OTTAWA – The Canadian Network Operators Consortium has filed an application with the CRTC asking that a number of new regulations be applied to cable company ISPs who are not fairly treating its members acting as third party internet access providers.
The independent TPIAs (such as Teksavvy, Primus and Telnet) who provide internet service to their customers by purchasing wholesale high speed access service from the likes of Cogeco, Rogers, Shaw and Videotron say that either through malice or indifference their businesses are being seriously harmed by the cable companies and the CRTC must step in.
“This is necessary because ISPs, who are members of CNOC, are being treated in an unduly discriminatory manner by the carriers relative to the manner that the carriers treat their own retail operations, contrary to section 27(2) of the (Telecommunications) Act,” reads the CNOC application, filed on Friday. The “vastly inferior treatment” the independent ISPs suffer through “detrimentally and unfairly affects the reputation of ISPs that rely on TPIA services to provide high-speed Internet access and related services to their end-users.”
The cable companies in question are often very slow to react to requests from the independent ISPs to hook up new customers and respond poorly when service to those TPIA customers is interrupted, added the application.
“If this situation is allowed to persist, the very legitimacy of the TPIA platform as a means of promoting competition (which was aided by the CRTC’s 2011 capacity-based billing model) in the provision of retail Internet access and other high-speed services will be irreparably diminished,” says the application. “Such an outcome will ultimately lead to an undue lessening of competition in the provision of the retail services that the TPIA platform is meant to support. That outcome is clearly not in the interest of consumers, or in the broader public interest.”
The CNOC application details “persistent and repeated service shortcomings at virtually every stage of Internet provisioning (that) have seriously damaged the business reputation of many TPIA ISPs. As a consequence, the entire TPIA industry is undermined. The current state of TPIA has led to formal customer complaints and regular media coverage,” it reads. “In an effort to preserve customer support, some ISPs have reached out to their subscriber base and communicated their intent to resolve the situation with the carriers and the Commission. If the remedies ordered by the Commission are not successful in reversing sub-standard service delivery by the carriers, then ISPs will be unable to reverse the damage to their business reputation and to the viability of competitive TPIA services in general.”
Since the independent ISPs generally do not have networks of their own in which to provide service to homes and businesses and instead rent space in order to re-sell to their own customers, the ISPs rely on the network owners in order to provide service and “it is this dependence that provides the justification for regulatory intervention when problems arise that carriers are not motivated to cure on their own initiative,” reads the application.
”CNOC acknowledges that TPIA service issues will arise from time-to-time. CNOC members accept the fact that the operation of complex, dynamic and vast cable networks involve unavoidable service disruptions. What is unacceptable is when carriers either: (1) design the TPIA service and network elements so as to provide an inferior level of service compared to what the carriers deliver to their own retail customers; or (2) do not respond to the service disruptions of their TPIA customers with the same degree of vigilance and urgency that ensures efficient resolution of issues which affect their own retail services. Even beyond the resolution of network disruptions, carriers simply do not provide TPIA services at standards that foster competition – and they do so to their own benefit,” adds the application.
While the application did not name the CNOC member company or companies used in its examples, it noted one member had to wait two years before Rogers would even respond to its request to offer TPIA service “and the ISP has yet to obtain service due to incessant delays and wholly inadequate service from Rogers’ account team,” says the application.
When it comes to installations for individual independent ISP customers “Videotron has taken up to 20 days to complete installations” for one member company. “Similarly, Cogeco has taken up to 15 days to complete installations,” adds the CNOC submission. “Rogers has taken an average of 8-10 days for new installations and 17.25 days for customer transfers (which do not involve an on-site technician visit)… since June of 2013.”
And when it comes to agreed upon installation windows or needed service calls, CNOC says the cable carriers actions, or inactions, are alarming. “One particular CNOC member, who obtains TPIA service from four carriers, reported that its installation windows were altered on the very day of the scheduled installation between 40 and 300 times since June 2013, depending on the carrier,” says the application. “Moreover, this same ISP reported that the technician never even showed up to a scheduled installation between 40 and 200 times, depending on the carrier, over that same time period.
“Other CNOC members, who have had similar experiences, also report uncooperative behavior from the technicians deployed by the carriers. For example, ISP end-users have reported various instances of technicians ‘feather knocking’ at doors (knocking so lightly that no one hears) or hanging up on a call to the premises after a few rings. In these situations, the premise visit has to be rescheduled,” and the ISP’s customers are understandably riled.
CNOC’s 79-page application is demanding the CRTC take action to direct the cable companies to stop “unjustly” discriminating against TPIAs and offers a series of remedies to the Commission that would result in new regulations, oversight and monitoring governing such things as the timing of customer connections, co-ordination of repair and network maintenance, improved access to tools carriers use to trouble-shoot network problems, better telephone support and stopping carrier employees or contractors from trying to sell customers on the cable company’s broadband product while they are there to service or install for the TPIA.
“When a TPIA customer’s end-users are out of service, the carrier’s efforts should be focused on restoring a working TPIA access as promptly as possible and not using the outstanding service issue as an opportunity to switch the customer to the carrier’s retail service instead,” says CNOC.
As well, if the carriers do not provide the quality of service the independent TPIA companies expect, there should be a rate rebate plan in place when the carriers violate the new rules. “CNOC is asking the Commission to introduce a series of Q of S indicators and a RRP in order to create some service standards in some basic areas that will improve the delivery of TPIA services to ISPs,” says the application. “It is important to note that this proposed regime is founded upon, and meant to mirror, the Q of S / RRP regime that has been in place since 2005 and applies to ILECs with respect to the delivery of wholesale services that competitors require to offer their own local voice services.”
It’s not known at this time what the CRTC will do with this lengthy, detailed, application, nor have the carriers responded yet to the allegations described within it.
– Greg O’Brien
