FCC fines T-Mobile $819k for failing to offer enough hearing aid-compatible phones in ’09/10

t-mobile-sidekick-review-00-sm

The FCC has published a forfeiture order informing T-Mobile that it must pay a penalty of $819,000 for failing to meet requirements to sell a certain number of hearing aid compatible phones. T-Mo – according to the FCC – “willfully and repeatedly violated Sections 20.19(c)(2) and 20.19 (d)(2).” This news was only published in a full report by the FCC a couple of days go, and comes more than 4 years after the initial investigation started.

This final penalty follows on from an original Notice of Apparent Liability from 2012. Since that notice was published, T-Mobile has never denied the allegations. Instead, it sought to reduce the penalty. But in the forfeiture order published two days ago, the commission makes it clear that it will not be doing so. The full $819,000 penalty fee stands.

In 2003, the FCC set out to adopt new measures designed to help customers with hearing loss benefit from the use of devices. It meant that nationwide carriers had to ensure a certain percentage, or certain number of phones were compatible with two different hearing aid types. The minimum number of devices required has grown since the initial measures were proposed. And it’s in the following examples where T-Mobile failed to meet standards.

Screen Shot 2014-08-29 at 13.38.13

T-mobile submitted a hearing aid compatibility status report on January 14, 2010 covering the entire calendar year of 2009. As a follow up later on in the year, T-Mobile also disclosed further possible violations for 2010.

Having investigated all the evidence, the FCC found that T-Mobile was short 38 M3-related handset models and 14 T3-related models. And with a $15,000 penalty against each model short, the final penalty amount came to $780,000. After inflation, and noting other factors (including T-Mobile’s “timely disclosure”) the FCC’s final forfeiture amount comes to $819,000. Which T-Mo now has to pay.

Source: FCC

Tags: , , , , ,

  • Mike Palomba

    This is really wrong in my opinion. It was something that had happened years ago and didnt really do harm to anyone. T-Mobile is the only carrier trying to do the right thing in the industry and first the FCC charged them for the “premium services” which every carrier does, and now for this. The should do some more detailed checks on verizon att and sprint. They’ll find a lot more violations with them I’m sure

    • donnybee

      Yeah, if only there weren’t so many lobbyists from the big carriers.

      It’s all a game, and the government is holding all the cards. Unfortunately, society thinks the government should keep being handed all the cards, so nothing will ever get better.

    • Mike Isanidiot

      Let me guess, you have 2 working ears?
      TMobile isn’t trying to do anything different then the other carriers, it’s just TMo is so far behind to the top 2 that it is trying to do anything to remain competitive.

      • Mike

        Actually, I wear two hearing aids.

        • mikey likes it

          Riggghht your posting as a guest after posting with ur account….
          Sniff*DonnyBee*Sniff

  • Mike

    I wonder if other carriers were hit with similar charges?? TMO does not make the phones they carry in their line up and rely on the manafucters to comply with the ever changing FCC requlations. Should the manufactures also be fined? Don’t phones have to be approved by the FCC before they can be used in the US? Seems like TMO is being singled out on this one!

    • Paul

      Was thinking the same thing myself.
      “Should the manufactures also be fined? Don’t phones have to be approved by the FCC before they can be used in the US?”
      I agree there as well. It seems the FCC dropped the ball and using the carriers, like T-Mobile, as a scapegoat.

    • Jeff

      T-Mobile is not being singled out. The minimum number of hearing aid compatible phones is very clear; this isn’t some fuzzy, nebulous requirement that leaves any room for “singling out” a politically unfavored carrier.

      • Vomitous Mass

        Burdening the people selling devices is not the answer, though.

        Want compatibility? Force it on the manufacturer level – There are plenty of FCC requirements all manufacturers must meet to be allowed to sell the device in the US. Make these two part of them.

        I’d say “problem solved”, but one problem would remain: The FCC wouldn’t get it’s blood-money.

  • Tmosince2003

    A, what took so long and B, good. My stepdad who recently passed was very hard of hearing and it was and still is difficult to find M4T4 handsets. Young folks think their seniors just don’t get technology, when often the technology is failing them in a fundamental way. Never take your faculties for granted.

    • donnybee

      How was your stepdad negatively affected by T-Mobile not selling enough handsets in those given years? I mean, I get the issue, but who is benefiting from these rules? Your stepdad or the government?

