SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 17
Download to read offline
New FCC Rules:
   Expert Legal Analysis with Q&A




                       Compliance Webinar
                          April 11, 2012

David J. Kaminski                          Joe Sanscrainte
Carlson & Messer LLP                       Offices of Joe Sanscrainte


                   Ryan Thurman
                   Contact Center Compliance
FCC Compliance Webinar

 David Kaminski, Esq.        (310) 242-2204
                                                         Carlson & Messer LLP
 Partner
 Carlson & Messer LLP        kaminskid@cmtlaw.com




Joseph Sanscrainte               212-626-6934
Law Office of                    jws@sanscrainte.com
Joseph W. Sanscrainte




 Ryan Thurman                    866-362-5478 ext. 116

 Director of Sales & Marketing   Ryan@dnc.com
Issues

• When do I need to comply with the new FCC rules and
  the law re: dialers?

• Are pre-recorded calls totally off the table?

• What do I need to scrub for telemarketing and collection
  calls?

• What impact do the rules have on the call abandonment
  rate and abandoned call message?

• What is an automatic telephone dialing system under the
  TCPA and what impact does the FCC have on dialers?
                                                         3
BACKGROUND
• 2008: FTC changes its prerecorded rules
  – prerecorded telemarketing messages require express written
    consent
  – Opt-out via automated keypress or voice-activated
    mechanism
  – Technology “agnostic” – doesn’t matter how you make the
    call; doesn’t matter if its to a landline or wireless
  – Successive, 30 day, per campaign standard for
    abandonment
• January 2010: FCC NPRM
  – FCC correctly concludes its prerecorded rules are different
  – Proposed rules keep existing FCC framework – NOT
    agnostic
  – “Rolling” v. “successive” abandonment measurement
                                                             4
ISSUE 1: PRED DIAL/PREREC (PD/PR) CALLS TO CELL PHONES
• Old rule: no PD/PR to cell phones w/out PEC (PDQ)
• New rule: FCC creates two categories:
   – Category 1: telemarketing PD/PR calls to cell phones
   – Category 2: all other PD/PR calls cell phones
• Category 1 - FCC divides THESE calls into:
   – Calls that constitute telemarketing generally: prior express
     WRITTEN consent required
   – Telemarketing calls made by tax-exempt non-profit orgs – PEC
     (i.e., no writing) sufficient
   – HIPAA calls
• Category 2 – “catch-all”
   – All PD/PR calls to cells OTHER than above – PEC only
   – Informational, non-telemarketing calls

                                                                5
ISSUE 2: PR CALLS TO RESIDENTIAL LINES
• Old rule: PEC to deliver PR TM call to residential
  line
  – UNLESS you have an EBR – then no PEC required
  – FTC removed EBR exemption in August, 2008 AND
    required EWC
• New rule: FCC follows FTC rule
  – You can not rely on EBR when delivering a PR TM call
    to a residential line
  – You must obtain EWC for ANY such call
  – FCC makes clear this ONLY applies to TM, and NOT
    informational and non-telemarketing calls
  – New rule does not apply to HIPAA calls
                                                     6
ISSUE 3: ABANDONED CALL CHANGES
• Old rule: measure abandonment rate every
  30 days across all calling campaigns
  – FTC requires measurement on a 30 day
    successive day basis per campaign
• New rule: Same as FTC
  – Ok, almost . . . Seller has to disclose that the call
    was for “telemarketing purposes” along with name
    and telephone number of the seller




                                                        7
ISSUE 4: AUTOMATED OPT-OUTS
• FTC rule:
  – PR TM calls that “could be answered by a person”
    must have interactive voice or keypress opt-out
  – PR TM calls that “could be answered by an
    answering machine” require toll-free # disclosure
• FCC rule: see above, but . . .
  – Unlike FTC, FCC requires opt-out during
    ABANDONED CALL message
  – Toll-free # disclosure must be made during PR TM
    messages that are in fact left on answering
    machines
                                                    8
ISSUE 5: IMPLEMENTATION
• “Start” point: publication of OMB’s approval
• FCC establishes:
  – 30-day period for abandoned call rule
  – 90-day period for opt-out mechanism for PR TM
    calls and abandoned messages
  – 12-month period for phasing out EBR exemption
    for PR TM calls to residential lines
  – 12-month period for implementing rule that PEC
    be in writing for predictive dialer calls to cell
    phones

                                                        9
Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems and Predictive
             Dialers – 47 USC Section 227(a)(1)
•   The TCPA defines the term Automatic Telephone Dialing System (“ATDS") as:
    equipment which has the capacity- (A) to store or produce telephone numbers to be
    called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such
    numbers." 47 U.S.C. §227(a)(1)(emphasis added).

