|
Dear Legal Line,
I am the owner of a small-sized prepaid calling
company. We licensed and certified ourselves as an IXC prepaid calling
company back in 2000 with the FCC and several state commissions.
Lately we have been getting a lot of notices announcing that the
states we are certified in are de-tariffing IXC services, and, we
received advice from our regulatory guy that the FCC has de-tariffed
carriers of domestic services for some time. When I first licensed
the company, I was under the impression that the federal and state
tariffs we filed were also important for defending lawsuits from
our customers, because of the filed-rate principle. Is this still
true? Our regulatory guy said that the FCC says that it is no longer
applicable because they do not require paper tariffs to be filed.
Do the tariffs protect us or not?
Texas Pete
Dear Pete,
The filed-rate (or filed tariff) doctrine is
a long-standing Supreme Court created principle, that the courts
give precedent, that protects common carriers from certain consumer
claims, provided that the carrier has posted a tariff related to
rates, terms and policies of carriage. The doctrine, at least from
application in the courts, by the Supreme Court of published rates
originated in 1906 and related first to railroad carriers. The doctrine
has survived over time and has been applied to common carriers of
telecommunication services through the 1934 and 1996 Telecommunications
Acts. Largely, the doctrine has been used to bar recovery through
the courts (state or federal) of consumer claims that challenge
the advertised/represented rates or charges, versus what was actually
charged by the carrier. The doctrine holds that if the carrier has
“posted” their rates and charges through a tariff, the
consumer is “presumed” to have been made aware of the
rates through constructive notice. In essence, if the carrier “posts,”
the consumer is presumed to have notice of that rate or charge.
The consumer challenge, thereafter, is considered to be an Administrative
Law matter that can be handled by either the FCC or the state PSC/PUC.
For common carriers, it is a cost-effective way of shielding liability
on certain consumer complaints and cases related to rates and charges.
In 1998, the FCC began the process of de-tariffing
common carriers for statutory, administrative, and budgetary reasons,
in light of the 1996 Act. The initial statements of the FCC alluded
to the position that since the FCC was de-tariffing, the end-game
result would be that the filed rate doctrine world be DEAD. This
position was based on a perspective that an actual filed paper was
the engine behind the legal doctrine and that posting was to be
centralized in one place – the FCC. However, “mere paper
does not a tariff make” and in that same year, the Supreme
Court ruled in the case of AT&T v Central Office Telephone,
Inc. 524 US 214 (1998) that the doctrine applied to the 1996 Act
and that strict application was necessary to avoid discriminatory
pricing. This upheld the doctrine and became a touchstone for further
application by other state and federal courts.
Now, going back to high school civics, you may
be getting the idea that the battle of whether the doctrine is dead
or alive is a question of the balancing of power between the three
branches of government (legislative, executive and judicial). Well,
it is. The filed rate doctrine is a judicially created principle
to be applied in Legal Causes of Action over those in the telecom
industry that provide services to the public. The FCC ordering de-tariffing
is an administrative branch order impacting the way the agency (the
FCC) organizes itself to apply mandates from the 1996 Act. So who
prevails? Both. In the courts, as it relates to the application
of the doctrine, filed-tariff precedent is still good law and generally
enforceable because the Supreme Court said so. In that magical realm
of administrative law and regulatory work, companies do not need
to file paper tariffs with the FCC over domestic LD and merely maintain
the tariff on their websites. The only real question between the
two comes in the issue of “posting.”
Again, going back to high school civics, now
comes the difference between federal and state powers. The 1996
Telecom Act gave a fair amount of space for states to develop continuing
policies and law related to local and long distance services within
their borders. Following suit with the 1996 Act, many states implemented
policies requiring tariffs and specific disclosure to protect consumers
on the telecommunications services front. To a large extent, this
is where the majority of telecom companies “post” their
tariffs today – at the state level. The reason is because
much of state law and regulation over telecom protects consumers
within their borders. Also, the 1998 FCC order to de-tariff was
not a mandate over the state commissions, but instead the FCC only,
and the states are free to structure themselves where federal mandate
does not control. Many states, from a state statutory, administrative
and budgetary regime, are now in the process of de-regulating or
de-tariffing selective services. So depending on the state, what
constitutes “posting” rates and charges for purpose
of the filed-rate doctrine varies at the state level.
Now to your question of whether the tariffs protect
you or not, the answer is that they should. The caveat is that the
ONLY true test is its use in defending litigation from a consumer.
Likewise, if you are licensed in a state, and they have requirements
different from an actual filed tariff, compliance with individual
state requirements will be essential for showing that the doctrine
should be applied. The best method of verifying this, and to know
if you have sufficiently “posted,” is by talking with
your lawyer, preferably a civil litigator, to see how it is applied
in the jurisdiction you are concerned about. Battle experience of
a civil litigator in telecom cases is sometimes key to getting good
advice about how the doctrine is invoked in your particular circumstance.
Good Luck and Success in the Industry.
•• Ed Maldonado is a principal of Maldonado & Glenn,
a telecom legal firm. He can be reached at info@4counsel.net.
Send all of your Legal Line questions to
legalline@prepaidpress.com.
|