Background

On April 22, 1999, we initiated this proceeding by issuing an Order Instituting Investigation (OII) based on allegations made by the Commission's Consumer Services Division (CSD) that Accutel was billing consumers an unauthorized monthly recurring service charge of $4.95. The OII, which also served as a scoping memo, asked whether the operations and practices of Accutel violated:

· Pub. Util. Code § 451¹ by billing California consumers for products and/or services not ordered or authorized by the consumer, a practice known as "cramming";

· Section 2890 by cramming subsequent to January 1, 1999;

· Section 2889.5 by "slamming," i.e., switching without authorization, California consumers' presubscribed toll call or long-distance carrier to another carrier or to Respondent; or

· GO 96-A and GO 104-A by not meeting reseller tariffing, notice, and recordkeeping requirements.

On June 22, 1999, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) DeUlloa held a prehearing conference (PHC) to determine a schedule for evidentiary hearing. A second PHC was held on August 13, 1999, to discuss discovery issues. Five days of evidentiary hearing were held on August 24, 25, 26, 27 and September 10, 1999. CSD filed its opening brief and reply brief on November 12 and 24, 1999, while Accutel filed its opening brief and reply brief on November 16 and 29, 1999. On September 7, 1999, CSD filed a motion requesting that Accutel demonstrate financial solvency or post a performance bond, and on September 22, 1999, Accutel filed a response to the motion. This matter was submitted on November 29, 1999. Decision (D.) 00-06-070 extending the statutory deadline was issued on June 22, 2000. On October 25, 2000, the Presiding Officer's Decision (POD) in this matter was mailed to parties. On November 27, 2000, CSD filed an appeal.