© 1994 - 2007
Against the Grain

Site Design, Hosting and Logo
by DNA Web Media

November 30, 1998

Mr. Carl Goolsby
Public Staff-North Carolina Utilities commission
P.O. Box 29520
Raleigh, North Carolina

Re; Formal Complaint

Dear Mr. Goolsby;

By this presentment I wish to make a formal complaint against Sprint.

1. On or about July 1, 1998, I discovered that much of the charges billed by Sprint and AT&T were either illegal and unconstitutional.

2. A two page letter, Exhibit A, was sent to The CEO of AT&T Phone Company in care of and also to Dwight W. Allen, dated July 28, 1998, under Certified Mail Z 086 370 875, RRR. This letter contained seventeen paragraphs of which, ten paragraphs were questions disputing the various charges on the phone bill and requesting the documentation of proof that I was obligated to these charges within twenty days. The CEO of AT&T and Mr. Allen of Sprint Corporation did not produce any of the documents demanded within the seventeen paragraphs although Mr. Allen responded in his letter dated Aug. 11, 1998 Exhibit B. The CEO of AT&T did not respond.

3. A carbon copy was sent to Sprint billing in Tenn. with my corrected bill of my own that paid in full the account for the month of July minus the disputed charges. It was so marked on the money order. The Money Order was cashed as reflected in the August billing from Sprint. Acceptance by Sprint extinguished the complete bill.

4. A second notice was sent to Mr. Allen, dated Aug. 20, 1998 with a carbon copy to Dana Andel, AT&T, under certified mail Z 086 370 880 RRR Exhibit C. This notice informed both parties of various laws that did not exist so that the disputed charges could be exempted from the phone bills. The letter also informed Mr. Allen that he had yet to produce any of the documents requested in the previous letter.

5. A corrected bill was sent to both AT&T and Sprint on August 28, 1998 Exhibit D.

6. By letter dated September 9, 1998, Exhibit E, Mr. Allen informed me that when my phone bill reaches an amount of $45.00 in past due account for my failure to pay the disputed charges, it would result in suspended phone service. He still did not give me any authorizing documents to collect the taxes.

7. On September 18, 1998, I sent a third Notice to Mr. Allen, Exhibit F, of which you have, which contained five Exhibits of all the statutes, code of federal regulations, Table of Authorities showing all the Federal Excise taxes were repealed which concerned the disputed charges that should never have been charged to me. This was carbon copy to AT&T CEO in Basking Ridge, New Jersey under certified mail # Z 086 370 882 RRR.

8. On September 18, 1998, Mr. Jeff Vonholdt from AT&T called me on the phone. We had a discussion in which he stated that I had to send AT&T a letter every month and they would remove all the excise taxes. Mr. Vonholdt explained all the other charges in dispute were the responsibility of Sprint. Mr. Vonholdt then explained the disputed charges and how four private corporations did the controlling of the disputed charges along with the FCC. The Congress had not authorized legislation for these charges. The charges were to be passed along for the phone companies doing business with each other, to the customer.

9. On September 18, 1998, I sent a third Notice to Mr. Allen,

Exhibit G.

10. On or about September 21, 1998, I contacted your office and talked to you, Mr. Goolsby, of the public Utilities Commission of North Carolina. I sent you the material on September 18, 1998, showing the repealing law and regulation. You requested that I send it to the North Carolina Department of Revenue. I did so. See cover letter Exhibit H.

11. On September 23, 1998, under certified Mail # Z 086 370 883, RRR, a Constructive Notice was sent to Mr. Allen with carbon copies going to CEO of AT&T, Sprint billing Department in Tenn., Muriel Offerman, Secretary of Revenue of North Carolina and the AT&T Federal Excise Tax Group, Exhibit I.

12. This notice contained excerpts from the phone conversation of Sept 18, 1998 between me and Mr. Vonholdt of AT&T. Also included in this Constructive Notice was evidence of proof from the General Counsel of the General Accounting Office, Robert P. Murphy, before the House Judiciary Committee, that all the disputed charges I had refused to pay were non-constitutional in nature and no legislative authority was ever approved and passed for these charges. In this Constructive Notice I informed Mr. Allen of Fraud and crimes under Title 18 U.S.C. that I had to report to him and the carbon copied people. I had given Mr. Allen, in good faith, another ten days to respond with a meaningful response to all my demands to produce his authorization to collect, which he still refused to answer.