•   Under the FCC’s 2008 ruling, the “ATDS” definition in TCPA is expanded. FCC holds
    predictive dialer is an ATDS under the TCPA. FCC’s 2008 Ruling re dialers includes
    devices with “the capacity to dial numbers without human intervention”.

•   The FCC’s 2003 and 2008 Orders: The TCPA’s ban re the use of dialers to call cell
    phones and other numbers was because such practices were determined to threaten
    public safety and inappropriately shift marketing costs from sellers to consumers.

•   Note: FCC’s reason for autodialer ban, i.e., threat to public safety due to calls to
    emergency and healthcare numbers, shifting costs to consumers, and dialers that
    can dial thousands of numbers in succession which tie up telephone lines – not
    relevant today. Note: All dialer technologies should not be painted with the same
    definition of an ATDS, even under the FCC’s 2008 Ruling.



                                                                                           10
Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems and Predictive
                Dialers – Satterfield Decision
•   The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, 569
    F.3d. 946 (9th Cir. 2009) did not rely on the FCC’s 2008 Ruling in its interpretation of
    the definition of an ATDS. The key points from the decision are as follows:

•   Court holds that the phrase “automatic telephone dialing system ”(“ATDS”) as defined
    by § 227(a)(1) in the TCPA is clear and unambiguous. If a dialing system has the
    “capacity” to store or produce numbers to be called using a random or sequential
    number generator, such system may constitute an ATDS under the TCPA.

•   9th Circuit says no need for FCC to interpret what is an ATDS since statute clear and
    unambiguous on its face.

•   Satterfield holds that a text message to a cell phone constitutes a “call” under 47
    U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A).

•   “Call” defined in Satterfield – To communicate with or try to get in communication
    with a person by telephone.



                                                                                               11
Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems and Predictive
           Dialers – Satterfield Decision
•   Satterfield held: “summary judgment was inappropriate” - issue of material fact
    whether equipment has the requisite capacity under the TCPA. Case sent back
    to lower district court to determine whether equipment had “capacity” (Id. at 952)

•   Satterfield favors limiting scope of devices that would be considered an ATDS.
    Primary issue is: can dialer argument prevail on summary judgment. Issue
    more difficult if outside Ninth Circuit. See Griffith case (ATDS includes devices
    that dial “without human intervention”).

•   The determination of an ATDS - will involve FCC Rulings unless within 9th
    Circuit; the technical nature of dialers will likely require competing expert
    testimony (which may present jury question). See Satterfield, supra; see also
    Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 553 F.2d 1378, 1381-83 (D.C. Cir.
    1977)

•   A TCPA defendant will have to weigh: risk losing on summary judgment and
    going to trial on the issue of whether dialer is an ATDS, which may invoke
    considerable exposure.




                                                                                         12
Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems and
                   Predictive Dialers

    After Satterfield, questions remain: What constitutes the “capacity” to store or
    produce numbers to be called using a random or sequential number generator?
    Issue never decided. Case settled.

-   Based upon Satterfield, the question is: what impact does 9th Circuit decision
    have on interpretation of “automatic telephone dialing system” as set forth in the
    FCC’s 2008 Ruling?

•   Can FCC’s 2008 Ruling be challenged? - FCC’s 2008 Ruling may be a final
    order for the purposes of U.S. Supreme Court Chevron deference analysis and
    the Hobbs Act. See United States v. Mead Corp., 533 U.S. 218, 229 (U.S.
    2001) (FCC's conformance with notice-and-comment procedures serves as a
    "very good indicator of delegation meriting Chevron treatment.") See also Wilson
    v. A.H. Belo Corp., 87 F.3d 393, 395-399 (FCC Declaratory Ruling is a “final
    order” under the Hobbs Act; reviewing cases from “[a]ll other circuits that have
    decided the issue, except the Eleventh”)



                                                                                    13
Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems and
                   Predictive Dialers
•   Argument in favor of defense - Pursuant to Satterfield, reference to the FCC’s
    2008 Ruling should be barred because the definition of an ATDS is clear and
    unambiguous. See Chevron USA, Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S.
    837, 104 S. Ct. 2778, 81 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1984) (if Congress has directly spoken
    to the precise question at issue, “Congress's intent must be enforced and that is
    the end of the matter.”)

