Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version
********************************************************
NOTICE
********************************************************
This document was converted from Microsoft Word.
Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.
All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.
Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.
If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.
*****************************************************************
Before the
Federal Communications Commission
Washington, D.C. 20554
)
)
)
In the Matter of ) File No. EB-06-TC-1371
ESpeed Mortgage Dot Com, LLC ) NAL/Acct. No. 200732170066
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ) FRN: 0016739708
)
)
)
NOTICE OF APPARENT LIABILITY FOR FORFEITURE
Adopted: July 23, 2007 Released: July 23, 2007
By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:
I. INTRODUCTION
1. In this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture ("NAL"), we find
that ESpeed Mortgage Dot Com, LLC ("ESpeed") apparently willfully or
repeatedly violated section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934, as
amended ("Act"), and the Commission's related rules and orders, by
delivering at least 3 unsolicited advertisements to the telephone
facsimile machines of at least 3 consumers. Based on the facts and
circumstances surrounding these apparent violations, we find that
ESpeed is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the amount of $13,500.
II. BACKGROUND
2. Section 227(b)(1)(C) of the Act makes it "unlawful for any person
within the United States, or any person outside the United States if
the recipient is within the United States . . . to use any telephone
facsimile machine, computer, or other device to send, to a telephone
facsimile machine, an unsolicited advertisement." The term
"unsolicited advertisement" is defined in the Act and the Commission's
rules as "any material advertising the commercial availability or
quality of any property, goods, or services which is transmitted to
any person without that person's prior express invitation or
permission in writing or otherwise." Under the Commission's Rules,
there is an "established business relationship" exception that permits
a party to deliver a message to a consumer if the sender has an
established business relationship with the recipient and the sender
obtained the number of the facsimile machine through the voluntary
communication by the recipient, directly to the sender, within the
context of the established business relationship, or through a
directory, advertisement, or a site on the Internet to which the
recipient voluntarily agreed to make available its facsimile number
for public distribution.
3. On November 15, 2006, in response to one or more consumer complaints
alleging that ESpeed had faxed unsolicited advertisements, the
Commission staff issued a citation to ESpeed, pursuant to section
503(b)(5) of the Act. The staff cited ESpeed for using a telephone
facsimile machine, computer, or other device, to send unsolicited
advertisements for mortgage products and/or services to a telephone
facsimile machine, in violation of section 227 of the Act and the
Commission's related rules and orders. The citation, which the staff
served by certified mail, return receipt requested, warned ESpeed
that subsequent violations could result in the imposition of monetary
forfeitures of up to $11,000 per violation, and included a copy of the
consumer complaints that formed the basis of the citation. The
citation informed ESpeed that within 30 days of the date of the
citation, it could either request an interview with Commission staff,
or could provide a written statement responding to the citation.
ESpeed did not request an interview or otherwise respond to the
citation.
4. Despite the citation's warning that subsequent violations could
result in the imposition of monetary forfeitures, we have received
additional consumer complaints indicating that ESpeed continued to
engage in such conduct after receiving the citation. We base our
action here specifically on complaints filed by 3 consumers
establishing that ESpeed continued to send 3 unsolicited
advertisements to telephone facsimile machines after the date of the
citation.
5. Section 503(b) of the Act authorizes the Commission to assess a
forfeiture of up to $11,000 for each violation of the Act or of any
rule, regulation, or order issued by the Commission under the Act by a
non-common carrier or other entity not specifically designated in
section 503 of the Act. In exercising such authority, we are to take
into account "the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the
violation and, with respect to the violator, the degree of
culpability, any history of prior offenses, ability to pay, and such
other matters as justice may require."
III. DISCUSSION
A. Violations of the Commission's Rules Restricting Unsolicited Facsimile
Advertisements
6. We find that ESpeed apparently violated section 227 of the Act and the
Commission's related rules and orders by using a telephone facsimile
machine, computer, or other device to send at least 3 unsolicited
advertisements to the 3 consumers identified in the Appendix. This NAL
is based on evidence that the consumers received unsolicited fax
advertisements from ESpeed after the Bureau's citation. The facsimile
transmissions advertise mortgage products and/or services. Further,
according to the complaints, the consumers neither had an established
business relationship with ESpeed nor gave ESpeed permission to send
the facsimile transmissions. The faxes at issue here therefore fall
within the definition of an "unsolicited advertisement." Based on the
entire record, including the consumer complaints, we conclude that
ESpeed apparently violated section 227 of the Act and the Commission's
related rules and orders by sending 3 unsolicited advertisements to 3
consumers' facsimile machines.
