Was a regulatory proceeding necessary?

The CRTC issued a ruling yesterday on the Consumer Association of Canada’s filing from last December regarding a billing error by Bell that resulted in some customers being charged $2.80 per month for touchtone service. According to the filings, Bell had already corrected the billing for the customer.

The charges began after Bell conducted a “revenue assurance” audit on its lines – trying to ensure that their billing matched the services being provided by the network. In the case of this customer, touchtone was provisioned in the network, but wasn’t being billed. The customer, a grandfathered rotary customer (prior to mandatory touch tone charges), claimed that they had never asked for touchtone.

The relief provided by the CRTC was to endorse what Bell was doing:

sending a letter to all affected customers that may have been inappropriately charged the monthly rate for Touch-Tone service. The Commission considers that Bell Canada is taking steps to rectify the inappropriate charging of the Touch-Tone service monthly rate and is satisfied with the approach proposed by Bell Canada.

The consumer group has asked for its costs to be reimbursed; the CRTC has told them to file an application in accordance with the rules.

So the question is why this needed to go to the CRTC in the first place? The lawyers know each other. Did they speak in advance to try to settle without a public proceeding? Was it a slow winter and they needed a case to keep busy?

Each year, the regulatory chiefs get together to debate issues at The 2010 Canadian Telecom Summit, taking place June 7-9. The Regulatory Blockbuster, on Tuesday June 8, has become a highlight of the event – with representatives from Bell, TELUS, Rogers, Allstream, Globalive and PIAC.

Have you registered yet? Prices increase on Monday. Register today to save $250 per person.

Download the complete conference brochure.

Scroll to Top