Frontier: Minnesota Complaints Report Shows One Side, Exaggerates Problems
Frontier Communications pushed back on a scathing service-quality assessment by the Minnesota Commerce Department that said the carrier possibly violated at least 35 laws and rules, based on about 1,000 customer comments. "It maybe is not as large a crisis as the department has portrayed it to be," said Frontier General Counsel Kevin Saville at the Public Utilities Commission's livestreamed Thursday meeting.
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!
Commissioners stressed the claims’ seriousness. They voted 4-0 to grant the company a 30-day extension until March 5 to respond to the Jan. 4 report in docket 18-122. Complaining of a “queasy stomach,” Commissioner John Tuma (R) doesn’t want the extension to lead to “more delay for delay’s sake.”
The PUC opened mediation under the Office of Administrative Hearings, as suggested by the company. It also delegated authority to the executive secretary to decide if more data should be filed with the Consumer Affairs Office (CAO) to help adjudicate individual customer complaints. The commission directed the telco to make a compliance filing within 15 days outlining remedies it offers consumers, which the CAO will use to ensure complaining customers get appropriate relief until the PUC can reach a final decision.
The Commerce report’s 130-plus pages was longer than Frontier expected but showed only “one side of the story,” said Saville. The carrier wants to find a “resolution” but disagrees with many allegations and material facts in the report and probably will seek a contested proceeding if mediation fails, he said. The department portrayed the company’s compliance with a 24-hour service restoration standard as an emergency, but in December Frontier restored 426 of 447 customer-reported outages within one day, Saville said.
This shouldn't be “just about reaching resolution” but about “fixing problems” and ensuring Minnesotans get “adequate service,” said Commissioner Katie Sieben (D). Don’t read the extension as commissioners not thinking the reported problems are “super important,” she said. Tuma hopes the extension produces “meaningful solution” but worries Frontier’s request could be “just your effort to reposition yourself” for a contested case he wants to avoid.
The company is “not making this extension request for purposes of delay,” Saville said. “Frontier takes this matter very seriously,” is “absolutely” committed to complying with Minnesota service-quality rules and is considering “a number of internal actions” to improve service quality in the state, he said. The company needs more time to respond due to the report’s length but plans to “provide as much information as we can,” he said.
Give Frontier a chance to show it’s complying with Minnesota law, said Linda Jensen, state assistant attorney general for the Commerce Department. If customers continue to file complaints, there should be a penalty, she said. The department supports mediation, said Jensen, but there should be no “material disputes” with the report’s facts unless the telco was confused how to comply.
The report flagged network plant and equipment problems, buzzing landline connections and poor customer service, including long wait times, lost repair tickets, incorrect billing and no credits for outages. The findings got state legislators' attention but didn’t surprise union workers (see 1901140002).