Creditors Want Automated Calling to Numbers Ported to Mobile
A petition to stop prerecorded calls to consumers who port landline numbers to wireless was denounced by creditors, phone companies and others involved in automated messaging. In comments in an FCC rulemaking, they said a customer who has consented to calls on a landline number probably still wants them after cutting the cord. But consumer activists said cellphones are more private than wireless phones and deserve different treatment under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
FCC rules under the act prohibit autodialed and prerecorded message calls to cellphones except in emergencies or with “prior express consent of the called party.” Petitioner Paul Edwards, president of the Consumer Information Center in Las Vegas, asked the FCC to rule that a creditor loses “prior express consent” when the consumer ports a landline number to wireless.
But porting a number doesn’t cancel the consumer’s consent, said ACA International, an association of credit and collection companies, and other creditors agreed. “A consumer’s decision to provide a number to a creditor constitutes consent to call that number without regard to the character of the service associated with that number,” the American Bankers Association said.
Some activists highlighted differences between landline and wireless that they said support Edwards’s petition. Wireless numbers “are more private and deserving of more privacy protection than land-line numbers,” said Robert Biggerstaff, a retired computer engineer from South Carolina who has sued marketers. “Calls to a land-line number don’t distract drivers, interrupt family outings, or invade classrooms.” And wireless customers, unlike wireline subscribers, are charged for incoming calls, he said.
Sometimes there’s no way to stop pre-recorded calls from debt collectors, even if they're calling the wrong number, Biggerstaff added. Collectors “refuse to identity themselves in these prerecorded calls, citing [Fair Debt Collection Practices Act] provisions prohibiting disclosing the existence of a debt to a third party,” he said. “These calls often have no way for ‘human’ interaction, and instead inform the called party to return the call to an 800 number. When calling the 800 number, the collector still refuses to identify itself.”
But USTelecom said granting Edwards’s petition “would likely lead to significant consumer confusion for the vast majority of customers” who port their numbers. “A customer that ‘cuts the cord’ would likely expect the equivalent service -- and to continue to receive the same calls as before -- just on a different network,” it said. Granting Edwards’ petition could undercut the FCC’s policy of local- number portability, the Direct Marketing Association said, “because it would discourage consumers from switching telecommunications services.”
Rejecting Edwards’ petition would help businesses adapt to the growing trend of consumers’ cutting the cord, the marketing association said. “Consumers are increasingly using their cellular phone as the sole household telephone,” it said. “Prohibiting businesses from calling customers at the number provided to them, whether a wireless or landline number, would prevent businesses from communicating with consumers and delivering relevant information to them.”
USTelecom said, “Creditors are not required to, and many do not have, systems in place that screen their list of “can be reached” numbers for ported wireless numbers. Employing such systems and periodically acquiring the intermodal porting data to run the screens are both costly and time-consuming.” The extra difficulties would interfere with creditors’ efforts to stop identity theft, said the FMA Alliance, a Texas collection agency. Before the creditor could check with a customer about suspicious account activity, the company would have to learn whether the number had been ported to wireless. If so, the creditor would have to send a letter or make someone call in person, slowing the process further, it said.