to cancel their long distance carrier and are using i of these other methods to make long distance calls. In the past, MCI did not neb consumers for an MUF when the consumer cancelled his or her long distance service with MCI.

Beginning on June 1, 2002, customers who had cancelled their MCI service, sometimes years ago, began to receive MCI bills for the MUF. If MCI had checked its internal records prior to billing these customers, MCI's records would show that these one-time customers cancelled their long altitude service with MCI. However, as described above, even though MCI is aware that that at that place may be a need to check on the accuracy of industry records MCI chooses not to check its existing customer records prior to creating a new account and imposing an MUF on the quondam customer.

Former MCI customers besides complain that MCI bills an MUF when the customer cancels service because they are moving to a new domicile, a unlike expanse, out-of-state, etc. In those cases, MCI did not receive a switch notification for that account because the customer was not switching, but was only canceling their service. In some cases, MCI alleges that it has failed to receive (or perhaps acknowledge) the notification code from the LEC. Yet, Staff believes that consumers are not at fault for whatever discrepancies that might occur every bit a outcome of infirmities in the providers' notification systems which MCI is aware of and which MCI is capable of mitigating. Staff believes that consumers should not exist required to pay an MUF to a provider when the consumer has cancelled its subscription for that service.

D. Some Consumers Never Had MCI Service on a Primary or Secondary Telephone Line, Yet Are Billed By MCI for an MUF

Consumers often have a second line dedicated to a fax auto, Internet service, etc. On initiating service, they do non select a long altitude carrier for the second line because they do not plan on making any long distance calls on that line. The consumers' principal line is used for making long altitude calls, while their secondary line is used for fax or Internet service. These consumers have the option to select no long altitude company on the secondary line.

In cases reviewed by Staff, consumers report that MCI began billing the secondary line for an MUF, even though MCI was never the long altitude carrier on that line. The consumer never requested MCI's service on the secondary line and made no long distance calls, yet, MCI billed these consumers an MUF.

In some cases, consumers report that they had never selected MCI on their main line, even so were billed by MCI for an MUF on the secondary line. Staff believes these are conspicuously violations of the law that should non occur.

East. Directive to Cease and Desist

On March 3, 2004 Staff informed MCI that its practice of imposing monthly charges on non-customers, whether they were inactive accounts or customers who had non affirmatively selected MCI as their provider, is unlawful. Staff ordered MCI to cease and desist. Staff informed MCI that the practise results in charges being imposed for products or services that were never authorized or requested by the consumer, in violation of Public Utilities Code section 2890. On September 15, 2004, Staff met with MCI to straight the visitor to discontinue its practice of imposing MUFs, to discuss mitigating the damage to consumers caused past this practice and to talk over other technical issues related to how the MUFs are imposed. Staff believes that, to date, MCI has not stopped or modified its exercise.

³ MCI requests the 2414 TCSI code from the LECs. The 2414 code is officially divers equally "End Users Selected To Requesting Air conditioning For Post conversion Equal Access End Office(s)." Typically, this Transaction Lawmaking is used to provide terminate user data to the Access Carrier (AC) - in this case, MCI. Information technology is intended to be used as data merely and should non exist confused with a TC twenty - subscription order install, or TC 28 - pending subscription order. ⁴ At the present, the Basic Dial-1 programme includes a $three.95 "minimum usage fee". The Bones Dial-i programme is not advertised to the public, is not an option for prospective customers, and appears to be solely the default plan used when MCI has not contacted the prospective consumer to make up one's mind which MCI calling plan the consumer has chosen. ⁵ MCI simply recognizes the notification of a PIC modify if it is received from the LEC or the new carrier, not the consumer.

Previous Page Top Of Page Next Page Go To First Page