Home > 18120, AT&T, Brandon Presley, Leonard Bentz, Mississippi Legislature, Mississippi Public Service Commission > Bentz, Presley agree: AT&T oversight removal bill bad business

Bentz, Presley agree: AT&T oversight removal bill bad business

The Mississippi Public Service Commission is not particularly known for agreeing on a whole lot.

The opposite of that is true when it comes to House Bill 825. The bill, filed by Rep. Jim Beckett, R-Bruce, has been referred to the Public Utilities Committee, which Beckett chairs.

What the bill would do is essentially remove a lot of functions AT&T performs from PSC jurisdiction. Television and radio stations already enjoy this exemption. The legislation would extend it to AT&T, and shift that oversight to the federal government. That’s the simple explanation, anyway.

Commissioners Leonard Bentz, a Republican who represents the Southern District; and Brandon Presley, a Democrat representing the Northern District, both have issued lengthy statements that generally paint the bill as one of the worst ideas to circulate around the Capitol in some time. That’s significant, because Bentz and Presley don’t see eye to eye all that often.

Presley called it a “corporate wish list.” Bentz said it would make AT&T’s customer service operations — which have become infamous for their ability to frustrate customers — worse.

One thing is certain. Beckett, since he wrote the bill, will surely air it in front of the Public Utilities Committee. You can bet there will be some lawmakers who hear from folks who don’t like this.

Statements in full from Bentz and Presley:

Public Service Commission Chairman Leonard Bentz announced today his opposition to HB 825, which would remove all oversight which the Mississippi Public Service Commission has over AT&T.

 “This is a very bad bill for consumers in Mississippi,” Commissioner Bentz stated. “Even though AT&T will tell you that the oversight that we [PSC] have is limited, the little we do have is piece of mind for the consumers.”

“You don’t have to think very long to understand why this bill is bad. Think back to last time you called in a problem to AT&T and the lack of customer service you received. This bill would make it worse. It is important to understand AT&T will lead you to believe this bill will affect only a small number of customers, but that is not so. As it stands right now, all customers with AT&T have the ability to file complaints with the Public Service Commission, and have the PSC on their side to help them navigate the system. The bill clearly states customer appeals will be removed from the PSC jurisdiction.

“Further, AT&T states they are at a competitive disadvantage. How can you be at a disadvantage when you own more infrastructure and receive more Universal Service Fund monies than any other telecommunication company? The bill would also limit the Commission’s oversight of the Universal Service Fund. This is a critical fund in which AT&T receives monies to invest in their infrastructure. In the proposed bill this would give the oversight to the federal government,” Bentz added.

“The avenue for customer complaint appeals to the PSC will also be removed. I guess if a consumer had a complaint they could call the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).  If AT&T can explain to me how this bill will build better customer service by calling a Washington bureaucrat versus an elected Mississippian, I will be their biggest cheerleader,” Bentz said.

“I hope legislators reviewing this AT&T bill (HB 825) will contact the PSC and give us an opportunity for input. AT&T employs great employees in Mississippi and I am sure they will tell you AT&T has become more and more like a corporate run robot organization. If AT&T wants a competitive advantage, I have three recommendations. Provide a quality service, listen to your customers and treat your customers as clients. And that does not take any legislation to accomplish.” Bentz concluded.

And here’s Presley’s:

Public Service Commissioner Brandon Presley said today that House Bill 825 would totally strip the PSC of any authority to hold AT&T accountable for rate increases and lousy landline and cell phone coverage. Presley said the bill was requested by AT&T as retaliation against the PSC for denying a rate increase and for complaining of poor cellular and residential phone service. The PSC won a case in the Mississippi Supreme Court to limit charges to customers after AT&T appealed the PSC’s ruling.

“This bill is a corporate wish list that gives AT&T the permission to run over and take advantage of every single customer in Mississippi and no one can say one thing to them about it.” Presley said. “Complaints against AT&T have gone up dramatically over the past few years, yet this bill rewards them by taking the cop off the beat that is there to protect customers”

“It is hard to believe that the Legislature could honestly think that a company with such a terrible track record should be taken out from under the PSC’s authority” Presley added.

Presley said the Legislature passed the first phase of deregulation in 2006 an since then complaints to the Commission about billing errors, poor service and the like have risen from 1,735 in 2006 to 4,361 in 2011 an increase of over 150% .“This is evidence enough of why this bill is bad for consumers”.

Along with removing all of the Public Service Commission’s authority to investigate abuses, extortion and customer complaints, House Bill 825 also removes the Commission’s authority to designate conditions for AT&T’s receiving of millions in federal funds to promote rural cell phone service. Presley said the Commission’s authority to place conditions on those dollars has been the main tool to increase cell phone coverage in rural counties. “Rural Mississippi’s interest are gutted in this bill.” Presley said.

Presley said there should be extensive hearings held on this matter. “AT&T and their high paid lobbyists are spreading lies all around the Capitol, the Legislature should listen to the regulators who are here to protect the public.”

  1. claytonian
    February 27th, 2012 at 16:42 | #1

    I’ve been an ATT small business customer for many years ( 35+ ) and I have to say this is not the first time I’ve experienced this type very costly ATT corporate misconduct…

    My small business runs on local telephone commerce and I’ve been an good ATT customer utilizing their “auto-pay” program where my credit card is billed at the beginning of each month with my current ATT business telephone charges.

    Sometime in November of 2011, my credit card number ( the one used for these charges ) was hijacked on an internet site, cancelled, and was replaced by my bank.

    I called ATT to give them my new credit card charge information on Feb. 7th of 2012 after noticing the bill was no longer correctly charged to the new account number. I spoke with three different operators, from three different departments at ATT, and after nearly an hour of repeating my story, I was able to confirm that they had correctly logged the current charge information, and had paid my outstanding charges to “current” status.

    Imagine my surprise when on Friday morning 2-24-12, the business telephone service had been disconnected and my business customers were sending along messages that my business telephone numbers had been “disconnected”…!

    I called ATT, ( making a fair guess at what had happed ) and after confirming that my bill was paid in full, and current, I asked to have my phone numbers turned back on, to which they flatly refused. I asked why, if it had been less than an hour since it was turned off, and their mistake and not mine, that they could not simply turn the phone number back on. They put me on hold a number of times for very extended periods ( 10-15 min without contact ) and I had to hang up and call again two separate times on Friday 2-24-12 to reestablish this same conversation , then asking for a supervisor each time. The people who I spoke with were unanimous in their obstinate refusal to address my simple question and each gave me the sequential run-around, person after person.

    My business telephone service is now disconnected even when I was assured earlier in the month ( 2-07-12 ) that all of my telephone bills would be paid automatically from that point on.

    This is not the kind of service a California service company should be providing their good customers and I believe the time has come for the California PUC to think about opening the state’s home and business telephone services to a broader competitive market as I believe ( after numerous similar experiences over the years with SBC, PAC-Bell and now ATT ) the same kind of abusive-non-response and self-serving attitude for the people who are each claiming to want to “Help you” with your telephone service issues. They invariably tie their customers into a continuous long drawn travail with numerous “departments” and unresponsive ranks of middle management muddle… I guess they are hoping most customers will simply give up and pay extra money to restore services that had been unreasonably discontinued.

    Please help us make the telephone service provider for the State of California as fine as the State which grants it this valuable monopoly.

  1. No trackbacks yet.