After a week of hearings, CRTC now must decide how to police telecoms
Consumer groups say ‘companies are in denial’ about magnitude of complaints
TORONTO Sales agents make mistakes, Canada’s largest telecommunications providers admitted at a public inquiry this week, an inevitable outcome when thousands of representatives sell a mix of internet, wireless, home phone and television services to millions of customers.
Regulators heard about an elderly woman who wanted home phone service but wound up with high speed internet; a man who agreed to pay a fixed price for internet for a year only to see his bill increase after a few months; a woman who said she had to call her provider 70 times to get what she wanted; and dozens of customers who signed up for one thing but say they got another.
This mismatch between expectations and reality was the most common grievance aired at the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission’s five-day hearing into whether telecoms use aggressive or misleading sales tactics.
The CRTC has until the end of February to determine the scope of the problem and what, if any, fix is needed. It must report proposed solutions to the federal government, which ordered it to investigate after reports of unethical sales tactics from customers and former employees.
Options include a new sales code of conduct, a mandatory cooling off period where customers could cancel without penalty and a ban on door-to-door telecom sales.
One thing is clear after a week of hearings — there’s a disconnect between consumers, small providers and large providers when it comes to perceptions over sales practices.
Consumer groups demanded more stringent rules to keep telecoms honest after reporting sales tactics some described as “abusive” and “predatory.” Smaller providers argued they’re already trustworthy and warned any extra rules would unfairly punish them for the sins of BCE Inc. and Rogers Communications Inc.
In Bell’s presentation, it said the vast majority of its customers are highly satisfied, according to internal surveys. But CRTC chairman Ian Scott juxtaposed this against the more than 650 Canadians that raised issues specifically about the company.
“I sense a disconnect between the care taken to identify suitability and the submissions on the record,” Scott said.
Rob Malcolmson, Bell’s senior vice-president of regulatory affairs, said Bell has 22 million customers and handles 54 million interactions annually. Though Bell said the complaints are not representative of its day-to-day business, it accepted responsibility for the incidents and said it used them as a learning opportunity.
“We spent the week listening to where the industry has dropped the ball. We’ve dropped the ball in some instances,” Malcolmson said.
Bell recommended that internet and telephone services comply with the “clarity of offer” provisions in the TV service providers code; a mandatory 30-day buyer’s remorse period without fees; mandatory written confirmation of any offer within 24 hours of an order; the creation of a “do-not-knock” list for customers that don’t want door-to-door sales; and a required whistleblower policy.
Earlier Friday, vice-chair Christianne Laizner grilled Rogers over complaints about expired promotions and bundled offers where it’s cheaper to get three services than two — even if a customer only really wants TV and telephone, or TV and internet.
“I think it’s happening because it’s not a dead simple offer to consumers,” said David Watt, Rogers’s senior-vice president of regulatory affairs.
To deal with the complexity, Rogers said it plans to email consumers written offers with all the critical terms by the second half of next year. It emphasized the importance of customer service, noting its chief executive, Joe Natale, sends a companywide email about customer complaints every Monday morning.
Rogers supports extending the clarity of offers provision to internet services — this requires providers to clearly state the duration of the offer, the regular price after a discount expires and the minimum commitment period — but doesn’t believe a new sales code is needed.
Telus Corp. also said it is not in favour of new regulation. It emphasized its customer-first approach, and defended door-todoor sales, calling them a critical tool in markets where it is building fibre-to-the-home connections.
Following the hearing, consumer groups were skeptical that all the complaints could be boiled down to one-off incidents.
“The companies are in denial,” said Public Interest Advocacy Centre executive director John Lawford. “They have major sales problems.”