FCC vote set to make customers pay $225 to make a complaint [Update: Vote passed]

[Master Disaster]

Update:

Quote

We reported earlier this week that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was going to vote on a proposal that would potentially free it from listening to public comments unless consumers pay $225. With one of its own commissioners calling the proposal “bonkers,” the proposal attracted questions and concerns from lawmakers. However, as it has been in the past, the communications watchdog has both ignored the public and the lawmakers voting 3-1 to stop reviewing informal consumer complaints against telecom and phone companies.

 

This comes despite the agency’s promise yesterday that it was removing controversial bits from the draft. It appears Ajit Pai, the current FCC chairman and ex-Verizon employee, was simply trying to get the attention away from this vote.

 

Original: Ajit is at it again, this time he and his cronies are set to vote on Thursday on whether to make customers pay a $225 fee before any complaint they make will be considered.

Quote

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) appears to be on a non-stop streak of approving pro-companies rules and regulations that completely ignore the consumers. The agency is apparently going to vote this Thursday to ask you to pay $225 or it won’t be required to review your formal complaints.

Obviously there is a worry this is a deliberate move to try and reduce complaints made to the agency in response to the Net Neutrality argument that's currently still very much in the public eye. Basically if they don't pay up their complaint is ignored entirely.

Quote

Following the argument of the FCC ignoring over 20 million comments supporting net neutrality, consumer rights activists are worried that the agency is opting for this policy to never have to answer for such negligence in the future. Lawmakers aren’t onboard either, sharing concerns that this policy would protect mega companies, not the American citizens.

Lawmakers made the following statement delivered to the FCC directly

Quote

“As the chief communications regulator, the FCC plays a critical role in ensuring consumers – including families, small businesses and struggling Americans – get fair and honest treatment from their service providers,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter [PDF] to the FCC chairman Ajit Pai. “We worry that the proposed change signals that the FCC no longer intends to play this role, and will instead simply tell consumers with limited means and time that they need to start an expensive and complicated formal legal process.”

A Reddit user pointed out that recently he received $200 compensation from his ISP but if the rules were in place it would have cost him $25 more to make the complaint than what he received back.

Quote

“I recently filed a complaint about a $200 charge and the FCC forced spectrum to refund it. In this scenario I’d be out $25 more asking the FCC for help.”

The FCC say this move won't affect informal complaints and is only meant to streamline the formal complaints process, what ever that means.

Quote

FCC argues that the new policy won’t affect the process of informal complaints and is only intended to streamline the filing of formal complaints. However, the new rules carry the potential of shutting down consumer voices against telecom giants.

 

The agency is set to vote on Thursday during the commission’s Open Meeting.

https://wccftech.com/fcc-forcing-users-225-complaints/

 

Wow, coming from the group that voted to remove net neutrality I'm not surprised but this does make me very angry. As usual it's the least wealthy of society who will lose out here and as usual big business will get an extra buffer from the public to protect their hugely anti consumer policies.

 

America, land of the free, assuming you can afford it.

[Stefan Payne]

Its maybe more to get rid of some bogus claims.

 

Though I find 225 USD a bit on the high side. I'd start with 25USD and see from there.

[Arika]

sounds like it's time to disband the current FCC and reform a new one with people that are not colossal bags of dicks

[NMS]

Oh that's just great! Next thing you know, you will have to pay tax for mentioning (@) a company on Twitter.

6 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Obviously there is a worry this is a deliberate move to try and reduce complaints made to the agency in response to the Net Neutrality argument that's currently still very much in the public eye. Basically if they don't pay up their complaint is ignored entirely.

Pretty much this.

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, Stefan Payne said:

Its maybe more to get rid of some bogus claims.

 

Though I find 225 USD a bit on the high side. I'd start with 25USD and see from there.

Sorry but no it isn't, it's designed to stop the poorest members of society from complaining about their ISP when they're getting treated unfairly and create an entrance fee for complaining that outweighs the usual compensation.

[Mooshi]

If ever there was a man who should eat shit and choke on it.

[MGE Dawn]

I'm thinking it's time to spam complaints to the DoJ requesting that they intervene... they ARE about the only group that can do anything whose interests aren't directly tied to corporate bribes donations, after all...

[Stefan Payne]

1 minute ago, Master Disaster said:

Sorry but no it isn't, it's designed to stop the poorest members of society from complaining about their ISP when they're getting treated unfairly and create an entrance fee for complaining that outweighs the usual compensation.

That's why I said that I find the 225USD a bit too high and start with 25 bucks instead...

 

But why do YOU have to do the complaint?! Why can't an organisation do the Complaint for you?