B. Proposed Forfeiture
7. We find that ESpeed is apparently liable for a forfeiture in the
amount of $13,500. Although the Commission's Forfeiture Policy
Statement does not establish a base forfeiture amount for violating
the prohibition against using a telephone facsimile machine to send
unsolicited advertisements, the Commission has previously considered
$4,500 per unsolicited fax advertisement to be an appropriate base
amount. We apply that base amount to each of the 3 apparent
violations. Thus, a total forfeiture of $13,500 is proposed. ESpeed
will have the opportunity to submit evidence and arguments in response
to this NAL to show that no forfeiture should be imposed or that some
lesser amount should be assessed.
IV. CONCLUSION AND ORDERING CLAUSES
8. We have determined that ESpeed Mortgage Dot Com, LLC apparently
violated section 227 of the Act and the Commission's related rules and
orders by using a telephone facsimile machine, computer, or other
device to send at least 3 unsolicited advertisements to the 3
consumers identified in the Appendix. We have further determined that
ESpeed Mortgage Dot Com, LLC is apparently liable for a forfeiture in
the amount of $13,500.
9. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED, pursuant to section 503(b) of the Act, 47
U.S.C. S: 503(b), and section 1.80 of the Rules, 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80,
and under the authority delegated by sections 0.111 and 0.311 of the
Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. S:S: 0.111, 0.311, that ESpeed Mortgage
Dot Com, LLC is hereby NOTIFIED of this APPARENT LIABILITY FOR A
FORFEITURE in the amount of $13,500 (thirteen thousand five hundred
dollars) for willful or repeated violations of section 227(b)(1)(C) of
the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. S: 227(b)(1)(C), sections
64.1200(a)(3) of the Commission's rules, 47 C.F.R. S: 64.1200(a)(3),
and the related orders described in the paragraphs above.
10. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT, pursuant to section 1.80 of the
Commission's rules, within thirty (30) days of the release date of
this Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture, ESpeed Mortgage Dot
Com, LLC SHALL PAY the full amount of the proposed forfeiture or SHALL
FILE a written statement seeking reduction or cancellation of the
proposed forfeiture.
11. Payment by check or money order, payable to the order of the "Federal
Communications Commission," may be mailed to Forfeiture Collection
Section, Finance Branch, Federal Communications Commission, P.O. Box
358340, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. Payment by overnight mail may be sent to
Mellon Client Service Center, 500 Ross Street, Room 670, Pittsburgh,
PA 15262-0001, Attn: FCC Module Supervisor. Payment by wire transfer
may be made to: ABA Number 043000261, receiving bank Mellon Bank, and
account number 911-6229. The payment should note NAL/Acct. No.
200732170066.
12. The response, if any, must be mailed both to the Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20554, ATTN: Enforcement Bureau - Telecommunications
Consumers Division, and to Colleen Heitkamp, Chief, Telecommunications
Consumers Division, Enforcement Bureau, Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554, and must
include the NAL/Acct. No. referenced in the caption.
13. The Commission will not consider reducing or canceling a forfeiture in
response to a claim of inability to pay unless the petitioner submits:
(1) federal tax returns for the most recent three-year period; (2)
financial statements prepared according to generally accepted
accounting practices; or (3) some other reliable and objective
documentation that accurately reflects the petitioner's current
financial status. Any claim of inability to pay must specifically
identify the basis for the claim by reference to the financial
documentation submitted.
14. Requests for payment of the full amount of this Notice of Apparent
Liability for Forfeiture under an installment plan should be sent to:
Chief, Revenue and Receivables Operations Group, 445 12th Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20554.
15. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Notice of Apparent Liability
for Forfeiture shall be sent by Certified Mail Return Receipt
Requested to ESpeed Mortgage Dot Com, LLC Attention: Mark J. Korcok,
at 1600 South Federal Highway, Suite 900, Pompano Beach, Florida
33062.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Kris Anne Monteith
Chief, Enforcement Bureau
APPENDIX
Complainant sent facsimile solicitations Violation Date(s)
Van Wood 3/7/2007
Roger Wolf 2/14/2007
Angela Larson 2/22/2007
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(1). The Commission has the authority under this
section of the Act to assess a forfeiture against any person who has
"willfully or repeatedly failed to comply with any of the provisions of
this Act or of any rule, regulation, or order issued by the Commission
under this Act ...." See also 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(5) (stating that the
Commission has the authority under this section of the Act to assess a
forfeiture penalty against any person who is not a common carrier so long
as such person (A) is first issued a citation of the violation charged;
(B) is given a reasonable opportunity for a personal interview with an
official of the Commission, at the field office of the Commission nearest
to the person's place of residence; and (C) subsequently engages in
conduct of the type described in the citation).
