BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                             1
         1





                SENATE ENERGY, UTILITIES AND COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE
                               DEBRA BOWEN, CHAIRWOMAN
          

          SB 1601 -  Bowen                                  Hearing Date:   
          April 9, 2002              S
          As Amended:         April 1, 2002                 Non-FISCAL       
           B

                                                                        1
                                                                        6
                                                                        0
                                                                        1

                                      DESCRIPTION
           
           Current law  permits states to establish consumer protection rules  
          for cellular telephone  service customers.

           This bill  requires cellular telephone companies to provide new  
          customers with a 30 day grace period within which a customer  
          could rescind his or her contract if they find the cellular  
          service quality is unsatisfactory.

                                       BACKGROUND
           
          Cellular telephone usage continues to enjoy spectacular growth.   
          The number of cellular subscribers has more than doubled since  
          1998 to 133 million nationwide.  Not only are more people using  
          the phones, they're also using them more intensively - the  
          average monthly use has grown by 75% to 422 minutes per customer  
          over the past two years.  New wireless uses, such as data  
          transmission and Internet access, are starting to show growth,  
          too.

          This growth in popularity has been accompanied by a growth in  
          customer expectations and, not surprisingly, a growth in customer  
          complaints.  Complaints about cellular service at the California  
          Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) jumped 47% last year.   
          "Consumer Reports" magazine surveyed cell phone users and  
          observed that customers rate their service as "mediocre."  A  
          recent J.D. Power & Associates survey noted that three times as  
          many cellular customers call customer service than local  
          telephone company customers.  

          An indicator of customer dissatisfaction may be churn rates,  









         which are anywhere from 25% to 80%, according to the Yankee  
         Group, a consulting firm.  Recent articles in the  New York Times  ,  
         "Business Week," the  Wall Street Journal  , and  USA Today  all note  
         user complaints about wireless service quality, which many  
         customers feel doesn't live up to the advertising promises made  
         by many companies.  While cellular telephone service has many  
         benefits that landline telephone services don't have, few would  
         disagree with the notion that cellular telephone service is  
         neither as clear nor as reliable as regular landline telephone  
         service.  

         A prospective cellular phone customer can't rely on the coverage  
         maps provided by the cellular carriers because they all contain  
         disclaimers that the map is not a guarantee of service  
         availability or quality.  In the absence of accurate maps, the  
         only way for a customer to know if the cellular phone meets their  
         needs is to use it for a period of time.  If a customer is  
         required to sign a long-term contract to obtain service, that  
         customer is potentially stuck if he or she finds the service is  
         less than was advertised or promised.  The goal of this bill is  
         to provide customers with a reasonable way out of that long term  
         commitment if the product they're buying doesn't live up to their  
         expectations or to the promises made by the carrier.

                                       COMMENTS
          
          1.Getting the best service quality  .  The author's goal is to give  
           people the information they need to try and make sure they'll  
           get what they pay for when they sign a cellular service  
           contract.  

           If cellular service coverage maps could be made more accurate  
           and if the "test drive" in the store could account for the  
           topography, underpasses, tunnels, buildings, trees, atmospheric  
           disturbances, other radio signals, and intensity of usage  
           challenges that a customer will face out on the "open road,"  
           there would be no need for a grace period because the customer  
           would be able to make an informed choice right in the store.   
           Since that isn't an option, the author believes the next best  
           solution is to allow customers to rescind their contracts if  
           the service proves to be unsatisfactory.  This bill gives  
           customers 30 days to rescind the contract.

          2.Pay for what you use  .  The bill gives customers 30 days to  
           cancel their cellular service contract, but it's silent on what  
           happens relative to charges the customer may have incurred  








            during that 30 day period.   The author and committee may wish  
            to consider  amending the bill to make it clear that any  
            customer who does terminate a contract in that 30-day window is  
            still responsible for any air time charges that have accrued,  
            any charges associated with wear and tear on the actual phone,  
            and any damage to the telephone that may have occurred during  
            the 30-day "test drive." 

           3.Who does what now  .  Some cellular carriers already provide  
            their customers with a grace period in which they can choose to  
            terminate their service contract.  AT&T Wireless gives  
            customers a 30-day grace period and Verizon has a 14-day great  
            period.  Cingular does not allow any grace period.

                                       POSITIONS
           
           Sponsor:
           
          Author

           Support:
           
          Office of Ratepayer Advocates

           Oppose:
           
          Cingular Wireless
          Sprint Communications Company
          Verizon Wireless
          

          Randy Chinn 
          SB 1601 Analysis
          Hearing Date:  April 9, 2002