Wireless issues top the list with largest share of complaints
By Ahmad Hathout
OTTAWA – A watchdog that fields telecommunications complaints said in a report released today that Canadian complaints about their services have dropped 25% compared to the same period last year, with wireless taking the top spot for issues and with some trending issues that one advocate said are “disturbing.”
All telecommunications services recorded by the Commission for Complaints for Telecom-Television Services reported declines in complaints for the 2021-2022 year compared to the previous 2020-2021 period. The CCTS said it resolved 88% of complaints, often within 30 days.
Wireless topped issues by a wide margin. Canadians raised 14,887 issues related to wireless services, making up 51% of the nearly 30,000 issues brought forth by the 12,790 complaints (complainants can raise multiple issues, hence the discrepancy between number of complaints and issues). That segment saw the smallest decrease in issues compared to other services, at a drop of 19% compared to the previous period, but is up from 44% of issues last year relative to the other services.
Disclosure issues, which are related to information not fully or clearly provided, made up the bulk of wireless issues at 15%. Incorrect charges was next at 13% of complaints, followed by quality of service at 7% and breach of contract at 6%. Roaming charges issues were up 130% compared to the previous year, while device financing plan issues increased the largest amount, by 142%.
Internet services came in second at 7,939 issues, or 27% of problems, but represented a decrease of 40% of segment issues compared to the previous period and is the lowest level over the last five years, the CCTS data show. The top issue in the segment, making up 17% was quality of service, but that figure decreased by 46% compared to last year – the most significant decline in the segment. Incorrect charge on monthly plans followed at 13% of issues, which is a decline of 31% over the year. That was followed by disclosure issues at 11% of issues, down by 39% over the same period.
Television issues made up 11%, with 3,327 complaints, for a decline of 35% of issues compared to TV complaints in the last period. Incorrect charges on monthly price plans was the leading issue in the segment at 15%, that’s down by 39% from last year. Disclosure issues followed, accounting for 14% of issues, a decrease of 41% from the same period last year. But issues related to complete loss of service increased by 11% from last year and accounted for 4% of complaints.
Local phone made up 10% of issues at 3,056 problems, a decline of 39% in the segment over the same period. Incorrect charges on monthly plans led the number of issues, amounting to 13% of all phone issues and down 41% from last year. That was followed by quality-of-service issues, which accounted for 10% of phone issues and down 28% from last year.
Disclosure problems and incorrect charges were tied at the top of issues, with each taking 13% of all service type issues. The number one disclosure issue was a mismatch between what a customer agreed to purchase and what their contract says, the CCTS said. The number two disclosure issue was lack of full disclosure on promotions; for example, lack of clarity on how long a discount will be applied over the contract period.
Telus was the only telecom listed by the CCTS to have an increase of complaints compared to last year, at an increase of 4%. However, the Vancouver-based, third-largest telecom only made up 9% of total issues, which is lower than issue leader Bell at 20% and Rogers and its flanker brand Fido at 16% and 9%, respectively. Despite leading in percentage of all issues, Bell saw a 49% decline in issues compared to the previous year, Rogers saw a 30% decrease, Fido a 20% decline, and Quebecor’s Videotron, which made up 7% of all issues, saw a decrease of 46% compared to the previous year. Shaw and its Freedom Mobile each had 5% of all issues with declines of 46% and 24% respectively, while Cogeco made up 1% of complaints, representing a decline of 37% over the year.
Other issues outlined by the CCTS included general billing issues, slow internet speeds, customers not being informed of planned outages, devices being paid off but monthly fees remaining the same (device payments are normally baked into the monthly charge) and customers being unclear about early termination fees.
“We suggest that providers explore simpler ways of articulating device subsidies to avoid confusion and future complaints,” the CCTS said. “Providers should also train their representatives to be able to accurately explain cancellation scenarios. We encourage consumers to ask questions during sales transactions and review their contracts carefully to make sure they understand payment requirements for scenarios such as early termination or when the financing arrangement ends.”
In a statement today, John Lawford, executive director and general counsel of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, noted a “disturbing spike” in consumers not realizing their cellphones “may have hundreds or thousands of dollars remaining payable even when the nominal term of their contract is over or they wish to switch to a competitor mid-contract.
“The problem of non-transparent financing for ultra-high cost cellphones is the next huge consumer trap, and one that destroys the Wireless Code,” Lawford added, “noting that nearly all new wireless contracts in Canada with a smartphone are now sold under this billing structure,” the statement said.
When asked whether the service provider told them about the CCTS during their efforts to resolve the problem, nearly 87% of respondents said “no,” the CCTS said. When asked if they saw a notice on their bills about the CCTS, which is required by the watchdog, 84% said “no.” And when asked if they had seen information prominently displayed on the service provider’s website about the CCTS, 69% said “no.”
“The industry has an obligation to refer customers to the CCTS when their complaint is escalated and not resolved adequately, but the CCTS found in nearly 9 out of 10 of these cases they do not,” said John Lawford, executive director and general counsel of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, in a statement today. “The CCTS should count these failures to refer as an additional complaint – as is done in Australia,” he said, adding the CCTS should change its name to something like “Communications Ombudsman” so that it’s easier for consumer to remember.
In a statement to Cartt, Rogers said, “We are committed to delivering the best experience for our customers in every interaction we have. Over the report period, we saw a 18% decline in the number of complaints, but we recognize even one complaint is one too many and are committed to listening to our customers and using their feedback to help us improve.”
In a press release, Telus pointed to the fact that it had the fewest complaints among the national players, which it said is a streak in its 11th-straight year. “The investments we make in our world-leading networks and customer service team continue to set us apart from our national peers,” Zainul Mawji, executive vice-president and president of Home Solutions and customer excellence, said in the release. “While we are proud of our longstanding leadership position, we are focused on finding ways to improve and we will not be satisfied until we receive zero complaints. I want to thank our customers for their loyalty and feedback, and our entire TELUS team who go above and beyond every single day.”
Bell pointed to the reduction in its share of complaints versus its national rivals. “Our impressive CCTS results highlight the positive effects of our team’s commitment to delivering customer-first service experiences,” said Bell president and CEO Mirko Bibic in a release. “I am so proud of the progress we’ve made to match our accelerated broadband network expansion investments with enhancements to our customer service processes and digital self-serve platforms. We recognize that the journey continues and we strive every day to make it easier for our customers to do business with Bell. Thank you to #TeamBell for clearly making a difference.”
This story has been updated with comments from Telus and Bell in the last two paragraphs.