According to publicly available information, ESpeed Mortgage Dot Com, LLC
is also doing business as Net Speed Mortgage Dot Com LLC, and Net Speed
Mortgage Dot Com, LLC. Therefore, all references in this NAL to ESpeed
encompass Espeed Mortgage Dot Com, LLC, as well as Net Speed Mortgage Dot
Com LLC, and Net Speed Mortgage Dot Com, LLC. ESpeed has offices at 1600
South Federal Highway, Suite 900, Pompano Beach, Florida 33062. Mark J.
Korcok is listed as the contact person for ESpeed. Accordingly, all
references in this NAL to ESpeed also encompass the foregoing individual
and all other principals and officers of this entity, as well as the
corporate entity itself.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 227(b)(1)(C); 47 C.F.R. S: 64.1200(a)(3); see also
Rules and Regulations Implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
of 1991, Report and Order and Third Order on Reconsideration, 21 FCC Rcd
3787 (2006).
47 U.S.C. S: 227(b)(1)(C); 47 C.F.R. S: 64.1200(a)(3).
47 U.S.C. S:227(a)(4); 47 C.F.R. S:64.1200 (f)(13).
An "established business relationship" is defined as a prior or existing
relationship formed by a voluntary two-way communication "with or without
an exchange of consideration, on the basis of an inquiry, application,
purchase or transaction by the business or residential subscriber
regarding products or services offered by such person or entity, which
relationship has not been previously terminated by either party." 47
C.F.R. S: 64.1200(f)(5).
See 47 C.F.R. S: 64 (a)(3)(i), (ii).
Citation from Kurt A. Schroeder, Deputy Chief, Telecommunications
Consumers Division, Enforcement Bureau, File No. EB-06-TC-1371, issued to
ESpeed Mortgage Dot Com, LLC on November 15, 2006.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(5) (authorizing the Commission to issue citations
to non-common carriers for violations of the Act or of the Commission's
rules and orders).
Commission staff mailed the citation to 1600 South Federal Highway,
Apartment 900, Pompano Beach, Florida 33062. See n.2, supra.
See Appendix for a listing of the consumer complaints against ESpeed
requesting Commission action.
We note that evidence of additional instances of unlawful conduct by
ESpeed may form the basis of subsequent enforcement action.
Section 503(b)(2)(C) provides for forfeitures up to $10,000 for each
violation in cases not covered by subparagraph (A) or (B), which address
forfeitures for violations by licensees and common carriers, among others.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b). In accordance with the inflation adjustment
requirements contained in the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996,
Pub. L. 104-134, Sec. 31001, 110 Stat. 1321, the Commission implemented an
increase of the maximum statutory forfeiture under section 503(b)(2)(C) to
$11,000. See 47 C.F.R. S:1.80(b)(3); Amendment of Section 1.80 of the
Commission's Rules and Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect
Inflation, 15 FCC Rcd 18221 (2000); see also Amendment of Section 1.80(b)
of the Commission's Rules and Adjustment of Forfeiture Maxima to Reflect
Inflation, 19 FCC Rcd 10945 (2004) (this recent amendment of section
1.80(b) to reflect inflation left the forfeiture maximum for this type of
violator at $11,000).
47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(2)(D); The Commission's Forfeiture Policy Statement
and Amendment of Section 1.80 of the Rules to Incorporate the Forfeiture
Guidelines, Report and Order, 12 FCC Rcd 17087, 17100-01 para. 27 (1997)
(Forfeiture Policy Statement), recon. denied, 15 FCC Rcd 303 (1999).
See, e.g., complaint dated March 13, 2007, from Van Wood (stating that the
mortgage fax advertisement was not solicited, and that the recipient had
no established business relationship with the sender). The complainants
involved in this action are listed in the Appendix below.
See 47 U.S.C. S: 227(a)(4); 47 C.F.R. S: 64.1200(f)(13) (definition
previously at S: 64.1200(f)(10)).
See Get-Aways, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability For Forfeiture, 15 FCC
Rcd 1805 (1999); Get-Aways, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 15 FCC Rcd 4843
(2000); see also US Notary, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability for
Forfeiture, 15 Rcd 16999 (2000); US Notary, Inc., Forfeiture Order, 16 FCC
Rcd 18398 (2001); Tri-Star Marketing, Inc., Notice of Apparent Liability
For Forfeiture, 15 FCC Rcd 11295 (2000); Tri-Star Marketing, Inc.,
Forfeiture Order, 15 FCC Rcd 23198 (2000).
See 47 U.S.C. S: 503(b)(4)(C); 47 C.F.R. S: 1.80(f)(3).
47 C.F.R. S: 1.80.
47 C.F.R. S: 1.1914.
(...continued from previous page)
(continued....)
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-3372
1
6
Federal Communications Commission DA 07-3372