•   U.S. District Court Decision Re Predictive Dialer – Federal District Ct. held: a
    predictive dialer that automatically dialed numbers from a database constituted
    an ATDS. Griffith v. Consumer Portfolio Serv., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91231
    (N.D. Ill. Aug. 16, 2011). Crux: dialer had "capacity" to dial numbers "without
    human intervention". (following 2003 and 2008 Orders); Ct. rejects Satterfield:
    “The Satterfield court did not analyze or even cite the relevant provisions of the
    FCC's 2003 and 2008 orders.” Ct. not bound by Satterfield.

•   Manually Dialed Calls Attached to Dialer - Where call is manually dialed, even if
    phone is attached to an ATDS, no TCPA liability. See Dobbin v. Wells Fargo
    Auto Fin., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63856 (N.D. Ill. June 14, 2011)(although
    desk phone was connected to ATDS that had capacity to autodial, because desk
    phone calls were manually dialed, no TCPA liability because not “using” the
    ATDS as required under TCPA).

                                                                                         14
Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems - Dialing in
                “Preview Mode”
• In “preview” dialing mode, numbers to be called are sent to a
  live agent by dialer or software before the number is dialed by
  the dialer. Agent has the option to place a call to the telephone
  number. If agent chooses to place the call, agent instructs dialer
  by a command and the dialer makes the call.

• Does dialing in preview mode violate the TCPA? - Under
  Satterfield and the TCPA’s ATDS definition, if agent intervenes
  to place a call from specific debtor accounts, and if the dialer
  does not have the “capacity” to store or produce numbers to be
  called via a random or sequential number generator program,
  maybe no TCPA liability.




                                                                  15
Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems – Dialing in
                   “Preview Mode”

•    FCC Impact on Preview Dialing - FCC’s 2008 Ruling regarding dialers
     includes devices with “the capacity to dial numbers without human
     intervention”. (See Griffith) Argue - Dialing in preview mode does not
     constitute an ATDS under the FCC Ruling because preview mode
     dialing requires human intervention to dial the call.

•    Caveat: central issue in preview mode is: capacity to dial without
     human intervention!!!! If the dialer at issue is configured such that it
     cannot place calls without the human element, maybe dialer does not
     have “capacity” to dial without human intervention.

•    Distinguish 2003 and 2008 FCC Rulings and purpose of autodialer ban.

•    Caveat: Even if dialer not an ATDS under TCPA, caution re using
     artificial or prerecorded voice without prior express consent.
     227(b)(1)(A).
                                                                                16
Questions ?

Special Offers:
   Free Wireless Number Analysis
   Free State Registration Review


David Kaminski, Esq.                     Joseph Sanscrainte
310-242-2204                             212-626-6934
Partner                                  jws@sanscrainte.com
Carlson & Messer LLP
KaminskD@cmtlaw.com

                                    Contact Center Compliance Solutions
    Ryan Thurman
                                                 DNC Scrub
    866-362-5478 ext. 116
                                               Training Master
    Ryan@dnc.com
                                             Compliance Guide

                                             Data Enhancement

More Related Content

Similar to Contact Center Compliance April 11 2012 FCC Webinar

TCPA Compliance Experts Explain How to Avoid Fines in 2015
TCPA Compliance Experts Explain How to Avoid Fines in 2015 TCPA Compliance Experts Explain How to Avoid Fines in 2015
TCPA Compliance Experts Explain How to Avoid Fines in 2015 Connect First
 
CCC FCCC Rules Webinar
CCC FCCC Rules WebinarCCC FCCC Rules Webinar
CCC FCCC Rules WebinarRyan Thurman
 
Can I Give You a Call? Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) Dos, Don'ts, ...
Can I Give You a Call? Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) Dos, Don'ts, ...Can I Give You a Call? Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) Dos, Don'ts, ...
Can I Give You a Call? Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) Dos, Don'ts, ...Quarles & Brady
 
The State of the TCPA: Consent, Dialers, the FCC -- the Law is in Flux
The State of the TCPA: Consent, Dialers, the FCC -- the Law is in Flux The State of the TCPA: Consent, Dialers, the FCC -- the Law is in Flux
The State of the TCPA: Consent, Dialers, the FCC -- the Law is in Flux Ryan Thurman
 
