A
Monthly Review of Issues Affecting Commercial Telemarketing by Copilevitz & Canter,
LLC, Attorneys at Law
April, 2004
FTC
The Federal Trade Commission has announced a proposal to require telemarketers
to “scrub” against the national “do-not-call” list
at least every thirty-one days. This is a change from a previous proposal
which required “scrubbing” every thirty days or “once
a month.”
The FTC, March 31, 2004, issued amended rules requiring “scrubbing” against
the national “do-not-call” list no more than every
31 days. The amended rule would take effect January 1, 2005.
The FTC has obtained an order against a company resolving
allegations that it registered persons for the national “do-not-call” list
for a fee.
The FTC has also obtained a preliminary injunction against
two payment processing companies following allegations that
they knowingly processed electronic payments for deceptive
telemarketers. Any business can be found liable for violations
of telemarketing laws for the businesses it works with if it
knows, has reason to know, or consciously avoids knowing of
the illegality under the telemarketing sale and continues to
provide services to the illegal entity.
ALABAMA
A bill has been proposed in the Alabama General Assembly which would require
inbound call centers to disclose the name of the telemarketer, the name
of the employer of the telemarketer and the city, state and country where
the inbound call center is located within the first 30 seconds of the telephone
call.
CALIFORNIA
California has filed suit against a Florida mortgage company’s alleged
violations of federal and state laws regarding automated messages and the
federal “do-not-call” list.
California is considering a bill which would require inbound
and outbound call centers to disclose at the beginning of the
telephone call whether the employee is in a call center located
outside the United States and whether the call is being monitored
by a person located outside the United States.
GEORGIA
A Georgia appellate court has denied a class certification for a plaintiff
who claimed that a wireless company sent her unsolicited faxes. Because
she was a customer of this wireless company, the Georgia court agreed with
the FCC that, at the time the faxes were sent, the TCPA did not ban them.
INDIANA
MCI has agreed to pay a $100,000 fine to resolve alleged violations of the
Indiana “do-not-call” list.
KENTUCKY
The Kentucky House is considering a bill which would require that telephone
companies provide a pamphlet or print information on consumers’ bills
concerning the state “do-not-call” list.
LOUISIANA
A bill is being considered by the Louisiana House which would restrict calls
between the hours of 9:00 am and 9:00 pm and require disclosure of the
consumer’s right to be removed from the telemarketer’s call
list and a telephone number the consumer could call to complain about the
call.
The Louisiana House is also considering a bill which would
authorize the state to use the national “do-not-call” list
instead of maintaining its own state “do-not-call” list.
MAINE
The Maine House is considering a bill which would require all providers of
electricity to comply with state and federal telemarketing laws.
MISSOURI
Missouri has reached a settlement with a St. Louis mortgage company regarding
alleged violations of the state “do-not-call” list.
NEVADA
A Nevada telemarketer has been sentenced to at least 5 years in prison for
fraud with regard to sales of investments and securities. The defendant
is also required to pay more than $300,000 in restitution.
NEW YORK
A bill has also been introduced in New York which would raise the fines for
violation of the New York “do-not-call” list to $11,000 per
violation.
NORTH CAROLINA
North Carolina’s Attorney General has reached a settlement with four
telemarketers regarding alleged violation of the state “do-not-call” list.
PENNSYLVANIA
Pennsylvania has reached settlements with three telemarketers, including
a national magazine company regarding alleged violations of the Pennsylvania “do-not-call” list.
The Attorney General has also filed suit against at least two other telemarketers’ alleged
violations of the list.
WEST VIRGINIA
West Virginia has instituted a $250 registration with the Department of Tax
and Revenue for telemarketers which are exempt from telemarketing registration
because they have been under the same name and ownership for at least 2
years and derive 50% or more of their gross telemarketing sales revenue
from supervised financial institutions.
This “registration” appears to be similar to the
limited registration found in Arizona, although with a $250
fee. You should review your registration status in the State
of West Virginia if you rely on this exemption from telemarketing
registration laws.
VIRGINIA
The Virginia House is considering a bill which would require transmission
of caller identification and require telemarketers to play a recorded message
in the event of an abandoned call. The bill would also adopt the federal “do-not-call” list
instead of creating a state “do-not-call” list.
WISCONSIN
The Wisconsin Attorney General has obtained a judgment against a Tennessee
telemarketer regarding alleged “do-not-call” list violations
and use of prerecorded messages. The Consent Judgment involved a $6,556
penalty.
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®. April 1, 2004, Copilevitz & Canter,
L.L.C.