      And the problem isn’t that T-Mobile didn’t offer any compatible handsets, but that they didn’t offer what the government thinks is enough. To top that off, T-Mobile is just 1 of the national big 4 carriers, and just 1 of all the available carriers when taking into account regional carriers. In my eyes, it would seem that with each carrier required to offer at least 27 compatible handsets in those 2 years, your stepdad and other hearing-impaired individuals had at least 81 handsets to choose from in that 2 year period between the other 3 carriers. This does not take into account those that T-Mobile DID offer or what regionals offered. I’m having a hard time seeing where the lack of selection comes in. There are also carriers dedicated to our seniors and various impaired by offering devices with large buttons, high contrast screens with very large font and hearing aid-compatible devices (i.e. Jitterbug).

      I fail to see the need for the tight government regulation. Especially when the counter argument is lack of selection. This is downright shady government control; and that never gets society anywhere.

      • Tmosince2003

        Ok I will try to spell it out, but since all you may hear is, ‘government bad,’ I will be brief.

        I would have been delighted to bring my parents onto my plan, but the hearing aid compatibility was and still is, terrible. The fact that there is a sprint based service for seniors doesn’t address the problem. I didn’t need large fonts or big buttons, I needed a voice communication device that would allow a hearing disabled person to communicate via voice. It’s very basic. That’s what this is about, access for the less able. I didn’t need selection, I needed compliance.

        • donnybee

          Firstly, your family doesn’t NEED T-Mobile. None of us NEED T-Mobile; rather T-Mobile needs us. As does every other carrier. You never said that they needed T-Mobile, but your comment ends with “I needed compliance” suggesting T-Mobile was the only option.

          Secondly – “I needed a voice communication device that would allow a hearing disabled person to communicate via voice. It’s very basic.”

          So let’s keep it basic and say these things exist. Everywhere. On every carrier. Again lending to the idea that complaining about T-Mobile not having all the options does nothing to solidify your response. It just leaves us wondering why you can’t shop around for a service and device that meets your needs.

          Third, Jitterbug and other carriers like it don’t only offer devices with large fonts and big buttons. They’re based around providing service and devices for the impaired. This includes hearing impaired. They even carry smartphones. This would seem like a logical solution to consider.

          I understand T-Mobile broke the law, but you didn’t NEED compliance from T-Mobile, you had plenty of avenues that provided for anyone in your family that was impaired. We all have to shop for service and devices that meet our needs, and that goes for the impaired as well.

        • Tmosince2003

          True, the FCC is not just for me, it’s for everyone, you, me, the hearing impaired and those with perfect hearing, vision and health. The rules apply to all and arguing that I could patronize compliant providers is missing the point. Of course I could.

        • donnydum

          As long as the issue doesn’t affect “donnybee”, then it’s irrelevant…
          Is that the jist of your paragraph rants?

        • donnybee

          And then the most insightful person chimes in. Every discussion needs one.

          By the way, you misspelled “dumb”.

        • DonnySpellingBeeChamp

          Can you hear out of both ears Donyb?
          Yeah i know i misspelled, it just helped further my point that if it affected you if only you were involved…. lol

        • Julioooooo

          We also needed one person to make absolutely no sense and be anti-government….. Good job jonnypee!

  • Brian

    It’s too bad that the FCC doesn’t take into account the enormous impact the Sidekick had on e hearing impaired community. T-Mobile was the only carrier to offer a device that allowed the hearing impaired community to easily communicate with each other as well as having a “data only” plan for these individuals. No other carrier offered this and this made T-Mobile and it’s Sidekick family an invaluable tool that the FCC needs to realize and actually comment Magenta for.

  • TechHog

    So, this confirms that the FCC purposefully sits on things until they can be used to distract from what they’re doing/not doing. I have the government. :/

    • Qwerty155

      No it confirms that people believe in conspiracies because its easier than trying to actually fact check.
      Blame the fcc and/or the US government because TMobile didn’t comply while the other carriers suceeded without hiccups???

      I hope none of TMo fanboys go deaf or have loss hearing, I don’t think any of you have any grasp on how hard it is to be without hearing :/

  • Deadeye37

    It took 4-5 years for the government to do that? Bureaucracy as it greatest! If it was a private company, this would’ve been done in just a few months.

  • Hello

    Only in America , you got government controls everything including yourself without your knowing. And you will deny by saying “we’re better than everybody” without actually looking around you. Do you really think the government is really care, just want to create some extra revenue.