Your Top 10 TCPA Questions Answered
Your Top 10 TCPA Questions AnsweredYour Top 10 TCPA Questions Answered
Your Top 10 TCPA Questions AnsweredExperian
 
TechComm Industry Update ~ November 2, 2012
TechComm Industry Update ~ November 2, 2012TechComm Industry Update ~ November 2, 2012
TechComm Industry Update ~ November 2, 2012Patton Boggs LLP
 
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 10 26 11 Direct From The Ftc And Fcc
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 10 26 11 Direct From The Ftc And FccContact Center Compliance Webinar 10 26 11 Direct From The Ftc And Fcc
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 10 26 11 Direct From The Ftc And FccRyan Thurman
 
Wireless Siting: The Issue that Won't Go Away and Grows in Complexity
Wireless Siting: The Issue that Won't Go Away and Grows in ComplexityWireless Siting: The Issue that Won't Go Away and Grows in Complexity
Wireless Siting: The Issue that Won't Go Away and Grows in ComplexityBest Best and Krieger LLP
 
Cellphone Tower Regulation: Maximizing Revenue While Protecting Local Interests
Cellphone Tower Regulation: Maximizing Revenue While Protecting Local InterestsCellphone Tower Regulation: Maximizing Revenue While Protecting Local Interests
Cellphone Tower Regulation: Maximizing Revenue While Protecting Local InterestsBest Best and Krieger LLP
 
Mobile Communications Marketing: Effective Compliance Strategies to Avoid Pen...
Mobile Communications Marketing: Effective Compliance Strategies to Avoid Pen...Mobile Communications Marketing: Effective Compliance Strategies to Avoid Pen...
Mobile Communications Marketing: Effective Compliance Strategies to Avoid Pen...Ryan Thurman
 
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKEN
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKENBattling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKEN
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKENTelcoBridges Inc.
 
STIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQ
STIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQSTIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQ
STIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQAlan Percy
 
The TCPA on the Fringe. Where is the FCC Headed? What is the future of TCPA?
The TCPA on the Fringe. Where is the FCC Headed? What is the future of TCPA?The TCPA on the Fringe. Where is the FCC Headed? What is the future of TCPA?
The TCPA on the Fringe. Where is the FCC Headed? What is the future of TCPA?Ryan Thurman
 
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKEN
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKENBattling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKEN
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKENAlan Percy
 
TechComm Industry Update - February 26, 2013
TechComm Industry Update - February 26, 2013TechComm Industry Update - February 26, 2013
TechComm Industry Update - February 26, 2013Patton Boggs LLP
 
Wireless in the Rights of Way and on Public Property
Wireless in the Rights of Way and on Public PropertyWireless in the Rights of Way and on Public Property
Wireless in the Rights of Way and on Public PropertyBest Best and Krieger LLP
 

Similar to Contact Center Compliance April 11 2012 FCC Webinar (20)

TCPA Compliance Experts Explain How to Avoid Fines in 2015
TCPA Compliance Experts Explain How to Avoid Fines in 2015 TCPA Compliance Experts Explain How to Avoid Fines in 2015
TCPA Compliance Experts Explain How to Avoid Fines in 2015
 
CCC FCCC Rules Webinar
CCC FCCC Rules WebinarCCC FCCC Rules Webinar
CCC FCCC Rules Webinar
 
TCPA-Whitepaper
TCPA-WhitepaperTCPA-Whitepaper
TCPA-Whitepaper
 
Can I Give You a Call? Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) Dos, Don'ts, ...
Can I Give You a Call? Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) Dos, Don'ts, ...Can I Give You a Call? Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) Dos, Don'ts, ...
Can I Give You a Call? Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) Dos, Don'ts, ...
 
