# POL-219 — The terms must carry a contact block

> The terms of service must carry a contact block naming the entity, its address, an email address and a phone number.

- **Rule ID:** POL-219
- **Layer:** Policy pages (`POLICY_PAGE`)
- **Checks:** `ToS contact block`
- **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:** AI judgement over the crawled website or policy page
- **Fix type:** Fix the privacy policy or SMS terms
- **Required by:** CTIA, Sinch, AWS
- **Applies:** Applies to every 10DLC registration.
- **Canonical URL:** https://ekas.io/rules/10dlc/policy-page/pol-219/

## Why this rule exists

The contact block doubles as the customer-care route the messaging framework separately requires, so a terms page without one leaves both a contractual and a messaging obligation unmet. It is also the block a reviewer reads to corroborate the brand, which is why a bare contact-form link does not do the job.

## How to fix it

Close the terms with a contact block carrying the entity, the postal address, a monitored email and a phone number, matching the brand record. Done when a reader can reach a person without using a form.

## Example of a compliant value

```text
Questions? Acme Coffee Co, LLC, 1240 Mission St, Suite 400, San Francisco, CA 94103 · support@acmecoffee.com · 415-555-0134
```

## Provider rejection codes

| Provider | Code | Resubmission allowed |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Bandwidth/DCA | `852` | yes |

## Notes

Overlaps deliberately with POL-190, which asks the SMS terms for a support contact: a brand that publishes dedicated SMS terms satisfies both from one block, and a brand that does not still owes the contact here.