Crosstalk phone incident in Niagara region potentially caused by lightning strike, Rogers says

A case of misconnected phone calls in the Niagara region of Ontario last month might have begun due to a lightning strike, according to Rogers Communications Inc. The telecom provider has told the CRTC in a response to the regulator’s request for information on the incident that a “small amount” of Rogers’ wireless to Bell wireline traffic switched from a working port to a protection port on Rogers’ legacy patch cords in the Niagara region because of a suspected lightning strike, though the “trigger for this event remains under investigation.” After reports that people calling voice lines in the Niagara region of Ontario one day in late July were being connected to random strangers’ phone calls instead of reaching those they intended to speak with, customers raised privacy concerns and the Internet Society’s Canadian chapter demanded inquiries from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner and the CRTC. Some callers reported hearing sensitive information they should not have, such as a conversation between a patient and their doctor. The CRTC had asked both Rogers and BCE Inc. to explain what happened and what they are doing to avoid similar issues in the future. Rogers investigating lightning as potential cause “We note that a lightning strike was detected at the incident site, coinciding closely with the onset of the reported issue. This is being analyzed further as a possible cause,” Rogers wrote in a letter to the commission dated Aug. 15. The steps the company is taking to avoid a similar problem in the future are redacted in the public document, as they have been filed in confidence with the CRTC due to concerns about network security and competition. Some customers of Rogers’ flanker brands Fido and Chatr were also affected. Rogers said that “unfortunately, we are not able to tell the total number of calls that were impacted, and it cannot be determined.” The company said that “only a single voice path” was affected, though it has various trunk groups with Bell in the Niagara area. It said it was the first time this kind of problem has happened since this particular network configuration came into play with Bell in 2011. Bell said in its own response to the CRTC that it does not have a way to technically detect crosstalk issues on its network, so it cannot give the CRTC a “precise count” of how many of its customers were affected. “Calls between Bell customers, or between Bell customers and non-Rogers customers, were not affected,” the telecom provider noted. Rogers says updated technology could have made the problem avoidable from Bell’s side. “Since Bell (wireline) only supports legacy TDM circuit technology for all local interconnections in its ILEC territories, when a transport failure causes TDM circuit mapping misalignment, crosstalk can occur. “It is important to note that this problem does not exist over IP interconnections. Like Rogers, various carriers in Canada have already adopted IP technology for their local interconnections.” Bell manager of public affairs Patricia Garcia told The Wire Report in an email that “Rogers’ implication that the root cause of the incident was Bell’s continued use of legacy TDM technology is misleading. It is Rogers’ responsibility to properly connect to Bell’s TDM access network and ensure crosstalk doesn’t happen.” Bell said it “takes several steps” to avoid such issues on its own network, including “rigorous cable repair and maintenance procedures…,” migrating customers from older copper networks to fibre-optic infrastructure, and working with partner TSPs “to ensure that any future interconnection issues are quickly identified and resolved.” Rogers took the opportunity to pitch in its response to the CRTC that all telecom service providers (TSPs) should have to move to IP interconnections. “With IP-based interconnections, transport failures no longer introduce the risk of crosstalk, not to mention other important advantages such as enhanced network redundancy, rapid trunk dimensioning, STIR/SHAKEN, etc. It is time for mandated migration to IP interconnections for all TSPs in Canada,” the company wrote. Those interested in submitting comments on the responses provided by Rogers and Bell have until Sept. 15 to do so, after the CRTC extended the deadline from Aug. 25. Internet Society says more transparency needed in information review process The CRTC’s information retrieval process has a critic in Matthew Gamble, vice chair with the Canadian chapter of the Internet Society. He voiced concerns with the CRTC about accessibility of the file to the general public. Prior to the original August deadline for submitting comments, Gamble wrote that “the public cannot easily locate the carriers’ submissions on the commission’s website, making it practically impossible for interested parties to provide informed comments by the August 25 deadline.” He was also concerned about information filed confidentially to the CRTC by Bell and Rogers without other parties having the chance to request further disclosure of that information, and asked the CRTC to “correct” the process of this file. “The normal four-step process — filing confidential information, opportunity for disclosure requests, reply by the designating party, and a commission determination — ensures fairness and transparency. By omitting these steps, the current process risks denying the public a meaningful opportunity to test confidentiality claims and request disclosure,” Gamble’s letter states. In response, Rogers argued that it is “unnecessary to expand or further formalize this inquiry,” calling it a “minor and isolated issue” affecting a “very small number of customers.” It based its assessment that a small number of people were impacted on the “total number of complaints we received.” “As the commission has seen in our RFI responses, which can be viewed by the public once posted, we have fully addressed all of the CRTC’s concerns. There is therefore no reason to create additional administrative burdens on either the carriers or the commission itself,” the company wrote. Gamble wrote that the society disagrees with that notion. “This incident — where calls were misrouted and private conversations overheard — is of significant public interest. Ensuring accountability and maintaining public confidence in Canada’s telecommunications networks requires a full and formal inquiry, rather than a summary dismissal of the matter as ‘minor and isolated.’” hdaley@thewirereport.ca

Crosstalk phone incident in Niagara region potentially caused by lightning strike, Rogers says

Regulatory |
By Hannah Daley
| August 26, 2025

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Crosstalk phone incident in Niagara region potentially caused by lightning strike, Rogers says

Regulatory | By Hannah Daley | August 26, 2025

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

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

UPDATED: WildBrain dropping TV broadcast business

Former Disney exec joins Bell Media as company launches streaming bundle

Bell ‘disappointed’ by feds upholding CRTC wholesale decision, expects fibre footprint to ‘plateau’

Toronto seniors without Bell service for seven weeks following fire

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Regulatory |
By Hannah Daley
| August 26, 2025