The State of the TCPA: Consent, Dialers, the FCC -- the Law is in Flux
The State of the TCPA: Consent, Dialers, the FCC -- the Law is in Flux The State of the TCPA: Consent, Dialers, the FCC -- the Law is in Flux
The State of the TCPA: Consent, Dialers, the FCC -- the Law is in Flux
 
Your Top 10 TCPA Questions Answered
Your Top 10 TCPA Questions AnsweredYour Top 10 TCPA Questions Answered
Your Top 10 TCPA Questions Answered
 
TechComm Industry Update ~ November 2, 2012
TechComm Industry Update ~ November 2, 2012TechComm Industry Update ~ November 2, 2012
TechComm Industry Update ~ November 2, 2012
 
Tatoa FCC Threats and Opportunities
Tatoa FCC Threats and OpportunitiesTatoa FCC Threats and Opportunities
Tatoa FCC Threats and Opportunities
 
Robocalls
RobocallsRobocalls
Robocalls
 
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 10 26 11 Direct From The Ftc And Fcc
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 10 26 11 Direct From The Ftc And FccContact Center Compliance Webinar 10 26 11 Direct From The Ftc And Fcc
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 10 26 11 Direct From The Ftc And Fcc
 
Wireless Siting: The Issue that Won't Go Away and Grows in Complexity
Wireless Siting: The Issue that Won't Go Away and Grows in ComplexityWireless Siting: The Issue that Won't Go Away and Grows in Complexity
Wireless Siting: The Issue that Won't Go Away and Grows in Complexity
 
Cellphone Tower Regulation: Maximizing Revenue While Protecting Local Interests
Cellphone Tower Regulation: Maximizing Revenue While Protecting Local InterestsCellphone Tower Regulation: Maximizing Revenue While Protecting Local Interests
Cellphone Tower Regulation: Maximizing Revenue While Protecting Local Interests
 
Mobile Communications Marketing: Effective Compliance Strategies to Avoid Pen...
Mobile Communications Marketing: Effective Compliance Strategies to Avoid Pen...Mobile Communications Marketing: Effective Compliance Strategies to Avoid Pen...
Mobile Communications Marketing: Effective Compliance Strategies to Avoid Pen...
 
STIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQ
STIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQSTIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQ
STIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQ
 
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKEN
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKENBattling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKEN
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKEN
 
STIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQ
STIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQSTIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQ
STIR-SHAKEN Top 10 FAQ
 
The TCPA on the Fringe. Where is the FCC Headed? What is the future of TCPA?
The TCPA on the Fringe. Where is the FCC Headed? What is the future of TCPA?The TCPA on the Fringe. Where is the FCC Headed? What is the future of TCPA?
The TCPA on the Fringe. Where is the FCC Headed? What is the future of TCPA?
 
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKEN
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKENBattling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKEN
Battling Robocallers - How to Implement STIR-SHAKEN
 
TechComm Industry Update - February 26, 2013
TechComm Industry Update - February 26, 2013TechComm Industry Update - February 26, 2013
TechComm Industry Update - February 26, 2013
 
Wireless in the Rights of Way and on Public Property
Wireless in the Rights of Way and on Public PropertyWireless in the Rights of Way and on Public Property
Wireless in the Rights of Way and on Public Property
 

More from Ryan Thurman

Repositioning your TCPA Strategies in a Post ACA World
Repositioning your TCPA Strategies in a Post ACA WorldRepositioning your TCPA Strategies in a Post ACA World
Repositioning your TCPA Strategies in a Post ACA WorldRyan Thurman
 
TCPA Safe Harbor Compliance Solutions
TCPA Safe Harbor Compliance SolutionsTCPA Safe Harbor Compliance Solutions
TCPA Safe Harbor Compliance SolutionsRyan Thurman
 
TCPA and Contact Center Law: What's on the Horizon in 2017?
TCPA and Contact Center Law: What's on the Horizon in 2017? TCPA and Contact Center Law: What's on the Horizon in 2017?
TCPA and Contact Center Law: What's on the Horizon in 2017? Ryan Thurman
 
Contact Center Compliance B2B Non Profit TCPA Webinar
Contact Center Compliance B2B Non Profit TCPA WebinarContact Center Compliance B2B Non Profit TCPA Webinar
Contact Center Compliance B2B Non Profit TCPA WebinarRyan Thurman
 
TCPA Best Practices
TCPA Best Practices TCPA Best Practices
TCPA Best Practices Ryan Thurman
 
Cutting Edge TCPA Solutions
Cutting Edge TCPA SolutionsCutting Edge TCPA Solutions
Cutting Edge TCPA SolutionsRyan Thurman
 
Contact Center Compliance TCPA Webinar
Contact Center Compliance TCPA WebinarContact Center Compliance TCPA Webinar
Contact Center Compliance TCPA WebinarRyan Thurman
 
