Telcos opposed to monthly CCTS publicity on bills

GATINEAU—Publishing a monthly informational message about the Commissioner for Complaints for Telecommunications Services (CCTS) on customers’ bills would be “overkill,” costly, and too technical, telecom providers told the CRTC at a public hearing this week. “By making it a monthly occurrence on the bill, I don’t think it really speaks to what the resolution process is really designed to do. I think it’s really overkill and a very expensive overkill for all of the carriers,” Shaw Communications Inc.’s senior vice-president of regulatory affairs, Jean Brazeau, said Tuesday. Tuesday marked the second day of a public CRTC hearing reviewing the CCTS’ structure and mandate three years after its launch. The CCTS works on resolving consumer complaints about telecommunications services like wireless phone and Internet. One of the main issues at the hearing has been a lack of public awareness about the agency. In December 2007, the CRTC said CCTS members should use a “variety of communications methods, such as directories, websites, and a standard notation on all billing statements” to inform consumers about it. Service providers told the commission Tuesday that printing a notice every month would be too technically challenging and leave no space for promotional messages. “There are a lot of things we could tell consumers every month,” Suzanne Morin, Bell Canada’s assistant general counsel and privacy chief, said Monday. “Presently, if that space on our bills is occupied by a message on the … CCTS, then we have lost an important space for other messages.” Michel Messier, Cogeco Cable Inc.’s director of regulatory affairs for telecommunications, said the company is “strongly opposed” to a monthly publication of the CCTS notice. Messier said very few CCTS complaints involve Cogeco and it would make little sense to ask it to devote IT and financial resources to create a new space on bills for the notification. Shaw and Quebecor Media Inc. also said they opposed monthly notifications. Consumer advocacy group the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC), which appeared before the commission Monday on behalf of the Consumer’s Association of Canada (CAC) and Canada Without Poverty (CWP), said the CCTS and its member companies have “not tried hard enough” to inform the public of the agency’s role and mandate. CCTS members now send out informational messages on customers’ bills on a biannual basis, and make information about the agency available on their websites and in white pages directories. PIAC counsel John Lawford said providers have made an “uneven presentation” of the CCTS on their websites and that their customer service representatives “generally fail to inform customers, who have exhausted complaints processes, of the existence of the CCTS.” Lawford told the commission that, in focus groups PIAC held in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal in September 2010, a majority of participants were not aware of the CCTS’ existence. He added that PIAC regularly receives emails confusing it with the CCTS. PIAC said the most efficient way to reach consumers is to require providers to print information about the CCTS on every customer bill. Lawford also recommended that members prominently display a direct link to the CCTS on their websites’ customer service and help pages. “To help remedy the slow start and general lack of enthusiasm for publicizing the CCTS by members, CAC/CWP request that the commission direct the CCTS to require to print standard CCTS contact information on all invoices for a period of one year from the date of the decision in this proceeding,” Lawford said. In a brief interview following the hearing, Lawford said it’s not necessary for the billing notification to be printed every month after the first year and that it could move to a quarterly publishing frequency. Promoting the CCTS for a year is a fair compromise for telcos, he said, given that they have failed to raise awareness about the institution. Rogers Communications Inc.’s senior vice-president of regulatory affairs Ken Engelhart suggested the CCTS adopt a “seal” to let customers know their carrier is a member of the agency. CRTC commissioner Elizabeth Duncan said she thought the seal was a “great idea” and that the CCTS could follow up on it without a directive from the CRTC. She added that the billing notice does not have to be published every month but could be increased in frequency. MTS Allstream told the commission Tuesday it sees no need for any new awareness initiatives outside existing campaigns. When pressed by the commission on whether the frequency of billing messages should be increased, MTS said it would have to assess the company’s printing abilities. Bell and Telus Corp. said they are pleased with the CCTS’s efforts. But Ted Woodhead, Telus’ vice-president of telecom policy and regulatory affairs, said the company is against a monthly notice on consumers’ bills because not all carriers have the same printing capabilities. “They have different abilities in terms of the limited amount of characters that can go in that field. Some of them don’t have the ability to generate short information messages at all because their invoicing system does not provide for that functionality,” he said, adding that it would require a new set of fields on bill. “It would probably cost us in the millions of dollars.” Woodhead suggested it may be more efficient for the CCTS to use public service announcements, adding that the agency needs a “reasonable budget” for public awareness initiatives. On Monday CCTS commissioner Howard Maker told the commission the agency spent its promotional budget last year on rebuilding its website and creating a brochure. But Maker said the agency’s offices are inundated with phone calls from consumers after a notice is published on bills. “We know that is by far the most effective tool to get the name of CCTS in front of consumers,” he said. He added that the CCTS is considering the use of public service announcements. CRTC commissioner Michel Morin asked Maker if he thought it would be more efficient to publish a standard notice on bills every month, but Maker said CCTS members could only reach a consensus to do it biannually. Commissioner Morin also suggested that the notification be placed prominently on the first page of consumers’ bills. Cable companies Cogeco, Shaw, Quebecor and Rogers, which presented jointly before the commission Tuesday, said they supported a shift to voluntary CCTS membership after three years, adding they would likely remain members if the agency continues with its current mandate. Right now, telecommunications service providers with annual revenues over $10 million are required to be CCTS members. The hearings wrap up Wednesday. kfournier@thewirereport.ca

Telcos opposed to monthly CCTS publicity on bills

News | 11/30/2010 11:25 pm EST

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us