Notwithstanding the deregulation of a communications service or
facility pursuant to Iowa Code section 476. ID, complaints alleging an
unauthorized change in telecommunications service (see rule
199-22.23
(476) ) will be processed pursuant to the rules set forth in this chapter with
the following additional or substituted procedures:
(1) Upon receipt of the complaint and with
the customer's acknowledgment, a copy of the complaint or a notification of
receipt of a telephone, or other oral, complaint will be forwarded to the
executing service provider and the preferred service provider as a request for
a change in the customer's service to the customer's preferred service
provider, unless the service has already been changed to the preferred service
provider
(2) The complaint or
notification of receipt of a telephone, or other oral, complaint will also be
forwarded to the alleged unauthorized service provider That entity shall file a
response to the complaint within ten days of the date the complaint or
notification of receipt of a telephone, or other oral, complaint was forwarded.
The response must include proof of verification of the customer's authorization
for a change in service or a statement that the imauthorized service provider
does not have such proof of verification.
(3) If the alleged unauthorized service
provider includes with its response alleged proof of verification of the
customer's authorization for a change in service, then the response will be
forwarded to the customer. The customer will have ten days to challenge the
verification or otherwise reply to the service provider's response.
(4) As a part of the informal complaint
proceedings, board staff may issue a proposed resolution to determine the
potential liability, including assessment of damages, for unauthorized changes
in service among the customer, the previous service provider, the executing
service provider, and the submitting service provider, and any other interested
person. In the event of a soft slam (as defined in 199 lAC
22.23(1)"j"), board staff may also propose joint and several
liability between the reseller and the facilities-based service provider In all
cases, the proposed resolution shall allocate responsibility among the
interested persons on the basis of their relative responsibility for the events
that are the subject matter of the complaint. For purposes of this rule and in
the absence of unusual circumstances, the term "damages" means charges directly
relating to the telecommunications services provided to the customer that have
appeared or may appear on the customer's bill. The term "damages" does not
include incidental, consequential, or punitive damages.
(5) If the complainant, the service provider,
consumer advocate, or any other interested person directly affected by the
proposed decision is dissatisfied with the proposed resolution, a request for
formal complaint proceedings may be filed. A request for formal complaint
proceedings will be processed by the board pursuant to 199 lAC 6.5(476) et seq.
If no request for formal complaint proceedings is received by
the board within 14 days after issuance of the proposed resolution, the
proposed resolution will be deemed binding upon all persons notified of the
informal proceedings and affected by the proposed resolution. Notwithstanding
the binding nature of any proposed resolution as to the affected persons, the
board may at any time and on its own motion initiate formal proceedings which
may alter the allocation of liability.
(6) No entity shall commence any actions to
re-bill, directly bill, or otherwise collect any disputed charges for a change
in service until after board action on the complaint is final. If final board
action finds that the change in service was imauthorized and determines the
customer should pay some amount less than the billed amount, the service
provider is prohibited from re-billing or taking any other steps whatsoever to
collect the difference between the allowed charges and the original
charges.