Contact Center Compliance TCPA Solution Overview
Contact Center Compliance TCPA Solution OverviewContact Center Compliance TCPA Solution Overview
Contact Center Compliance TCPA Solution OverviewRyan Thurman
 
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 2 8 12
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 2 8 12Contact Center Compliance Webinar 2 8 12
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 2 8 12Ryan Thurman
 

More from Ryan Thurman (9)

Repositioning your TCPA Strategies in a Post ACA World
Repositioning your TCPA Strategies in a Post ACA WorldRepositioning your TCPA Strategies in a Post ACA World
Repositioning your TCPA Strategies in a Post ACA World
 
TCPA Safe Harbor Compliance Solutions
TCPA Safe Harbor Compliance SolutionsTCPA Safe Harbor Compliance Solutions
TCPA Safe Harbor Compliance Solutions
 
TCPA and Contact Center Law: What's on the Horizon in 2017?
TCPA and Contact Center Law: What's on the Horizon in 2017? TCPA and Contact Center Law: What's on the Horizon in 2017?
TCPA and Contact Center Law: What's on the Horizon in 2017?
 
Contact Center Compliance B2B Non Profit TCPA Webinar
Contact Center Compliance B2B Non Profit TCPA WebinarContact Center Compliance B2B Non Profit TCPA Webinar
Contact Center Compliance B2B Non Profit TCPA Webinar
 
TCPA Best Practices
TCPA Best Practices TCPA Best Practices
TCPA Best Practices
 
Cutting Edge TCPA Solutions
Cutting Edge TCPA SolutionsCutting Edge TCPA Solutions
Cutting Edge TCPA Solutions
 
Contact Center Compliance TCPA Webinar
Contact Center Compliance TCPA WebinarContact Center Compliance TCPA Webinar
Contact Center Compliance TCPA Webinar
 
Contact Center Compliance TCPA Solution Overview
Contact Center Compliance TCPA Solution OverviewContact Center Compliance TCPA Solution Overview
Contact Center Compliance TCPA Solution Overview
 
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 2 8 12
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 2 8 12Contact Center Compliance Webinar 2 8 12
Contact Center Compliance Webinar 2 8 12
 