  • donnybee

    Government control at it’s finest. Hope everyone these days is happy with how large the government is getting.. because things sure aren’t getting any better.

    And isn’t it convenient that the FCC sat on this for so long and now they have to take inflation into account? Thieves. And I bet that $0.8 million won’t be going to anything worthwhile..maybe to help pay for another Obama vacation, or something else just as beneficial.

    • Jeff

      This regulation was implemented by the Bush administration. Obama’s failures have nothing to do with it.

      • donnybee

        No, I get that. I’m not suggesting Obama brought these rules into place, I’m suggesting that these days the money doesn’t go anywhere beneficial anymore. So much spending on worthless, pointless, ridiculous things. I don’t think this money will go to another vacation, but I’m sure whatever it gets spent on will be about as beneficial as another presidential vacation.

        • Jeff

          Well, I agree with you on that. The federal government will certainly waste the money. But that’s a separate issue than whether T-Mobile violated the law.

        • donnybee

          Yeah, it was a mere side-note in my original comment.

          T-Mobile did violate the law. There’s no question on that. But why did it take the FCC so long? And why are the laws getting more strict and demanding on carriers? I think this is a perfect example as to why we need to keep government restrictions in check.

        • KijBeta

          It would have been done in 2012 if T-Mobile didn’t file paperwork to have it reviewed and then request additional time to have a hearing on reducing the fine.
          But it still took them 2 years each time, and this is on the far back burner for the FCC which is insulting to the deaf and hard of hearing community.

        • GeezWilkers

          That just makes to much sense for the the self absorbed know it alls here, they are going to melt!

        • DeDe

          Why TMobile short change it to begin with? Why did they continue the process after realization of being in violation?
          What changes have been made recently that has made it more strict and demanding?

          We get that your anti-government but why do you do nothing to make ur changes relevant besides posting on a TMobile blog demanding people to believe in everything you say?

          Why are following questions with questions and trying to imply you know the answers but have no education greater that the average john or jane?

          It took so long because the fcc wanted to make sure Tmo was actually liable would be a good assumption…. Another good assumption would be that TMo has been challenging and goimg back n forth with there lawyers and the fcc…

          As far the inflation adjustment, tmo should be treated just like any other individual or company when it violate said laws, a good assumption would be that inflation was written into the documentation they received when law was created….

          There is no conspiracy here, TMobile F’d up and now have to pay the price, simple!
          TMobile should have started or should start pushing for a reveiw of said law if they feel that it is too high to be compliant

          Problem is that the only people who thinks it’s too high of number is here on tmonews….
          No statements or releases on the interwebs from the wireless companies

          Its only the self asorbed TMobile fannies here that have two fully working ears making any noise….

          Do you have any proof of TMobile pushing any legislation to lower the number.?
          TMobile complied the following years also btw just wanted to note that…

          Does it take a rocket science to figr that out? Wouldn’t common sense state more choice for everyone and anyone is beneficial to all? Wouldn’t common srnse tell you to use your best option/choices when you feel a law is too strict or wrong?

          Wouldn’t it of been better finacially for TMobile if they made the choice to comply and invest the 800k on lobbying?

          All it would take is for TMo to show proof that law would create hardship on their bottom line right?

        • RLB63

          Actually the more he is on vacation the less regs that violate the constitution bee can pass

        • calvin200

          Can you really say that with all the vacation days Bush took and some elements of the Patriot act? Use your brain.

        • HuluWho

          He just suggesting that he deserves more freedom or choice than a deaf person because he not personally deaf.

          It is also likely that donnybee uses the government more than he puts in and he hasn’t once attempted to put his thoughts across anywhere besides Internet forums.

  • Jeff

    I’m rooting for T-Mobile as much as anyone, but can’t believe all the fanboys here who are actually defending a willful and repeated violation of minimum accessibility standards. Just remember that we all grow old, and hearing loss can happen to anyone; I suspect that with time some of you will come to regret your callous disregard for the hearing impaired.

    • Paul

      But is it T-Mobile’s fault or the phone makers? The FCC does have a say on a device before it hits the market.

      • ProudPapa

        Plus, how many phone’s were carrier exclusive to the big two carriers, making it impossible for T-Mobile to carry them. Seems like misplaced enforcement by the government to me.. Big shock there. :)

    • donnybee

      In that 2 year period, there were at least 81 handsets required to be offered just between the other 3 national carriers. T-Mobile’s offerings added more to that figure and regional carriers added more to that figure. So that 81 number is in reality much higher. Plus, some carriers cater to impaired individuals (see: Jitterbug).

