Through this webpage, I am asking the FBI to contact Richard Smith, and find out who asked him to contact me during the Formal Complaint.

During the month of January 2002, Richard Smith was the Deputy Director at the Office of the Ratepayer Advocates. He contacted me by phone telling me that I needed to file an Ammendment to the Complaint to state the specific code violations, such as Code 451, 2891.1, 2107, 2108, etc. He also explained that fraud was not barred by the Statute of Limitations. See: Fraud and the Statute of Limitations

When Mr. Smith called me, he told me someone in the Commission had asked him to contact me, but he would not provide a name.

Richard Smith is now an Administrative Law Judge at the CPUC.

The email from Richard Smith, dated August 27, 2003, correctly states that the Judge committed legal error for not fining AT&T for violating my rights to privacy. According to the Law, the minimum fine would have been $61,000 and the maximum fine would have been $2.4 million.

Message From: "Smith, Richard" <RS1@cpuc.ca.gov>,
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 3:07 PM, Subject: RE: appeal.

Below is the content of the attachment to above email:
Re Application for Rehearing of Knell.doc

It should also be noted that the Judge refused to consider that publishing my home address for my business listings was a violation to my privacy. The Judge also ruled that the publishing of my personal information on AT&T's internet directory listings was not within CPUC jurisdiction. Had the Judge ruled that AT&T's repeated publishing of my home address for my business listings was a violation to privacy (and which went on for years), the minimum fines would have been in the $ millions.

Furthermore, it should be noted that during the Formal Complaint, AT&T continued to publish my home address, sell my home address to credit card companies and marketing companies. During the Complaint, AT&T also provided my home address to a collections agency (to demand payments for services I didn't even have). The Commission refused to punish AT&T for the ongoing violations, which included billing problems, listings problems, and privacy violations.

last edited 05/03/08