Contact Center Compliance April 11 2012 FCC Webinar

  • 1. New FCC Rules: Expert Legal Analysis with Q&A Compliance Webinar April 11, 2012 David J. Kaminski Joe Sanscrainte Carlson & Messer LLP Offices of Joe Sanscrainte Ryan Thurman Contact Center Compliance
  • 2. FCC Compliance Webinar David Kaminski, Esq. (310) 242-2204 Carlson & Messer LLP Partner Carlson & Messer LLP kaminskid@cmtlaw.com Joseph Sanscrainte 212-626-6934 Law Office of jws@sanscrainte.com Joseph W. Sanscrainte Ryan Thurman 866-362-5478 ext. 116 Director of Sales & Marketing Ryan@dnc.com
  • 3. Issues • When do I need to comply with the new FCC rules and the law re: dialers? • Are pre-recorded calls totally off the table? • What do I need to scrub for telemarketing and collection calls? • What impact do the rules have on the call abandonment rate and abandoned call message? • What is an automatic telephone dialing system under the TCPA and what impact does the FCC have on dialers? 3
  • 4. BACKGROUND • 2008: FTC changes its prerecorded rules – prerecorded telemarketing messages require express written consent – Opt-out via automated keypress or voice-activated mechanism – Technology “agnostic” – doesn’t matter how you make the call; doesn’t matter if its to a landline or wireless – Successive, 30 day, per campaign standard for abandonment • January 2010: FCC NPRM – FCC correctly concludes its prerecorded rules are different – Proposed rules keep existing FCC framework – NOT agnostic – “Rolling” v. “successive” abandonment measurement 4
  • 5. ISSUE 1: PRED DIAL/PREREC (PD/PR) CALLS TO CELL PHONES • Old rule: no PD/PR to cell phones w/out PEC (PDQ) • New rule: FCC creates two categories: – Category 1: telemarketing PD/PR calls to cell phones – Category 2: all other PD/PR calls cell phones • Category 1 - FCC divides THESE calls into: – Calls that constitute telemarketing generally: prior express WRITTEN consent required – Telemarketing calls made by tax-exempt non-profit orgs – PEC (i.e., no writing) sufficient – HIPAA calls • Category 2 – “catch-all” – All PD/PR calls to cells OTHER than above – PEC only – Informational, non-telemarketing calls 5
  • 6. ISSUE 2: PR CALLS TO RESIDENTIAL LINES • Old rule: PEC to deliver PR TM call to residential line – UNLESS you have an EBR – then no PEC required – FTC removed EBR exemption in August, 2008 AND required EWC • New rule: FCC follows FTC rule – You can not rely on EBR when delivering a PR TM call to a residential line – You must obtain EWC for ANY such call – FCC makes clear this ONLY applies to TM, and NOT informational and non-telemarketing calls – New rule does not apply to HIPAA calls 6
  • 7. ISSUE 3: ABANDONED CALL CHANGES • Old rule: measure abandonment rate every 30 days across all calling campaigns – FTC requires measurement on a 30 day successive day basis per campaign • New rule: Same as FTC – Ok, almost . . . Seller has to disclose that the call was for “telemarketing purposes” along with name and telephone number of the seller 7
  • 8. ISSUE 4: AUTOMATED OPT-OUTS • FTC rule: – PR TM calls that “could be answered by a person” must have interactive voice or keypress opt-out – PR TM calls that “could be answered by an answering machine” require toll-free # disclosure • FCC rule: see above, but . . . – Unlike FTC, FCC requires opt-out during ABANDONED CALL message – Toll-free # disclosure must be made during PR TM messages that are in fact left on answering machines 8
  • 9. ISSUE 5: IMPLEMENTATION • “Start” point: publication of OMB’s approval • FCC establishes: – 30-day period for abandoned call rule – 90-day period for opt-out mechanism for PR TM calls and abandoned messages – 12-month period for phasing out EBR exemption for PR TM calls to residential lines – 12-month period for implementing rule that PEC be in writing for predictive dialer calls to cell phones 9
  • 10. Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems and Predictive Dialers – 47 USC Section 227(a)(1) • The TCPA defines the term Automatic Telephone Dialing System (“ATDS") as: equipment which has the capacity- (A) to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers." 47 U.S.C. §227(a)(1)(emphasis added). • Under the FCC’s 2008 ruling, the “ATDS” definition in TCPA is expanded. FCC holds predictive dialer is an ATDS under the TCPA. FCC’s 2008 Ruling re dialers includes devices with “the capacity to dial numbers without human intervention”. • The FCC’s 2003 and 2008 Orders: The TCPA’s ban re the use of dialers to call cell phones and other numbers was because such practices were determined to threaten public safety and inappropriately shift marketing costs from sellers to consumers. • Note: FCC’s reason for autodialer ban, i.e., threat to public safety due to calls to emergency and healthcare numbers, shifting costs to consumers, and dialers that can dial thousands of numbers in succession which tie up telephone lines – not relevant today. Note: All dialer technologies should not be painted with the same definition of an ATDS, even under the FCC’s 2008 Ruling. 10
  • 11. Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems and Predictive Dialers – Satterfield Decision • The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in Satterfield v. Simon & Schuster, 569 F.3d. 946 (9th Cir. 2009) did not rely on the FCC’s 2008 Ruling in its interpretation of the definition of an ATDS. The key points from the decision are as follows: • Court holds that the phrase “automatic telephone dialing system ”(“ATDS”) as defined by § 227(a)(1) in the TCPA is clear and unambiguous. If a dialing system has the “capacity” to store or produce numbers to be called using a random or sequential number generator, such system may constitute an ATDS under the TCPA. • 9th Circuit says no need for FCC to interpret what is an ATDS since statute clear and unambiguous on its face. • Satterfield holds that a text message to a cell phone constitutes a “call” under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A). • “Call” defined in Satterfield – To communicate with or try to get in communication with a person by telephone. 11