      I fail to see and understand any argument that claims a lack of selection. This is clearly an issue of the accessibility standards being ridiculously inflated.

      Also, notice how the FCC waited so long to finalize the fee. They then thought it was necessary to account for inflation during that period and a lack of proper response time from T-Mobile; keeping in mind the FCC caused most of the delays. I suspect that with time, some of you will come to regret your callous disregard for increasing government control.

      • Jeff

        If you disagree with federal laws, then the appropriate response is to advocate the repeal of those laws (or your state’s orderly secession from the federal union). Companies can’t just pick and choose which laws they feel like following.

        • RLB63

          If Obama can why can’t we all?

        • Jeff

          Because two wrongs don’t make a right. (If you genuinely believe that the federal government is lawless and beyond reform, then the ethical response is secession from the federal union, not anarchy.)

        • Really…you just said that?

          Failure to comply with a law (or laws) you disagree with is not anarchy. It can actually be used as a means to force reform.

        • trife

          Oy vey. There’s always gotta be one.

        • RLB64

          Wow did you hurt your brain cells thinking of that?
          Any reason you didn’t include Bush Jr, Clinton, Bush Sr, and Reagan?
          That’s the thing of becoming a president, you get more say than the average citizen by definition of job title.
          Go back to kindergarten and try harder…

        • Vomitous Mass

          Anyone can pick and choose what laws they obey.

          It’s called freedom.

          We are also free to accept or challenge the “legal” consequences of those choices.

          We should always choose “right” over “legal”, whenever they conflict.

      • dip

        Could of been easily avoided if TMobile followed suit!
        What is so difficult about that?

    • Vomitous Mass

      The stick is being used on the wrong people.

      Hit the OEMs. Not the retailers.

      The retailers are not government officials -they should not be forced to do the government’s work.

      If the government says handsets must comply – they should make sure *all* of them do. Put the burden on the OEMs, not the retailer.

  • Christopher Olson

    I have to agree with the fcc on their handle on this situation. They’re the only authority than can defend against the smaller crowds getting fair options when less important features to the mass market get ignored and those have to suffer because it. At the same time I can’t blame T-Mobile at the time they already had financial struggles those years and they weren’t the first choice carrier for the elderly so the demand wasn’t really there.

    • donnybee

      “They’re the only authority that can defend against the smaller crowds getting fair options…”

      So let me get this straight – between the other 3 national carriers there were at least 81 handsets offered in those 2 years. You then could add in the offerings from regional carriers and any carriers who cater to the impaired. Also, add to it what T-Mobile DID offer.

      Over 81 handsets. Over 81 different choices. Exactly what lack of offerings are you referring to?

      • Christopher Olson

        I’m referring to T-Mobile offering less options than the other carriers, which is expected with their position in the market and I think they made the right choice considering that there were smarter decisions to focus on at that time. I’m saying I agree with the fcc because it’s not fair to be biased in T-Mobile’s favor and have them come down against the bigger carriers only (they’ve had their fair share off fcc violations too) but certain groups of people should have options on all the national carriers especially when it comes to ada requirements. It sucks that T-Mobile is being slammed with this outrageous fine but if they didn’t impose the fine then other carriers would use this situation as precedence against future cases against them.

        • donnybee

          Yeah, it’s true. I think this sheds more light on the problems in government than anything. I agree with another poster who asked why these regulations are being placed on carriers rather than manufacturers. I believe the regulations are pretty steep, considering the level of selection it’s requiring, and that’s where my counter argument comes in when people say there is a lack of selection.

          The point is – T-Mobile broke the rules. But maybe it’s high time these rules be looked into again and kept in check. Usually the government uses it’s strangle-hold to get what it wants.

        • DDDonny

          Why hasn’t Tmobile or any the US carriers attempted to have the law looked at smartguy?

      • Yo Donny

        Why do you get to decide the number?

        So 81 handsets on 4 different carriers for 9.8 million American people is exorbitant to you?
        Your ideals are not only narcissistic but are the opposite of the very principles of Our (not just yours) United States.

        So donny d how many phone choices are enough for all of us that have full hearing?

        I believe that all phones should be compatible….
        I also believe it should be on the manufacturers but right now by way of law it’s in the carriers best interests to adhere to said law and the carriers should follow the legal process to raise objections or to modify such law…

    • donnybee

      “I have to agree with the fcc on their handle on this situation.”

