FCC Consumer Complaints – 9 March 2015
Introduction
On Monday, 9 March 2015, the Federal Communications Commission recorded 865 consumer complaints relating to telecommunications services, this represented an increase from the 298 complaints recorded the day before. Reports were received from 50 states and territories, with California recording slightly more complaints than other locations. The most common issue reported was Telemarketing (including do not call and spoofing), accounting for 338 complaints.
Key statistics
- Total complaints
- 865
- States & territories reporting
- 50
- Most common issue
- Telemarketing (including do not call and spoofing) (338)
- Most reported state/territory
- California (103)
Where the complaints came from
On 9 March 2015, the 865 complaints recorded by the Federal Communications Commission were reported from 614 cities across 50 states and territories. Complaint reports were spread across multiple states and territories, without any one location accounting for a large share. A similar pattern is observed at the city level, with complaints spread across locations rather than concentrated in a single area.
The table below shows the distribution of complaints by state and territory for this date, highlighting the locations with the highest number of reports.
| State/Territory | Complaints | |
|---|---|---|
| California | 103 | 11.9% |
| Texas | 71 | 8.2% |
| New York | 55 | 6.4% |
| Florida | 45 | 5.2% |
| Illinois | 41 | 4.7% |
| Pennsylvania | 39 | 4.5% |
| New Jersey | 35 | 4.0% |
| North Carolina | 32 | 3.7% |
| Virginia | 31 | 3.6% |
| Michigan | 29 | 3.4% |
| Other states and territories | 383 | 44.3% |
Location highlight
Complaints in California were reported across 68 cities, the widest spread observed on this date.
What the complaints were about
Complaints recorded on this date related to 7 different complaint categories. Phone was the most reported category, with 651 complaints. Complaint activity was strongly concentrated in this category, with other categories contributing comparatively fewer reports.
| Complaint category | Complaints | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Phone | 651 | 75.3% |
| Internet | 109 | 12.6% |
| TV | 80 | 9.2% |
| Radio | 18 | 2.1% |
| Accessibility | 4 | 0.5% |
| Emergency | 2 | 0.2% |
| Request for Dispute Assistance | 1 | 0.1% |
Phone complaints
651 complaints were recorded in this category, representing 75.3% of the total.
| Issue | Complaints | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Telemarketing (including do not call and spoofing) | 338 | 51.9% |
| Robocalls | 144 | 22.1% |
| Billing | 67 | 10.3% |
| Cramming (unauthorized charges on your phone bill) | 20 | 3.1% |
| Availability (including rural call completion) | 17 | 2.6% |
| Equipment | 15 | 2.3% |
| Number Portability (keeping your number if you change providers) | 15 | 2.3% |
| Privacy | 13 | 2.0% |
| Interference (including signal jammers) | 10 | 1.5% |
| Junk Faxes | 9 | 1.4% |
| Slamming (change of your carrier without permission) | 1 | 0.2% |
The largest share of complaints in this category related to Telemarketing (including do not call and spoofing) and Robocalls, with fewer reports falling into other issue types.
Internet complaints
109 complaints were recorded in this category, representing 12.6% of the total.
| Issue | Complaints | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Billing | 30 | 27.5% |
| Privacy | 25 | 22.9% |
| Speed | 18 | 16.5% |
| Availability | 16 | 14.7% |
| Equipment | 11 | 10.1% |
| Interference | 9 | 8.3% |
The remaining complaints in this category were spread across several issues, including Billing, Privacy and Speed.
TV complaints
80 complaints were recorded in this category, representing 9.2% of the total.
| Issue | Complaints | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Billing | 33 | 41.3% |
| Indecency | 14 | 17.5% |
| Loud Commercials | 12 | 15.0% |
| Availability | 10 | 12.5% |
| Equipment | 7 | 8.8% |
| Interference | 2 | 2.5% |
| Privacy | 2 | 2.5% |
Billing was the most commonly reported issue in this category, while other issues occurred less frequently.
The information presented on this page is based on consumer complaint data submitted to regulatory authorities. References to telephone numbers reflect reports made by consumers and do not confirm ownership, authenticity, or that the number was genuinely associated with the call. Caller ID information may be inaccurate or subject to spoofing.
Complaint categories, dates and complainant locations are based on the source records and may contain incomplete, approximate or user-entered information. Location details refer to the complainant’s reported location, not the location of the caller or telephone number. This content is provided for informational purposes only.