# BRD-164 — The named contact must be authorised to act for the business

> The brand contact must be an authorised representative of the business, not a generic, third-party or aggregator name.

- **Rule ID:** BRD-164
- **Layer:** Brand (`BRAND`)
- **Checks:** `brand.authorized_rep`
- **Severity:** HIGH — Rejected by at least one carrier or provider, and a common cause of failure at the rest.
- **When it bites:** Gates approval — get this wrong and registration is refused
- **How it is detected:** Human check — only someone holding the document can settle it
- **Fix type:** Supply evidence only you hold
- **Required by:** AWS, Bandwidth, HighLevel, CTIA
- **Applies:** Applies to every 10DLC registration.
- **Canonical URL:** https://ekas.io/rules/10dlc/brand/brd-164/

## Why this rule exists

This person is treated as the party who attested to the registration, so the name matters when a carrier asks who authorised the programme. A vendor's account manager or a shared "Marketing Team" entry means nobody at the business did — and that is a materially different answer from the one the registration implies.

## How to fix it

Name someone employed by the business with authority to commit it — an owner, an officer, or the manager who owns the messaging programme. Get their agreement before naming them, because they may be contacted about it.

## Provider rejection codes

| Provider | Code | Resubmission allowed |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Twilio | `30972` | yes |

## Check this yourself

**Does the named representative work for the business, have authority to commit it, and know they have been named?**

1. Confirm the person is a real employee — an owner, an officer, or the manager who owns the messaging programme.
2. Tell them they have been named and that they may be contacted about it.
3. Rule out the two substitutes: a vendor's account manager, and a generic entry like "Marketing Team".

*What wrong looks like:* A reviewer calls the business and finds nobody by that name. The registration implies somebody at the business attested to it, and nobody did.

## Notes

Nothing on the form shows whether the named person works for the business. What the user has to do is confirm the person is a real employee with authority and knows they have been named — a reviewer who calls the business and finds nobody by that name treats the whole registration as unverified.