      Also, they handled the situation poorly. Why did it take them so long to decide to charge T-Mobile the whole fee? And then have the nerve to add an extra fee for T-Mobile not being ‘timely’ in it’s response to the initial charges? It shouldn’t be rocket science to come to a conclusion.

      • Donny The Brainiac

        How do you know how the fcc handled it? Your read a short summary of events and decided what has been going on behind the scenes somehow?

        If its not rocket science then why was there a delay? No assumptions or opinions, just because you think something without doing due diligence doesn’t mean it right and more than likely you’ll be wrong…

    • Vomitous Mass

      “They’re the only authority than can defend against the smaller crowds getting fair options when less important features to the mass market get ignored and those have to suffer because it.”

      Agreed.

      ” At the same time I can’t blame T-Mobile”

      Agreed again – but for vastly different reasons. I do not believe it is the retailer’s job to act as the regulator. If the FCC wan’ts to regulate how devices sold in the +USA are *produced*, that is fine – but forcing the retailer to carry product the retailer can’t or does not want to sell is wrong in *so* very many ways…

  • David Thoren

    Ok, what am I missing here? The chart says “whichever is less”, which would seem to indicate to me that the most you could get fined for in 2009 was 9 M3 handsets, and in 2010 was 10 M3 handsets. So how are they fined for being SHORT by 38 M3 handsets?

  • Hz

    Turns out big government isn’t into BYOD. They should instead fine the hearing impaired for not bringing enough compatible phones to the carrier.

    • Fat Albert Einstein

      Um how in the world did you get 6 likes???
      Sentence makes no sense first off and then mixing to unrelated things to blame the government and the hearing impaired for something that isn’t difficult given the evidence by other 3 top carriers is just dumbfounding.

      TMobile itself has admitted wrongdoing…..

      Maybe cell phone radiation is more severe than research shows and damage isn’t detectable with modern equipment available…..

      • Clem2011

        Looks like someone didn’t get the joke.

        • Uh La Le

          With the stupidty here presented on a daily basis, it’s 50/50 that op was serious LOL

  • Matt

    What about levying the fine against the handset makers? The last time I checked, T-Mobile isn’t in the business of manufacturing handsets. This is just pure and simple spite.

    • Stefan Naumowicz

      Handsets are ordered from manufacturers by carriers. T-Mobile chose not to order enough compliant handsets

      • dtam

        it’s not that easy to just order and offer. it requires an actual contract and sometimes manufacturers have exclusivity deals. we all know about the iphone but even crap like the nokia lumia and amazon fire phone are exclusive.

        i think the onus should be on the manufacturers. this is the biggest micromanaging ever!

        • I Only Care For MY Freedom

          If it was so difficult why is Tmobile the only carrier that had issues? Why is it that TMobile has complied the following years without raising any objection besides asking for a discount on said fine?

          Now Tmobile making it look easy to comply and have yet to lobby or even release a statement concerning said requirement LMAO

          Its fine to be TMo fan but cumon guys this is just common sense…
          You want freedom but then state freedom and choices should have limits for other people besides yourself?!!
          Great definition of freedom!

        • dtam

          I think the point most people are making is that if such law exists, it should be on the manufacturers and not the carriers. The law in general is pretty stupid and if it were Sprint or Verizon that got hit, I’d still think it’s stupid that they force carriers. If there is anyone that should be forced, it’s the manufacturers

    • mutt

      So the fcc is after TMobile because why again??
      I love hearing conspiracy theories without any motives of facts, it makes me feel so lucky for my intelligence i was born with.

  • mjs64

    T-Mobile needs to tell the FCC to stuff it!

    • Rudolf

      Or they could be fair to those who need help to be able to use their service like the others carriers have done…
      Wait that makes to much sense for most here…. smh

  • Pretty Simple

    All of these idiots defending TMobile were obviously born with two fully working ears but somehow their brain development curtailed…

    Pretty simple TMobile knew how many devices needed to be present and failed to comply…

    To those complaining about the government, I hope one day you get your wish of less goverment but what has always tickled me is if you resent the government so bad, why don’t you explore your options?
    There is plently of countries that support your political view yet you stay here in the U. S.
    Is it ignorance or stubbornness?

    • Simple apparently = stupid.