  • 12. Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems and Predictive Dialers – Satterfield Decision • Satterfield held: “summary judgment was inappropriate” - issue of material fact whether equipment has the requisite capacity under the TCPA. Case sent back to lower district court to determine whether equipment had “capacity” (Id. at 952) • Satterfield favors limiting scope of devices that would be considered an ATDS. Primary issue is: can dialer argument prevail on summary judgment. Issue more difficult if outside Ninth Circuit. See Griffith case (ATDS includes devices that dial “without human intervention”). • The determination of an ATDS - will involve FCC Rulings unless within 9th Circuit; the technical nature of dialers will likely require competing expert testimony (which may present jury question). See Satterfield, supra; see also Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Gen. Servs. Admin., 553 F.2d 1378, 1381-83 (D.C. Cir. 1977) • A TCPA defendant will have to weigh: risk losing on summary judgment and going to trial on the issue of whether dialer is an ATDS, which may invoke considerable exposure. 12
  • 13. Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems and Predictive Dialers After Satterfield, questions remain: What constitutes the “capacity” to store or produce numbers to be called using a random or sequential number generator? Issue never decided. Case settled. - Based upon Satterfield, the question is: what impact does 9th Circuit decision have on interpretation of “automatic telephone dialing system” as set forth in the FCC’s 2008 Ruling? • Can FCC’s 2008 Ruling be challenged? - FCC’s 2008 Ruling may be a final order for the purposes of U.S. Supreme Court Chevron deference analysis and the Hobbs Act. See United States v. Mead Corp., 533 U.S. 218, 229 (U.S. 2001) (FCC's conformance with notice-and-comment procedures serves as a "very good indicator of delegation meriting Chevron treatment.") See also Wilson v. A.H. Belo Corp., 87 F.3d 393, 395-399 (FCC Declaratory Ruling is a “final order” under the Hobbs Act; reviewing cases from “[a]ll other circuits that have decided the issue, except the Eleventh”) 13
  • 14. Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems and Predictive Dialers • Argument in favor of defense - Pursuant to Satterfield, reference to the FCC’s 2008 Ruling should be barred because the definition of an ATDS is clear and unambiguous. See Chevron USA, Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 104 S. Ct. 2778, 81 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1984) (if Congress has directly spoken to the precise question at issue, “Congress's intent must be enforced and that is the end of the matter.”) • U.S. District Court Decision Re Predictive Dialer – Federal District Ct. held: a predictive dialer that automatically dialed numbers from a database constituted an ATDS. Griffith v. Consumer Portfolio Serv., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91231 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 16, 2011). Crux: dialer had "capacity" to dial numbers "without human intervention". (following 2003 and 2008 Orders); Ct. rejects Satterfield: “The Satterfield court did not analyze or even cite the relevant provisions of the FCC's 2003 and 2008 orders.” Ct. not bound by Satterfield. • Manually Dialed Calls Attached to Dialer - Where call is manually dialed, even if phone is attached to an ATDS, no TCPA liability. See Dobbin v. Wells Fargo Auto Fin., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63856 (N.D. Ill. June 14, 2011)(although desk phone was connected to ATDS that had capacity to autodial, because desk phone calls were manually dialed, no TCPA liability because not “using” the ATDS as required under TCPA). 14
  • 15. Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems - Dialing in “Preview Mode” • In “preview” dialing mode, numbers to be called are sent to a live agent by dialer or software before the number is dialed by the dialer. Agent has the option to place a call to the telephone number. If agent chooses to place the call, agent instructs dialer by a command and the dialer makes the call. • Does dialing in preview mode violate the TCPA? - Under Satterfield and the TCPA’s ATDS definition, if agent intervenes to place a call from specific debtor accounts, and if the dialer does not have the “capacity” to store or produce numbers to be called via a random or sequential number generator program, maybe no TCPA liability. 15
  • 16. Automatic Telephone Dialing Systems – Dialing in “Preview Mode” • FCC Impact on Preview Dialing - FCC’s 2008 Ruling regarding dialers includes devices with “the capacity to dial numbers without human intervention”. (See Griffith) Argue - Dialing in preview mode does not constitute an ATDS under the FCC Ruling because preview mode dialing requires human intervention to dial the call. • Caveat: central issue in preview mode is: capacity to dial without human intervention!!!! If the dialer at issue is configured such that it cannot place calls without the human element, maybe dialer does not have “capacity” to dial without human intervention. • Distinguish 2003 and 2008 FCC Rulings and purpose of autodialer ban. • Caveat: Even if dialer not an ATDS under TCPA, caution re using artificial or prerecorded voice without prior express consent. 227(b)(1)(A). 16
  • 17. Questions ? Special Offers: Free Wireless Number Analysis Free State Registration Review David Kaminski, Esq. Joseph Sanscrainte 310-242-2204 212-626-6934 Partner jws@sanscrainte.com Carlson & Messer LLP KaminskD@cmtlaw.com Contact Center Compliance Solutions Ryan Thurman DNC Scrub 866-362-5478 ext. 116 Training Master Ryan@dnc.com Compliance Guide Data Enhancement