Consumer groups tell Commission most problems likely go unreported
GATINEAU – No one is disagreeing telecom sales practices can and should be improved. The companies know this and so do the consumers and consumer groups.
But, how deeply do the problems run? The telecom companies have said, for the most part, the bare number of complaints made to the CCTS annually and to the CRTC in this proceeding collectively point to sporadic, small problems which are inevitable given the tens of millions of customer interactions they log every month. Even counting all of the complaints from all sources, the total is less than one tenth of one percent of their entire number of customer contacts, pointing to largely happy customers. As for the potentially fraudulent or abusive actors detailed in the CBC stories which precipitated this hearing? Those are a few bad apples they are constantly on the watch for and rid themselves of when identified.
Essentially, this proceeding is more than a bit overblown to those viewing it from that angle.
Consumer groups, however, told the CRTC during day two of the hearing into telecom sales practices that the complaints, surveys and statistics do, in fact, point to systematic problems in the system, especially when you factor in the number of angry consumers who just fume and don’t file a formal complaint, or who just shrug their shoulders and accept a deal they feel misled on, or those who don’t know where to complain or are too afraid to; or those who don’t know they are paying for a terrible deal or services they don’t use.
The sales practices described by consumers and various organizations in the opening two days of the hearing (some head-shakingly bad like the one where a widow had to visit a store twice to prove her husband died to cancel his wireless contract and was told by the store employee they weren’t allowed to offer condolences and instead be “all business,” said intervenor Stephen Bailey on Monday) points to “a general practice by these players and not just by unscrupulous workers,” said Anaïs Beaulieu-Laporte of Quebec consumer organization Union des consommateurs in French on Tuesday. She went on to say more Canadians are not filing official complaints to the CRTC or pursing matters with the CCTS because often “people can not even tell they are victims.”
Some among the carriers have taken issue with the CRTC’s public opinion research done by Ipsos which was released last week, decrying the questions as leading and the negative answers, preordained. Howard Deane, of the Consumers Council of Canada, was having none of that. “The findings of the Ipsos POR differ significantly from the claims of the LTCs (large telecom carriers) in these proceedings. It begs the question: Given the use of an appropriate methodology applied by a reputable and capable organization, how can these highly critical, statistically valid findings of the Ipsos POR vary so widely from the anecdotal and often unsupported claims of the LTCs, which are essentially ‘Move on, nothing to see here’?”
Indeed commissioners have asked everyone who has appeared so far if they believe the survey’s finding that 40% of Canadians have experienced aggressive or misleading sales tactics from telecom companies. All have either said yes, or thought the number was low. We’ll start to hear from the carriers themselves Wednesday.
“I’m alarmed with what I’m hearing,” added Kim Sawchuk, professor in communication studies at Concordia University and director of Ageing Communication Technologies, an international research project based at her school, during her appearance in front of the panel of commissioners. Seniors whom she deals with are increasingly reporting they feel “tricked” into buying telecom or broadband services they did not want, need, or would even use.
This, said Beaulieu-Laporte earlier, has a lot to do with how the telecom companies are set up to deal with consumers. Her members report approaching their service provider for technical or other help and instead of responding to the question for aid, instead immediately launch into a sales pitch. “This is an abusive sales practice,” she explained.
“I’m dealing with well-established Canadian companies. I’m not walking through a dark, isolated alley at night. I am trying to make sure I won't be ripped off by a deal too good to be true.” – Anne Caines, ACT
Some of the Canadians most vulnerable to aggressive sales tactics are seniors and some of them feel under attack when having to deal with often new, confusing technology and complex contracts facing them after a quick talk at a mall kiosk. This isn’t how it should be, said Anne Caines, a senior and a member of ACT (pictured above talking to CTV News).
“I am fortunate to be educated and relatively tech-savvy. Still, I need to be on guard when it comes to interacting with this industry,” she said. “But why should I be? I’m dealing with well-established Canadian companies. I’m not walking through a dark, isolated alley at night. I am trying to make sure I won't be ripped off by a deal too good to be true.”
Plus, many don’t want to feel the embarrassment of not knowing what they signed up for, or having to tell a stranger they simply can’t afford to pay for what they signed up for. “They don’t want to feel ashamed for not having much money,” added Sawchuk.
“They should have to bear some of the risks of those really rotten sales practices because they know they do a terrible job.” – John Lawford – PIAC
The Public Interest Advocacy Centre told commissioners it’s time the “buyer beware” burden be removed from Canadians. They are purchasing expensive services and devices from carriers, but the risk to understand the contract what they are signing up for all falls on the consumer said John Lawford (pictured), executive director and general counsel, and counsel to the Fair Communications Sales Coalition. There should be a way for them to pull out of a deal, especially shortly after signing it, should they suddenly regret the decision. PIAC is recommending a forced 15-day grace period for consumers to cancel such a contract with no penalty.
Right now, if a consumer is subject to an aggressive or misleading pitch leading them to sign a contract they regret, the companies have now “placed all those negative externalities of (the carriers’) sales practices on consumers,” 
explained Lawford. Instead though, “they should have to bear some of the risks of those really rotten sales practices because they know they do a terrible job,” and with a 15-day window where a customer can potentially walk away, those risks revert back to the company and might lead them to work harder at cleaning up their sales tactics, believes PIAC.
The group also noted that if the Commission really wants to boost the profile of the Commission for Complaints for Telecom-Television Services (CCTS), which tracks and helps solve telecom complaints, it could force carriers to regularly tell their customers about the CCTS in their bills – or even force telecom carrier-owned broadcasters to air public service announcements about the complaints agency.
The hearing continues tomorrow with some smaller network operators (Teksavvy, Tbaytel, Eastlink, Xplornet and Northwestel) facing the Commission.
