Telecommunications relay service

Originally, relay services were designed to be connected through a TDD, teletypewriter (TTY) or other assistive telephone device.

Services gradually have expanded to include almost any real-time text capable technology such as a personal computer, laptop, mobile phone, PDA, and many other devices.

The user puts the operator on a brief hold to initiate a three-way call with the hearing person.

Many STS users have Parkinson's disease, cerebral palsy, ALS, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy or stroke.

The communications assistant listens to and revoices the hearing party's side of the conversation into the microphone of a headset.

Internet Protocol Captioned Telephone Service (IP CTS), like other forms of CTS, allows users with some residual hearing, who can speak, to simultaneously listen to the other party and read captions of what the other party in a telephone conversation is saying.

Support for these technologies has enabled many Internet-connected devices to be used with relay services, including desktop and laptop personal computers, mobile phones, and PDAs.

VRI has proven to be useful for deaf or hard-of-hearing people in business meetings, doctor appointments, minor surgical procedures, and court proceedings.

In the U.S., every phone company is required to connect persons who dial 711 to a TRS call center from a working number.

As such, it has been used by those without hearing or speech disabilities to make long-distance calls free of charge with TRS providers who do not bill for them.

Providers defend this as a necessary evil to maintain "transparency", which is the belief that the operator and the mechanics of relay should generally go as unnoticed as possible in the call.

Leaders in the deaf community defend this decision and generally retain strong support among service users with hearing and speech disabilities.

[citation needed] The open structure of relay services has led to a number of complaints regarding its use as a vehicle for fraud.

In 2004, news outlets, such as MSNBC,[13] and several newspapers, including the Baltimore City Paper,[14] ran stories of reported abuse of the relay system, such as users from international locations calling businesses in the United States to fraudulently purchase goods.

This has also generated numerous complaints, particularly by those who were employed as relay operators, that so-called "prank calls," where neither user requires the service and the caller is just attempting to have fun with a novel mode of communication.

Fraudulent calls of both types have been cited as reasons for further relay regulation, and as causes for long hold times that must be endured by many legitimate users.

Most businesses legally cannot have relay calls blocked due to the need for legitimate users to be accommodated, although businesses that are repeatedly victimized by pranks and/or scams often stop trusting relay calls or hang up on them because it is difficult to distinguish legitimate users from illegitimate ones; this is another way that the abusers of the service ultimately victimize the legitimate users, in addition to tying up the service from them.

In 2006, the FCC launched a campaign to gather feedback from the various Internet Protocol relay-certified companies operating within the United States to fight the wave of relay scams and pranks being made over the service.

The specific accusations state that AT&T "violated the False Claims Act by facilitating and seeking federal payment for IP Relay calls by international callers who were ineligible for the service and sought to use it for fraudulent purposes.

The complaint further contends that AT&T continued to employ this system even with the knowledge that it facilitated use of IP Relay by fraudulent foreign callers, which accounted for up to 95 percent of AT&T’s call volume.

The government’s complaint alleges that AT&T improperly billed the TRS Fund for reimbursement of these calls and received millions of dollars in federal payments as a result.