{"id":482,"date":"2013-06-11T16:15:39","date_gmt":"2013-06-11T20:15:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/?p=482"},"modified":"2024-08-14T09:06:09","modified_gmt":"2024-08-14T13:06:09","slug":"securus-fees","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/2013\/06\/11\/securus-fees\/","title":{"rendered":"Securus agrees that it&#8217;s ripping customers off via outrageous prison phone fees"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Yet another phone company is recognizing the broken nature of the prison phone industry, and this time it&#8217;s a big one.<\/p>\n<p>In a <a href=\"\/\/static.prisonpolicy.org\/phones\/filings\/7022422974.pdf\">letter filed yesterday with the FCC<\/a>, the second-largest phone company in the prison phone industry, Securus, has agreed that, &#8220;certain practices, which serve to artificially inflate the cost of prison phone calls, are egregious and should be eliminated.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Which practices? For example, Securus writes, charging customers extra fees to refund their money is &#8220;restrictive and unwarranted.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>The fact that Securus officials are speaking out against exploitative industry practices is great news. But will they take their own advice and stop <a href=\"\/phones\/pleasedeposit.html#table4\">charging customers $4.95<\/a> just to get their own money back? Only time will tell. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>But will they take their own advice and stop charging customers to get their own money back?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4,1],"tags":[],"coauthors":[13],"class_list":["post-482","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-phones","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/482","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=482"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/482\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16363,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/482\/revisions\/16363"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=482"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=482"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=482"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.prisonpolicy.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=482"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}