Wireless code hasn’t had expected effect on churn: PIAC

GATINEAU, QUE. — The Wireless Code has been a positive development for consumers in the three years since its implementation, consumer groups said on the first day of the CRTC's hearing on the Wireless Code Monday, adding that itseffect on encouraging customers to switch providers hasn't been fully realized. “I think the full effect of the Wireless Code's intended market dynamism hasn't really come through yet,” John Lawford, who represented the coalition of consumer interest groups—consisting of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, the Consumer Association of Canada, the National Pensioners Federation and the Council of Senior Citizens Organizations of British Columbia, said during his appearance in front of the panel. Lawford said that code has also helped address “unfair practices and irritants,” including bill shock and “unlocking other service fees,” but that it hasn’t led to a lot of customers switching providers, as expected would happen once it was implemented. He said that “it's been frustrating that the churn has become so low, it's ridiculously low in Canada, it's only two per cent—that's not a vibrant market," and that he had expected that churn would increase with awareness of the code. To raise awareness, the coalition recommended "regular, periodic bill notifications of the Wireless Code" and requiring service providers to deliver automated messages and texts stating the customer has rights under the code. CRTC chairman Jean-Pierre Blais responded that might mean customers are “satisfied with their service provider and the quality of the service they get." Lawford said issues that are still outstanding include short trial periods, normally 15 days, high unlocking fees, which prevents the use of foreign SIM cards and the ability to resell used phones, and low awareness of consumers' rights under the code. Also presenting in front of a panel was a group of researchers from the University of Ottawa, who revealed research that it conducted using a “mystery shopper” study involving six telecommunications providers between July and September 2016. Based on twelve visits, the research found that no one mentioned the code, contracts were unavailable to consumers prior to purchase, none mentioned or discussed trial periods, and four out of six providers did not discuss unlocking, while only one explained how to unlock and how much it would be. The group recommended, in its opening presentation, that there be an “interactive checklist,” on a website or through an app, that would allow consumers to deal with their needs. “Introducing such a resource to consumers in their pre-purchase market research could arguably improve their overall in-store transactions,” the researchers said in their presentation. The group also recommended that a coalition of sorts be brought together, which would be composed of providers, regulators, consumers and “informational intermediaries” to address awareness and information issues. The four-day hearing that began Monday is intended to help the commission see how companies have been complying with the code, which was implemented in December 2013, as well as collect data to asses its effectiveness and correct issues, Blais said in his opening statements. Among other measures, the code effectively eliminated three-year contracts. On the topic of unlocking fees, Bragg Communications Inc.'s Eastlink and Telus Corp. both set fees at $50, they said during their presentations Monday. The coalition said that there should be no fee, provided the customer pays for the device. However, where a customer hasn't paid the subsidy, the fee should be “considerably less” than $50. In the questioning phase, Lawford said perhaps $10 could be something to look at, but climbing toward $30 is unreasonable. The coalition added that unlocking fees have either stayed the same or have gone up. It said there is “enough evidence” for the commission to “be more prescriptive” on that matter. On the matter of trial periods, Eastlink said that its customers have generally not made the 15-day period an issue. But the coalition said that trial period is not only too short to even get “key documents” outlining the trial limits, but the limits themselves are too low. For example, it uses the example of BCE Inc. and Telus' 50 MB data limit as something that can consumed in “a few hours.” The group said it recommends usage limits for trial periods be half of a subscriber's monthly limit. On several of occasions during the hearing, the Commissioner for Complaints for Telecommunications Services' (CCTS) annual report, released in November, was used to measure the impact of the code. The CCTS, which is an independent organization that manages telecommunications-related complaints, found in that report that customer complaints were down 18 per cent in 2016 and have been on the decline for three consecutive years. The panel also asked about customers' low awareness of the CCTS. Currently, providers are asked to notify customers about going to the CCTS if they have a complaint that goes to a second escalation, but it is not mandated by the code. Both Eastlink and Telus said that while it does notify customers of that, it doesn't feel it necessary that it should built into the code. When asked what's the one point of clarification that could be made to the code, Lawford said that the critical information summaries should be presented better and that language needs to be more accessible because there hasn't been an assessment of the reading level of consumers of the code. Telus said the Wireless Code has been a positive development that provides clarity and transparency. However, it said that provincial legislation has over the last three years conflicted with the code. For example, it said it was prevented from making its roaming service “Easy Roam” a default service without express consumer consent, which Manitoba and Quebec legislation mandates, it said in its opening statement. It said without these conflicts, bill shock could be further reduced. For that, Telus recommends that the CRTC declare the Wireless Code as the “sole governing national standard, regardless of any provincial law,” it said in its remarks. On the topic of shared plans, which have grown in the industry since the code was implemented, Telus said its default offering on those plans allows anyone on the plan to approve overage and it said it doesn't have a plan in place to make the account holder the sole controller of that. The coalition said that the account holder should have sole control of approval to avoid bill shock, with some leeway for a spouse to share control. It cited public opinion research suggesting that more people on shared plans (28 per cent) experience bill shock than those on individual plans (19 per cent). — With reporting by Ahmad Hathout at ahathout@thewirereport.ca and editing by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca

Wireless code hasn’t had expected effect on churn: PIAC

News | 02/06/2017 11:59 pm EST

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Related Stories

CRTC seeking comment about removal of advertising limits

Briefs | 10/06/2022 2:14 pm EDT

Group suing CRTC worried language-minority groups will get left out of consultations, Senate hears

News | 10/06/2022 10:51 am EDT

Senator claims privilege over Digital First lobbying letter

News | 10/05/2022 12:08 pm EDT

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us