We have here what we call "Customer Protection" Agency (Verbraucherschutz), who would do the complaining for you and go the whole 9 yards.

 

 

While I see your argument, I also see a way around that: Just find 10 people with the same issue. And if it is a real issue that should be easy. Everyone share the 225 bucks equally but with 10 people its only 22,5 bucks.

 

 

[Master Disaster]

2 minutes ago, Mooshi said:

If ever there was a man who should eat shit and choke on it.

I know you're only joking but please don't wish ill of people, no matter what he's done he doesn't deserve to die.

[Trik'Stari]

Simple solution.

 

 

Get ahold of his and others FCC personal email addresses and complain directly to them. Spam them.

[Stefan Payne]

5 minutes ago, VegetableStu said:

$25, yes. $50, maybe.

$225, that amount better be refundable when complaint is validated.

Exactly!

If it is something like a deposit you have to give until your claim is validated, there is no problem.

Do we know if it is that or not??

What are the details??

 

[Mooshi]

3 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

I know you're only joking but please don't wish ill of people, no matter what he's done he doesn't deserve to die.

Never said anything about death. I want him to savor it.

[ScratchCat]

"For you inconvenience we now are charging $225 if you want to point out what we are doing wrong"

 

[Master Disaster]

1 minute ago, Mooshi said:

Never said anything about death. I want him to savor it.

Well I can't disagree with the sentiment.

[AlTech]

Somebody needs to kick Ajit Pai out of office. His ideas and the bribes companies are paying him are only harming the American people.

[ScratchCat]

4 minutes ago, Stefan Payne said:

Exactly!

If it is something like a deposit you have to give until your claim is validated, there is no problem.

 

There are those who do not have $225 to complain about something which they many not get back. This is not a court so the ISP could simply dismiss the complaint, not need to alter anything and get $225 for free

[Master Disaster]

2 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Somebody needs to kick Ajit Pai out of office. His ideas and the bribes companies are paying him are only harming the American people.

What makes me mad is he doesn't even try to hide what he is doing. He sits there like a fucking spin doctor telling the people he's supposed to be serving that this blatantly obvious bad for consumers thing he is doing is actually good for them expecting everyone to just swallow his lies and accept them as the truth.

 

I'm not even American and he makes my blood boil.

[Stefan Payne]

18 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

I'm not even American and he makes my blood boil.

Then why do you even bother?

 

As I said, there are other ways like NGOs that do the Customer Protection things. That's how it is in some European countrys.

 

As a normal citizen, the only way to change something is to sue a company.

There is no officiall gouvernment agency where you can complain at all.

 

 

And also something to keep in mind:

If something is free, it will be misused and abused!

And why not change something and make money off it?? 

Maybe there will be the funding for the FCC cut...

But the FCC is also the one organisation responsible for the beeps when people are swearing on TV...

 

So there are two sides to the coin.

 

 

As for Net Neutrality: Look at Youtube for a guy named "Troy Lewitt", who is a game developer. And I think I share his oppinion. If you want that, ask your state representative to bring a Net Neutrality law to Congress, vote on it and let the president sign it. 

THAT would be the right way to do it.

But what's really important is that the FTC does its job. But they just seem to be there and wiggling their thumbs.

[Ertman]

I think it would be fine IF they took these paid complaints more seriously.

 

If somehow paying the fee actually led to more investigation and proper response, than the fee would be well worth it. It would eliminate much of the frivolous complaints and if made them take action more readily and throughly than I'd say it would be worth it. I highly doubt this would ever be the case.

[Light-Yagami]

Ajit Pai will trade his reputation and everything his career ever meant for cash. It really shows how everything begins and ends with money. 

[asus killer]

What the hell is an " informal complaint "? 

[MGE Dawn]

If you are able to, and wish to file a public comment directly to the FCC, the exact proceeding number is 17-245. You're gonna need it to fill out the comment form...

[mr moose]

It should be Zero, it is a government funded agency that is there to represent the people.  If this was a service that provided a physical service i.e drivers license, reprint death certificate or title deed, then sure, you have to cover costs of such things, but consumer protection is not a service, it is a right. 

55 minutes ago, Arika S said:

sounds like it's time to disband the current FCC and reform a new one with people that are not colossal bags of dicks

I happen to think a colossal bag of dicks might run the agency better.

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, MGE Dawn said:

If you are able to, and wish to file a public comment directly to the FCC, the exact proceeding number is 17-245. You're gonna need it to fill out the comment form...

Pretty soon it will cost you to do that too.

[MGE Dawn]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

Pretty soon it will cost you to do that too.

I wouldn't hold my breath. That wouldn't make it more than 12 hours without the Attorney General taking issue and serving the FCC with a lawsuit...