Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Phones
  3. Mobile
  4. Legacy Archives

Sprint is next on FCC’s chopping block for cramming charges, as AT&T settles for $105M

Add as a preferred source on Google

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is on an apparent pro-consumer streak. In October, it partnered with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in leveling charges against AT&T, when it accused the wireless provider of capriciously throttling unlimited data plans. It threatened Verizon with an investigation if it chose to do the same. Now, the agency is turning its attention towards the transgressive industry practice known as “cramming,” in which charges from so-called premium apps are hidden in customers’ bills.

The agency has already penalized AT&T for the practice, and now, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal, it’s moving on to Sprint. Based on the report, a majority of FCC commissioners will vote in favor of fining Sprint $105 million for unauthorized charges on customers’ cellphone bills.

Recommended Videos

Related: FCC to fight ‘mystery fees’ on phone bills

The fine, which will be set aside in part to refund illicitly billed customers, ties for the largest fine dispensed in the agency’s crusade against carriers that surreptitiously bill customers for third-party services, including ring tones, text message alerts, and horoscopes. AT&T paid $105 million in October to settle identical claims. An FTC case filed against T-Mobile in July is still pending.

The nature of the services on paper is often unclear — AT&T grouped them under the euphemism “AT&T Monthly Subscriptions” — and many carriers don’t notify customers of enrollment. Carriers receive a 30 to 40 percent cut of the profits, which can amount to hundreds of millions of dollars. As many as 20 million people a year are affected, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler says. At the behest of state attorneys general, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, and Verizon stopped billing customers for third-party services in November.

Related: Senate study says phone bill ‘cramming’ is costing us millions

An agency probe, coordinated with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and various State Attorneys General, found evidence of “willful violation” of FCC truth-in-billing rules, which require that companies clarify service billing on statements. In a three-month window from August to October 2013, it found that Sprint received almost 35,000 complaints about unwanted charges.

According to the Journal’s sources, the agency will make its designs public in the coming weeks. It’s unclear whether or not Sprint will follow in AT&T’s footsteps and choose to settle before then.

Kyle Wiggers
Kyle Wiggers is a writer, Web designer, and podcaster with an acute interest in all things tech. When not reviewing gadgets…
Apple’s Siri AI is free, until you actually start using it
Turns out "unlimited" AI might come with an asterisk and an iCloud+ upgrade prompt.
Siri Ai on iPhone

Apple's latest earnings call had plenty of good news: record iPhone revenue, a record June quarter, and non-stop excitement about Siri AI. But buried inside the analyst Q&A was a detail that caught my attention: Apple all but confirmed that heavy Siri AI users could eventually need a bigger iCloud+ plan to keep using it comfortably.

Will heavy Siri AI users need to pay more?

Read more
Viaim RecDot Review: These AI earbuds sounds great and also take notes for you
These earbuds do the one thing they set out to do, and they do it extremely well.
Viaiam RecDot in-ear

Button Text

Quick Take

Read more
Apple’s new Upgrade plan looks cheap until you remember who owns the device
Apple Upgrade could be perfect for serial upgraders. But most people aren't one
Computer, Electronics, Laptop

Apple has found a great way to make an expensive iPhone more approachable. Apple Upgrade lets customers lease eligible devices through Klarna, with iPhone terms lasting 12 or 24 months. At the end, you can return the device, begin another lease, or pay the remaining amount to own it.

My initial reaction focused heavily on the value customers lose by returning an iPhone they could have sold or traded. While that concern is still valid, the program makes considerably more sense for a select group of people who already replace their iPhones every year. But the question is... how many people actually do that?

Read more