The brand must not be on the provider's own blocklist
The requirementstatement
The brand must not appear on the submitting provider's internal blocklist.
- Severityseverity
- BlockingBLOCKINGBreaking this rule gets the submission rejected. There is no partial credit.
- When it bitesphase
- Gates approvalapprovalGet this wrong and the brand or campaign is refused at registration.
- What is checkedobject
- the brand identity against the provider blocklist
- Where it liveslayer
- BrandBRAND
- How Ekas settles itdetectability
- External recordEXTERNAL_DATA
- The fact that settles it lives in a register we cannot query, such as the IRS file, a postal database, or another provider’s tenant. Reported as a warning with the evidence to check, not as a pass.
- What the fix involvesfailureClass
- Wait on someone elseTERMINAL_EXTERNAL
- Needs an external system or a waiting period, such as IRS propagation, a vetting result, or a carrier queue.
- Who requires itauthorities
- Sinch
- When it appliesapplicabilityText
- Applies to every 10DLC registration.
Why this rule existsrationale
How to fix itremediation
Where a provider refuses a brand on its own blocklist, ask them what triggered it before resubmitting anywhere — a prior enforcement action against a related entity is the usual cause, and it will follow the same details to the next provider. Registering the same business under a different name is a fabricated registration (BRD-286), not a workaround.
Provider rejection codescodes
The code you get back when this rule is what failed, and whether that provider lets you resubmit.
| Provider | Code | Resubmit |
|---|---|---|
| Sinch | CR2003 | No |
Check this yourselfattestation
No tool can settle this one for you. Here is the check, and what wrong looks like.
If a provider has refused this brand on its own blocklist, have you asked them what triggered it before submitting anywhere else?
- 1Ask the provider directly. They will usually say whether the trigger is the business, the EIN, or a person named on the record.
- 2That answer decides whether another provider is worth trying at all — a prior enforcement action against a related entity follows the same details.
- 3Re-registering the same business under a different name is a fabricated registration, not a workaround.
What wrong looks like: The rejection cites the list rather than a reason, so it looks arbitrary. The same details are submitted to a second provider and refused for the same invisible history.
Notesnotes
Rules you will hit next
Other brand rules at the same severity. A registration is judged as a whole, not rule by rule.
BRD-285 is one of 196 brand rules in the 915-rule 10DLC registry. Free to cite under CC BY 4.0.