FCC Proposes Nearly $3M TCPA Fine Against "Robocalling" Platform for 184 Calls

by Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Contact

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Notice of Apparent Liability (NAL) to Dialing Services LLC, finding the company apparently liable for 184 prerecorded calls to cell phones in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and related FCC rules, and proposing to fine the company $2,994,000, the maximum allowed by statute. Dialing Services allows users to upload prerecorded voice messages to company servers, or to create prerecorded messages by calling Dialing Services and recording a message over the phone, and then have the messages delivered to phone numbers of the clients’ choosing. In some instances, Dialing Services may have had no role in reviewing or approving the content of the messages or whether they are sent to cell phones. Nonetheless, depending on the numbers the client chooses, and the content of the message, such calls implicate the TCPA and FCC rules, which prohibit transmitting autodialed and/or prerecorded calls to cell phones other than for emergency purposes or with prior express consent of the called party, and require prior express written consent for prerecorded telemarketing. The NAL holds that liability can rest with calling platforms like Dialing Services, and not just with the clients who use the platforms to place calls.

The NAL indicates that FCC staff investigated Dialing Services in 2012, and found 4.7 million non-emergency prerecorded calls were delivered over the company’s platform in a three-month period. The FCC issued a citation, which is a prerequisite to any forfeiture (fine) for companies like Dialing Services that do not hold an FCC authorization, warning the company that further prerecorded calls in violation of the TCPA and rules would expose it to fines. Dialing Services petitioned to have the citation reconsidered and rescinded, but the FCC took no action on Dialing Services’ petition before dismissing it in the NAL.

The NAL was the result of a follow-up investigation of Dialing Services in June 2013.  The FCC found that Dialing Services’ platform had been used to deliver another 184 prerecorded calls to cell phones after the citation issued, forming the basis for the nearly $3 million forfeiture that the FCC has now proposed. The FCC did not commend Dialing Services’ apparent efforts to minimize non-compliant calls, but instead found that Dialing Services had willfully and repeatedly violated the TCPA and FCC rules, because it “made” each of the 184 calls, the calls had no emergency purpose, and no evidence was offered that either Dialing Services or its clients had obtained prior express consent for any of the calls. The FCC rejected Dialing Services’ contentions that it did not “make” any of the calls itself, but had only provided equipment, software and services that allowed its clients to make the calls, and that the company generally did not select phone numbers to which the calls were placed or have any way of knowing if its clients had obtained prior express consent.

In rejecting Dialing Services’ contentions, the FCC cited a variety of “affirmative acts” by Dialing Services to justify the fine. These included that the company provided the software platform and functionality for making the calls, leased or otherwise secured necessary telephone connections for the calls, and used software to detect whether calls were answered by a live person or voicemail and delivered the call (or not) accordingly, based on the client’s preference. The FCC also noted Dialing Services sometimes provided technical assistance to its clients, made voter lists available to them, and may have reviewed/edited clients’ messages if they appeared to be unlawful or in furtherance of fraudulent activity. In addition, the FCC noted, Dialing Services reviews phone numbers called to ensure they are valid and will connect, informs the client of the total number of calls that will result, and offers clients reports of their call history, results, and polling. These facts, and the notion that Dialing Services alone “dials” the numbers, rendered it apparently liable, the FCC held.

For similar reasons, the FCC dismissed as “unripe” Dialing Services’ petition for reconsideration of the citation, which raised objections akin to those the company offered in responding to the citation. This presents a dilemma. A citation is a prerequisite to a forfeiture for entities that do not hold FCC authorizations, which will often be the case in TCPA cases. If a citation issues in error, the NAL asserts there is no way of having it rescinded so that, if the FCC identifies other conduct it believes sanctionable, it must issue a valid citation before proposing fines.

The FCC went on to propose the maximum fine authorized by the statute – $16,000 for each of the 184 calls – finding that Dialing Services’ actions justified the heightened penalty. The FCC noted that the calls giving rise to the fine were all made after Dialing Services had already received the citation and was thus assertedly aware the calls violated the TCPA and FCC rules, as well as the “staggering number” of calls placed over Dialing Services’ platform before the citation issued (almost 5 million calls in 3 months).

The NAL is troubling for dialing platforms for a number of reasons. First, the NAL suggests that merely making facilities and services for the delivery of autodialed and/or prerecorded messages – even if the provider thereof does not craft the messages delivered or pick the phone numbers to which they are delivered – can give rise to millions of dollars of liability. In this regard, dialing platforms may not know the content of messages their clients load into the system, and thus what form of consent is required, and/or may not know the phone numbers a client selects for delivery, and thus whether they encompass numbers assigned to cell phones. There may also be no way of knowing, other than through representations required of clients, whether consent to delivery of the calls has been obtained. Conceivably, a calling platform might simply block all calls to cell numbers in an attempt to avoid liability such as that imposed here, but that would vastly diminish the value of the service for clients that have the requisite consent.

The imposition of the maximum fine seems extreme. As the NAL notes, the “base” (i.e., default or starting-point) forfeiture for TCPA violations is $4,500 per call, with the maximum fine of $16,000 representing nearly a four-fold increase in fine amount. The FCC cites Dialing Services’ prior receipt of a citation as grounds for imposing the maximum fine. But every fine against a company that is not an FCC license holder will be imposed after a citation, because the statute requires a citation before a forfeiture lies. Moreover, in this case, Dialing Services had lodged a petition to rescind the fine in which it made a case for why it should not be liable for calls resulting from its clients’ use of its platform. And Dialing Services clearly “dialed back” its calls and sought clarification of its obligations.  But the FCC basically cited as grounds for increasing the penalties the fact that Dialing Services, during the pendency of its request to reconsider the citation, continued to operate in a manner consistent with the good-faith objections it had raised.

Dialing Services is now entitled to respond to the NAL, before the FCC actually imposes the fine in a forfeiture order. But realistically, unless there is a mistake of fact or an intervening change in law, or the NAL recipient makes a proffer bearing on forfeiture amount that it had no prior ability/reason to raise (e.g., ability to pay, which can affect amount of a forfeiture), issuance of an NAL indicates the FCC will impose the almost $3 million fine.

If that happens, it suggests a kind of strict liability for calling platforms if their customers’ calls violate the TCPA and/or FCC rules. Coupled with recent court cases that have adopted a similar strict liability approach where a caller believes it has consent but in reality it does not due to, e.g., the phone number being reassigned or the person giving consent lacking authority to do so for the phone number in question, this most recent FCC development further raises the stakes for dialing platform services. In the wake of the NAL, such platforms should be asking themselves whether they should scale back any assistance provided to users with respect to message-crafting or call-list provision, in hopes of avoiding or minimizing liability should complaints to the FCC draw enforcement action.

 

Written by:

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP
Contact
more
less

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.