      “I hope one day you get your wish of less goverment but what has always tickled me is if you resent the government so bad, why don’t you explore your options? ”

      So what assumption are you making here? That those who speak out aren’t voters? That they do not participate in our election processes?

      Nope – you say that they should leave.

      To be brutally honest, the very fact you took the opportunity to tell any who are choosing to take issue with our government (even over something as simple as this) to “leave” says far more about you than anyone else here.

      Ban the dissidents? Silence those that don’t conform??

      From these small crimes, tyranny is born…I weep for you.

      • Simply Over The Head

        Where did it state to leave? Merely stated explore your options….
        Ppl complain but yet can’t find a destination that works even when some countries have government policies ran according to the complainers beliefs….
        My post was standing up for a group of ppl that have a disability where if it wasn’t any government interaction, barely if any carriers would cater to the deaf population…
        TMobile proves that theory alone by not complying to the very simple percentage of handsets….
        Posters here prove that if it doesn’t affect them personally they could careless….
        The same posters are defending a company who has already stated that they agree they were in violation but were trying to reduce the said given fine…

        • donnybee

          Actually, if you absorbed the discussions given by all the “complainers” here, you would see that nobody is debating whether T-Mobile broke the law. We all can see that they did. It’s black and white.
          What you’re feeble mind can’t seem to grasp is that these “complainers” are not happy about the apparent lack of checks and balances when this law came to be. And how stringent it’s hold is. Also, it’s apparent lack of correct targeting. This case being a perfect example.
          These “complainers” aren’t against deaf people or hard of hearing people, and just because you support a government law doesn’t mean you support these impaired individuals either. It merely means you know how to say ‘yes’ and how to conform without question. So congratulations. Leave the actual discussion to the big boys.

          The fact is that this law is far exceeding what would be a reasonable amount of selection for anyone, impaired or not. The reason the FCC put guidelines on how many phones each carrier needed to offer is to increase selection. However, when will enough selection be enough? Nobody is saying the impaired shouldn’t have selection, or that they shouldn’t be protected in some way, but rather that it makes no sense to force an exorbitant amount of selection. All things aside, the main question being asked is this: if there is a hardware requirement for devices on the market, why then isn’t this law directed towards the manufacturers instead of carriers?

          Your ideals of ‘don’t question anything, just do and believe what you’re told’ is exactly the opposite of how a person with intellect would perceive anything. Your stance on this speaks volumes more about you rather than anyone else here. Now, since you like to obey without question, do what you’re told and keep your thoughtless comments to yourself. If you don’t like the site of “complainers” who actually have something to say, maybe you should do a Google search and “explore your options” for other sites to spend your time on.

        • donnybeeassuming

          So Mr. Smart Guy when does too much choice become exorbitant?

          Not one part of my post stated don’t question….

          Your opinion that I don’t care about the hearing impaired and that it more about following the law is laughable…
          You must be some kind of genius to be able to decipher my motive in a paragraph or two. I have experience with the hearing impaired not only in the outside world but i also have a deaf family member.

          Why is TMobile adhering to said law now then lobbying to change it? Why is it that none of the carriers are challenging it either?

          The vast majority here have been stating that TMo did not do anything wrong or that it is unfair…
          I’m going on a limb here but the majority of the people who are “complaining” also have functioning ears so it doesn’t even affect them….

          Your lack of intelligence and integrity shows vividly when you tell me how i should live my life, or how my thoughts are aligned and what i should do with these thoughts.
          It’s ludicrous and ironic that the complainers and yourself believe that you get to decide what others should get or have to deal with when you are not in any position to decide so nor do you face any of the challenges of the affected party involved.

          Not only did you reinforce my statements but you also gave me a good laugh. I’m sorry but horrible assumptions make a person look pretty uneducated and very self absorbed. Thanks donnybee I needed a chuckle :)

        • donnybee

          You have no idea how much you made me laugh with all your fake names! I really love it! So mature.

          “Ppl complain but yet can’t find a destination that works even when some countries have government policies ran according to the complainers beliefs….”
          So all those who question or have a problem with the laws should bounce to another country. It’s funny how confused you’re getting from your own ideas.. Shows how much they make sense.

          That’s great that you have experience with the hearing impaired. So do I. So cool story. Unlike you, I don’t need to mention it in every other comment to make people think my opinion suddenly holds validity.

