GATINEAU – While most agree that Canada definitely needs a national, mandatory code of conduct for wireless providers to adhere to when dealing with their customers, agreement on what this code will actually say is another matter entirely.
Submissions were due into the CRTC last week on the Commission’s proceeding to establish a mandatory code for mobile wireless services. A public hearing will start February 11th – after the Regulator itself releases a draft code for discussion next month and conducts three more days of public, online consultations.
Bell Canada says it’s been listening to what the CRTC has been saying of late, writing in its submission: “We recognize that this initiative dovetails with the Commission's broader ‘connect’ and ‘protect’ pillars by more fully enabling Canadians to participate in the wireless market and by establishing the appropriate transparency benchmarks so that they can do so in a fully informed manner.
Bell, along with the other two of the big three, also told the Commission of their latest consumer-friendly pricing and packaging initiatives, demonstrating, they say, that the market is very competitive and they have been responding to consumer demand. “Many Rogers price plans now come with unlimited local voice minutes and either 1 GB, 3 GB or 5 GB of wireless internet usage. Such measures make it easier for customers to understand their plans and their bills. Unlimited plans also provide a sense of comfort in knowing there will be no overage charges,” reads the Rogers submission.
“Telus has completely re-written its customer service agreement and standard terms of service according to the best practices of ‘plain language’ legal drafting,” said the Vancouver-based company. “We have eliminated traditional cancellation fees and introduced a simplified ‘device balance’ approach to address recovery of device subsidy when a customer wants to cancel service or upgrade their device. Telus does not extend term contracts automatically, and provides extensive usage notifications and other tools to help customers avoid ‘bill shock’.”
Several provinces – most notably Quebec, which was first in 2010 – have passed their own wireless consumer protection laws and most agree that a patchwork approach of wireless standards across the country is costly and unworkable for both the companies and consumers.
However, the industry has generally found that basing a new national code off of Quebec’s Bill 60 might be the best way to go and the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association has submitted its own draft code for the Commission to consider based on that law. Both Rogers and Bell (along with others like SaskTel and EastLink) support that draft code. Telus, on the other hand, has submitted its own, which is based more fully on the Quebec Consumer Protection Act. Others have done the same, adding their own flavour to the Quebec Act.
“Telus proposes its own wireless code for consideration by the Commission and other parties for this proceeding… The fundamental premise in Telus’ proposal is to use the provisions of the QCPA that apply to wireless services as the model, as much as possible, for the Commission’s wireless code,” reads the company’s submission.
“The QCPA provisions that apply to wireless services have now been fully in force since June 30, 2010, and all wireless service providers that operate in Quebec abide by the requirements therein. This legislation provides consumers in Quebec with standard protections and rights, fully in alignment with many of the principles espoused by the Commission in the Notice. In addition, all of the provinces that have enacted or introduced their own wireless services consumer protection laws have used the Quebec legislation as a model. In that light, it makes sense that the QCPA be used as the starting point for the Commission’s wireless code discussions.”
Added Public Mobile in its submission: “The Quebec Code is considered the standard upon which the other provinces have modeled legislation regarding wireless consumer protection. The Quebec Code has been in place since April 2010, and has managed to strike a balance of protecting customers without overburdening providers in the wireless industry with superfluous regulation. The wireless industry in Quebec has adapted to the strict, but fair, stipulations of the Quebec Code and customers have benefitted from a more balanced relationship with their wireless service providers. Consumers understand their rights, and wireless companies know (and can plan for) their responsibilities to customers.”
As for those customers, the ones who added their two cents to the proceeding don’t much care about the exact wording of a code, as long as they get a few key things killed – like the three year contract, for example. Over 1,000 submissions have been posted by the CRTC on its web site.
“No contracts, no early termination fees, no charging for paper bills. No fees for services the used to be included under the guise of a new service or cost,” said Vern O’Connor of Victoria, B.C.
“The current situation needs to be changed so that new providers can offer services more easily without so much red tape so that more competition equals better rates for us here in Canada where we pay more for cell services than 3rd world countries!!!! something seriously wrong with that. stop being so greeedy and gouging your people so much you guys are way out of control with too much power,” wrote Billy Patterson, of Hot Shot Polymers in Brantford, Ont.
“Hi, I have a few suggestions.. I hope they help…
1)Cancelation fee: All communication companies should have a maximum standard fee for breaking a contract.
“2)External resolution department: Each company should have an expectation to provide their consumers with fair and clear customer service. If the company does not follow through with the above there should be a place for the consumer to go to resolve the issue. The company should have an obligation to honour what they offered the consumer. (Recently, employees of Bell, recommended and promised me features, for me to later find out that they did not honour their word. Their excuses were, "Our systems do not allow us to add that feature anymore…" – unacceptable!!)
“3)Waiting time: Each company should be required to have enough employees on staff to honour a waiting time of less then three minutes. (Waiting 26 minutes before speaking to an employee is unacceptable…)
“4)Data packages: They should be streamed-lined. The options are minimal and expensive. They need to be broken down more to give the consumer more options in picking the quantity of data… (When I called to increase my data, I only had the options of 1GB or 6GB. If I wanted any less I had to pay per MB of $.05 each…. ridiculous!) I hope this helps,” wrote Adriana Akins, of Stratford, Ont.
Replies to these initial interventions are due into the CRTC on December 18th. Then, beginning January 28th, the CRTC will hold a second phase of online consultations with Canadians, ending on February 1st. Further details of the online consultation will be announced shortly on the Commission’s web site.
