4. Defendant's Evidence at Hearing

AT&T witness Cheah testified that at all relevant times Capitano was shown on AT&T records as the customer of record for the CRS 800 number and the party responsible for account payment. Marking Products and its Oklahoma City address were listed as the "lead account," which Cheah said is the designation for the name and address where bills were to be sent.

Cheah testified that in order to transfer the CRS 800 number from Capitano to Marking Products, both parties would be required to complete a written Transfer of Service Agreement and submit it to AT&T. The parties stipulated that no such agreement had been executed by Capitano and Marking Products, and no such agreement had been submitted to AT&T.

Cheah testified that 800 numbers are not "owned" by subscribers, nor can they be acquired by another party absent a Transfer of Service Agreement. She said that before AT&T personnel will accept such a transfer, they must review the account to be sure that payments are current, and they are required to conduct a credit check for the party to whom the number will be assigned.

Cheah presented account records for the CRS 800 number and testified that the records show no request that the account be transferred to Marking Products. The records do show that both Capitano and a representative of Marking Products asked that bills for the account be sent to the Marking Products address in Oklahoma City, rather than to the Marking Products address in Orange. Cheah testified that changes in billing address are common, but that such changes do not affect the designation of the customer of record.

In aggressive cross-examination, Cheah admitted that anyone with the billing statement for an 800 number in front of them can call AT&T and change a billing address. She said that operators are trained to ask for the account number and other information contained on the statement and, if that information is accurate, the change in billing address is routinely processed. She acknowledged that AT&T had honored Capitano's request to have the CRS 800 number routed to his home. She stated that the request of Marking Products to route the number back to its offices was denied on the advice of AT&T's legal counsel because Capitano and CRS remained the subscriber of record on the account and no Transfer of Service Agreement had been submitted.