Minnesota AG Probes Frontier in Parallel With PUC Probing Consumer Complaints

Frontier Communications faces a second Minnesota investigation in response to complaints by consumers and workers in a state Commerce Department report finding that the carrier possibly violated at least 35 laws and rules (see 1901240025). The Minnesota Office of Attorney General is probing possible consumer fraud in parallel to a Public Utilities Commission’s service-quality investigation, OAG commented this week at the PUC. Responding at length to the Commerce report of about 1,000 complaining consumers, the telco claimed fewer than 450 Minnesota customers had major service problems last year.

Mediation continues at the PUC Office of Administrative Hearings, with more sessions scheduled for March 15 and 21, Frontier commented in docket 18-122. If the PUC probe isn’t “resolved through a settlement, a contested case hearing will be needed to meet the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 237.081 and due process, because the Department Report does not provide an adequate basis to resolve material fact questions arising from this investigation,” the carrier said. Frontier problems worried Minnesota lawmakers and upset customers, but didn't surprise workers (see 1901140002).

Soon after the PUC started investigating, the OAG opened an investigation into claims that customers were sold internet service the company knew it couldn’t provide. OAG is looking into possible violation of state consumer protection statutes, including unlawful trade practices and consumer fraud. OAG doesn’t usually disclose investigations, but is doing so to help the PUC decide where it has enforcement authority, it said. “Disclosure of this investigation will allow the Commission to focus upon the numerous potential violations identified by the Department in its Report of statutes, rules, and orders that fall within its jurisdiction.” The AG will share relevant information with the PUC, and the commission should refer consumer fraud issues to the OAG investigation, it said.

The record shows many possible violations by Frontier, the OAG said. “Minnesotans across the state have been deprived of essential services that have, in some cases, imperiled health and safety,” and unreliable phone and internet “undoubtedly affected the Minnesota economy, hitting rural areas of the state and small business owners especially hard,” it said.

Remember that Frontier "elected" but "is not required" to provide broadband, said Senior Vice President-Federal Government Affairs Ken Mason on OAG's comments. "Frontier provides a service, and has for years, that allows customers to access the Internet in numerous rural and hard-to-service areas across the state in which cable TV and other providers have elected not to offer wireline Internet service."

Commerce "greatly overstated the breadth and severity of the Frontier telephone service issues,” the company responded in 123 pages. Frontier "recognizes" customer concerns and complaints and "is committed to improving its customers' service experience,” but customers “are not facing a widespread crisis or breakdown related to their telephone service.” It's “highly reliable in terms of minutes of dial tone availability and Frontier’s telephone lines are consistently and effectively working for the vast majority of its customers" across Minnesota, it said.

More than 90 percent of customers haven't experienced any service outage in the past year, and about 95 percent who reported one had service restored within 24 hours, Frontier said. "Only 443 of Frontier’s approximately 79,000 telephone customers experienced a telephone service outage of greater than twenty-four hours in 2018.” Frontier met state metrics for trouble rates, timely installations, and held orders for the past three years, it said.

The telco followed up with 89 customers who approached its representatives at hearings, "and in a number of instances” was able to “accelerate installation or repair work, modify the services provided to the customer, address any billing errors, and/or provided billing or courtesy credits,” it said. Frontier added training for call centers, including “specific coaching on general service demeanor and customer service techniques,” and is now routing Minnesota customer calls to specialized Minnesota sales reps, it said.

Frontier complained that Commerce relied mostly on complaints about internet, not “regulated” phone service. “The Department's continued attempt to have the Commission assert jurisdiction over broadband Internet access is contrary to settled law,” said Frontier, noting FCC 2015 and 2018 net neutrality orders (see 1903060077) "expressly preempted state and local regulation of Internet service,” and that the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals recently affirmed limits of Minnesota jurisdiction. The PUC is weighing appeal to the Supreme Court (see 1903040025).

The department's conclusions and recommendations "routinely overgeneralize from limited comments and untested factual claims,” Frontier said. Photos of network issues don’t represent the statewide network, it said: Commerce overly relied on an affidavit by Communications Workers of America District 7 organizer Jeff Lacher.

The Minnesota Telecom Alliance warned the PUC not to stretch authority as seemingly suggested by Commerce. MTA, which includes CenturyLink and not Frontier, didn’t comment on Frontier but took issue with the department's suggesting an obligation to inform the PUC about service disruptions to a substantial number of customers applied to an outage affecting 38 customers. The department wrongly suggests the PUC should treat any time a customer expresses dissatisfaction as a complaint that under statute comes with record-keeping, tracking and customer contact obligations, the alliance said.