13. On September 28, 1998 I followed Mr. Vonholdt's instructions to remove the excise taxes by writing a letter to the AT&T address given to me Exhibit J.

14. Muriel Offerman, Secretary of Revenue of North Carolina has not supplied, to the date of this complaint, the authorizing statutes empowering Sprint to collect the hidden taxes and the excise taxes. Nobody has supplied me a copy of the contract whereby I would agree to pay the other charges Sprint is collecting for itself and as the agent of AT&T.

15. On October 9, 1998, I tendered Mr. Dwight Allen a Tacit Procuration document. Mr. Allen refused, failed or neglected to answer Exhibit K.

16. On October 23, 1998, Mr. Vonholdt called me and wanted the Tacit Procuration document I had sent to Mr. Allen of Sprint. Mr. Vonholdt stated that I would receive a letter from AT&T's legal counsel in 10 days. I have yet to receive any such letter from AT&T legal counsel Exhibit L.

17. On October 29, 1998 at 4:40 pm I called AT&T in Atlanta because I received my monthly phone bill and had questions concerning the charges. Sprint was still adding the late charges even though their billing was in error. AT&T verified I was overcharged by 108.66 for the months of September and October. I was told to deduct the charges from the bill and send Sprint the correct amount, which I did, Exhibit M.

18. On November 24, 1998 I received certified mail from Jack H. Derrick, Staff attorney for Sprint, a threatening letter stating if I did not pay the late charges before December 10, 1998 they would suspend my phone service Exhibit N.

19. The relief I seek from the Utilities Commission is:

A. to prevent severing of my phone service;

B. to compel Sprint to supply the Public law and regulation that they say requires me to pay a federal excise tax that they will not provide me;

C. to compel Sprint to supply the North Carolina Statute and regulation that they say requires me to pay a state excise tax that they will not provide me;

D. to compel AT&T to supply the North Carolina statute and regulation that requires me to pay a state excise tax that they will not provide me;

E. to compel AT&T to supply the Public law and regulation that they collected the federal excise tax even though they stated they would remove the excise tax when I wrote them;

F. compel both Sprint and AT&T to supply the Congressional Public Law and regulation that requires me to pay the Network Access Charge, the Universal Service Fund Charge, and the Carrier Line charge that they will not provide me;

G. compel Sprint to provide the evidence containing my signature that I consented to the N.C. Relay charge and the 911 charge, showing I am a "member of a political body" which they will not provide me;

H. compel Sprint and AT&T to produce the Public Law that offsets the Public Law 90-364, Title I, Sec. 105 (b) (3), June 28, 1968, that repealed the Federal Excise tax on phone service;

I. compel both Sprint and AT&T to provide me the Federal and State excise tax Form that I am required to file and the Office of Management of Budget's (OMB) control number as required by law.

J. I would like a refund of all Federal Excise taxes withheld from 1968 to present by both Sprint and AT&T that have been collected without any authorization of Congressional law.

K. I would like a refund of all N.C. State excise taxes that both Sprint and AT&T collected without any authorization of law enacted by the legislature of North Carolina.

L. I would like Sprint and AT&T to return all Network Access Charge, the Universal Service Fund Charge, and the Carrier Line charge that has been collected without specific authorization by the Congress.

M. My costs that I have expended and billed Sprint and AT&T to stop this unlawful practice.

20. Any other sanctions or actions that your office and the Attorney General's office can, or will make is your choice. AT&T and Sprint have been informed, as well as the Secretary of the North Carolina Department of Treasury, of criminal acts under Title 18 U.S.C. that has taken place under the direction of both AT&T and Sprint personnel.

Respectfully presented,

Albert Coombs
c/o 7055 Mountain Rd.
Oxford, North Carolina
919-693-8890