Securus Will Stop Blocking ‘ConsCallHome’ Calls, Gets Streamlined Approval of Transfer of Control

"Call blocking has the potential to degrade the reliability of the nation’s telecommunications network and ultimately harms consumers of voice services, including VoIP,” the Wireline Bureau wrote (http://bit.ly/12dxuci). “We believe that the agreement between Securus and Millicorp will lead to public interest benefits in greater communication between inmates and their families. We therefore accept Securus’s commitment and make it a binding and enforceable condition of our approval."

In petitioning to deny the application for streamlined consent to transfer control, the public interest groups had argued applicants failed to demonstrate the transfer was required for public convenience and necessity. The applications were “similarly devoid of information sufficient to evaluate the potential competitive harm resulting from the proposed transfer,” wrote Public Knowledge, the United Church of Christ, Free Press and the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition (http://bit.ly/12dzgtX). Denial was also appropriate, the groups said, because Securus charges “usurious rates that are neither just nor reasonable.”

There will be no competitive harm due to concentration, the FCC said. “The transferee does not currently hold interests in other inmate calling providers; thus, there is no increase in concentration for these services as a result of the proposed transaction, and the transaction itself will not have a significant impact on competition for these services,” the Wireline Bureau wrote. As for its claims about usurious calling rates, those are “more appropriately addressed in the Inmate Calling NPRM proceeding, where a rulemaking record is already being compiled on the specific issues that Petitioners raise,” the bureau said. “Petitioners are active participants in the rulemaking proceeding and have in fact filed notice in that docket that they are negotiating with Applicants to address long-standing policy concerns."

But “the question is not what is the suitable rate,” which is the subject of the ongoing rulemaking, said Harold Feld, senior vice president of Public Knowledge. The question is the “plain and obvious fact that the rate charged by Securus is, and continues to be, in violation of Sections 201 and 202.” Feld criticized the use of streamlined processing as “a way to circumvent real scrutiny.” The commission “should not encourage companies to use streamlined processing to do an end run around real market review,” he said.

Millicorp’s customers reported that, upon learning the inmate is using ConsCallHome, ICS providers Securus and Global Tel*Link often blocked the calls, the company told FCC officials Tuesday, a Friday ex parte filing said (http://bit.ly/12dD52i). Millicorp was not on Securus’s “approved” list of VoIP providers, it said. “Conscall home [sic] is not an authorized phone provider,” read a transcript of an online chat between a customer and Securus, attached to a Thursday ex parte filing (http://bit.ly/12dErtK). Securus did not respond to requests for comment.

"The consent decree with Millicorp demonstrates that -- when their own money is on the line -- Securus is able to quickly negotiate with opposing parties,” United Church of Christ Policy Advisor Chery Leanzy told us. “Families around the country have been waiting more than 10 years for their hard-earned dollars to be treated with the same care and speed as Securus investors’ funds were treated in the last week. We will use the recent effort as a benchmark by which to judge Securus’s future behavior.”