          When did I ever state “what others should get or have to deal with”? Oh yeah, I didn’t. But you weren’t able to understand that, so let me explain it like I’m telling a kid:

          Sometimes the government wants to make sure phones can do certain things for certain people. Kind of like how the government says cars need to meet certain safety requirements. But sometimes the government gets things wrong when they want to punish people. Imagine if the government said every car lot had to sell a percentage of cars with a certain safety limit. It really makes no sense, the car lot just sells the cars. Over time more and more will have it because now the manufacturers will all be pumping them out and it will benefit everyone!

          The fact that you haven’t seen any backlash yet from carriers doesn’t mean this targets the correct parties. As far as I’m concerned, this hurts the impaired class by causing the manufactures to not need to innovate with devices that are meeting these standards. They will continue to implement the functionality in devices that they know they won’t sell many units of and that will overall give the protected class less innovation. Oh but you don’t want to really support them, you just want to support the law, that’s right. Go ahead and keep fighting for the status quo. You’re now a waste of our time each time you comment.

          How many laws go unchallenged in today’s world? Does that make them correct? Does it benefit anyone to not challenge them when they don’t make sense? In your world, that’s a “YES!”

          So keep telling me I’m wrong. At this point you’ve already shown how you aren’t able to connect the dots or absorb another idea that would, God forbid, challenge the current law. You’ve shown your lack of maturity and collective thought processing from the minute you started commenting.

          Hey, can you do that thing again where you act smart, but just keep spouting off how you’re more entitled to an opinion than anyone else? Oh and tell us all again that if we don’t agree with all the laws then we can go live in another country? Also, comment on all the comments below as if you’re a different person each time? This would all make our day and really solidify your intellect!! In all reality, I’m the only one that gave you the time of day after you started spouting off and telling us to “get used to it or GTFO” (in so many words). Keep pretending everyone agrees with you by making different usernames and talking to yourself. It makes no difference..and actually I like it. It’s funny and is really the only part of your responses that are worth reading twice! I’m done wasting my time on you.

  • vinnyjr

    FCC can go take a good shit and a rolling donut. What a bunch of crap. I would gamble every Carrier was carrying the same phones at that time. Why T-Mobile with the fine??? Anything to put the screws to the small guy. No wonder why DT wants out of the US market.

  • jenn

    to a million dollar company like Tmo, $819 probably is nothing.

    • monkeybutts

      It’s still a decent chunk of money for a company busy rebuilding everything to make the service more acceptable for customers.

      • djjjdj

        Especially when it could of been easy for TMobile to avoid. It’s not like TMobile didn’t know said regulation.
        It’s beyond me why TMobile wouldn’t want to cater to prospective customers, I don’t believe carrier’s have to incur any extra costs from hard of hearing customers compared to non deaf customers.

  • Randall Lind

    FCC should require all phone have voice activate camera’s and other stuff for handicap people.

    • Teets

      If it runs android you can get just about anything a handicapped person could need.

  • vinnyjr

    These certain phones as described are not big sellers, manufacturers who make these always run out or Large Carriers buy them ALL hoping this happens, small Carriers fined.

    • MyCousinVinny

      Did you get this info from Spygating?

  • John Mun

    Are they seriously required to “sell” a certain number of hearing aid compatible phones? What if nobody wants to buy them from T-Mobile?

    • Thdkkdi

      Sell as in offer for sale not as actual raw sales number.

      Well if TMo doesn’t stock any devices then a hearing impaired individual CAN’T buy from TMo.

      If TMobile selection is limited then other carrier’s then most likely a hearing impaired individual would chose another carrier.

  • RonJeezy

    My coverage area is never going to get better. This fine, plus giving people test drives, all this advertising… They are not using their money correctly. Passing Sprint is so important to them but if they don’t get their coverage better they will be back to number 4 again. #Facts

    • Jay J. Blanco

      Kinda off topic ???

      • RonJeezy

        Had to get it out! #kanyeshrug Ima let y’all finish though!

        • #isGangbanging

          #wtfrutalkingabout and #whatsupwiththepounds
          #chodochodosmile

  • tomarone

    Which phones are the hearing-aid compatible ones? Which models?

  • charlieboy808

    They should just bill Microsoft for this one. They did kill their biggest seller for the hearing aid compatible phones. Let’s all remember when Micro$oft bought “Danger Inc.” and the amount of data I lost for months. They then turned around, used the technology to make Kin/Kin2 and then realized they f’d up and dropped it. Eventually, another Sidekick came out but that wasn’t until 2011 and by then that would have been too late for the FCC. #imjustsaying