The Federal Communications Commission has proposed its largest fine ever — $45 million — against a company accused of making “hundreds of thousands” of illegal robocalls attempting to sell health insurance. Perhaps most interestingly to companies in the accounts receivable management industry was a comment from the Chair of the FCC who said that something has to be done to broaden the definition of an automated telephone dialing system after the Supreme Court narrowed the definition last year through its ruling in Facebook v. Duguid.
Interstate Brokers allegedly made more than 514,000 robocalls to individuals trying to sell health insurance under the pretense that the annual enrollment period had been extended as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. All but 271 of the calls were made to individuals’ cell phones using pre-recorded messages without first obtaining the necessary consent, which is a violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The FCC said it reviewed 10,000 of those calls, confirmed that the messages were relayed using pre-recorded messages, and verified with some of the recipients that they had not provided any consent to be contacted. The proposed fine is based on the verified calls, according to the FCC.
Interstate Brokers, and its owner Gregory Robbins, have a chance to respond to the proposed fine before it is finalized.
In announcing the proposed fine, the FCC applauded the efforts of the Industry Traceback Group, which reported the suspected robocall traffic to the regulator. Consumers also submitted complaints about the calls directly to the FCC.
In using the announcement of the proposed fine to tout recent efforts to combat the proliferation of illegal robocalls, Jessica Rosenworcel, the chair of the FCC, also used the opportunity to make a comment about the state of the definition of an ATDS under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
“… for this agency to be truly effective when it comes to stopping robocalls more authority is needed,” she said in her statement. “For starters, the decision last year by the Supreme Court in Facebook v. Duguid narrowed the definition of autodialer under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which could lead to less consumer protection from these annoying calls. We need to fix that.”
Back in 2015, many in the industry will remember that the FCC issued a declaratory ruling that amended the TCPA and caused a lot of problems for companies in the ARM industry. That ruling was eventually struck down thanks to a lawsuit filed against the FCC by ACA International. Could Round 2 be on the horizon?
