The California Public Utilities Commission approval of the final settlement in 06-10-023, a cramming case brought by UCAN against MCI.

Summary

Utility Consumers' Action Network (UCAN) and MCI Communication Services, Inc. (MCI) (collectively, the Parties) have jointly moved for the adoption of an uncontested Settlement Agreement in this complaint proceeding involving a computer billing error on the part of MCI that affected 1,890 California customers from June 2006 to October 2006, and some associated issues. Under the settlement agreement, MCI agreed to implement procedures designed to prevent similar errors from occurring again. MCI has fully compensated all the affected customers for any billing errors they experienced. The Commission adopts the settlement, the full text of which is set forth in Appendix A, as resolving all issues in the complaint, and closes the proceeding.

Background

UCAN alleged that as early as May 2006, MCI began "cramming" certain customers by erroneously charging particular local service-only customers a long distance-associated "Basic Monthly Fee" and related fees, taxes and surcharges. Specifically, UCAN asserted that Jack Duclo, a California resident and local service-only customer of MCI, began receiving erroneous charges for a basic monthly fee and related fees, taxes and surcharges beginning with his June 2006 bill. UCAN further alleged that between June 2006 and October 2006, Duclo complained to MCI's customer service representatives (CSRs) about the billing errors and that the CSRs failed to properly credit his account.

MCI began its investigation into Duclo's complaints on or about October 25, 2006, following the receipt of UCAN's Complaint. The investigation revealed that Duclo was affected by a computer coding error that failed to exempt certain customers from being assessed the long distance basic monthly fee. Consequently, MCI billed him for a basic monthly fee, related taxes, fees and surcharges between June 2006 and October 2006. In response to his complaints, MCI credited Duclo's account $69.99, which included a $25.00 "courtesy credit" which the CSR added when he realized that Duclo's account was not properly credited.

On or about October 13, 2006, MCI discovered the computer coding error had occurred because technicians had not applied a certain hard-coded logic to a new billing component implemented on June 1, 2006. Upon detecting the coding error, MCI looked into the issue and added the missing hard code logic. On March 1, 2007, MCI added a note to the "plan page" of its billing system alerting users to add the hard code logic before changing the basic monthly fee in the future.

In November 2006, MCI conducted a credit recovery to ensure that it properly credited for overcharges any customer who experienced the same billing errors as Duclo. MCI issued credits of fees, taxes and surcharges equal to or greater than those previously charged to all its customers impacted by the coding error. The total amount of credits given to 1,890 California customers was $24,454.26. MCI has fully credited all customers.