CCC   PPPPP   U    U    CCC       N    N  EEEEE  W  W  W   SSS
 C   C  P    p  U    U   C   C      NN   N  E      W  W  W  S   S
C       P    P  U    U  C           N N  N  E      W  W  W  S
C       PPPPP   U    U  C           N N  N  EEE    W W W W   SSS
C       P       U    U  C           N  N N  E      WW   WW      S
 C   C  P       U    U   C   C      N   NN  E      W     W  S   S
  CCC   P        UUUU     CCC       N    N  EEEEE  W     W   SSS
CONTACT: Kyle DeVine                September 20, 1996  CPUC - 538
         213-897-4225                                (I.94-03-020)

   CPUC FINES MATRIX FOR SLAMMING, FAILURE TO ANSWER COMPLAINT

    The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) today fined
Matrix Telecom $13,500 for slamming an Orland (Glenn County)
couple and failing to respond to the formal complaint they filed
with the CPUC.
    Matrix, headquartered in Forth Worth, Texas, provides long
distance phone service nationwide, including 43,000 customers in
California.
    Michael and Kathleen Lyon, owners of a florist shop, filed a
complaint in June 1993 alleging that Matrix had slammed them,
switched their long distance provider without their permission.
Matrix did not respond to the complaint even after the CPUC gave
the company an extension to do so.
    In March 1994, the Commission ordered Matrix to compensate the
Lyons $700.20 for service charges and unauthorized excessive toll
charges.  CPUC also ordered Matrix to show cause why it should not
be fined for violating CPUC procedures and began investigating the
slamming allegations against Matrix.
    The $13,500 fine includes $7,500 for the 15 months in which
the Lyons were unaware they were slammed, $2,000 for slamming,
$2,000 for not answering the complaint as specified in CPUC
procedures, and $2,000 more for still not answering after being
ordered to respond.
    Matrix must also reimburse the Advocates Trust Fund, a fund
created to defray expenses related to litigating consumer
interest, $17,883 for compensation that covered the Lyons'
litigation costs.  Since Matrix has not paid the Lyons the $700.20
previously ordered, it must also pay them interest on that amount.
    The CPUC investigation notes it appears that Matrix's slamming
may not be extraordinary when compared to the industry as a whole.
However, because of previous slamming in California, Illinois,
                              -more-
Ohio and Florida, the CPUC will monitor Matrix for three years.
    Matrix' slamming techniques included the following: a consumer
was switched just by filling out a contest form; another simply
confirmed with a Matrix sales agent who his long distance carrier
was; one person cashed a small check not realizing this would lead
to a switch in carriers; one agreed to have Matrix on his business
phone but his personal phones were switched too; and another
filled out a card declining service, but was switched anyway.
    Because Matrix's billings have been unclear, customers may be
unaware that they were or still are Matrix customers, so Matrix
must notify customers that they do or did receive long distance
service from Matrix.
    Questions about the choice of long distance carrier may be
directed to the CPUC Consumer Affairs offices in San Francisco or
Los Angeles:
    San Francisco - 505 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco CA  94102.
    Los Angeles - 107 S. Broadway, Rm 5109, Los Angeles CA  90012.

                              -###-