Comp Bureau investigating Bell sales practices, going to court for CCTS info

The Competition Bureau is going to court to compel the Commission for Complaints for Telecom-Television Services (CCTS) to hand over information related to its investigation into the alleged unfair sales practices of BCE Inc., according to court records. Earlier this month, the bureau filed a notice of motion in Federal Court to get information from the CCTS for its review of the telecom’s sales practices, following media reports that Bell was engaged in misleading customers of its services. The bureau said it would support the CRTC’s review of the same matter last year. The documents reveal that on August 3, the bureau launched an inquiry into Bell’s practices after commencing a “preliminary examination” in March 2018, which followed those media reports. This is the first time the investigation is being made public. According to court filings obtained by The Wire Report, the bureau said it has “reason to believe” Bell had misled the public on its services and turned to the CCTS, which fields complaints from customers, to get specific complaint records as part of its investigation. It is asking for records dating back to Jan. 1, 2017, which is the time it believes Bell has been engaging in the practices. The bureau said it has received 65 complaints related to the practices since that date. A hearing on the matter is scheduled for Thursday. Bureau spokesman Jayme Albert said in an email that the agency, by law, conducts investigations confidentially, and could not comment on why Bell is the only telecom being investigated. Because the Bell investigation is still ongoing, there is “no conclusion of wrongdoing at this time,” Albert added. The CCTS does not accept complaints related to clarity of offers and promotions, as well as false or misleading advertising and pricing, the documents say. The bureau said its investigation has revealed that there are a “number of ways” consumers are being misled by Bell, including being told quoted prices would not rise during a fixed term, that they would be able to renew services at promo prices even after the promo ends, and that some of them would have fibre services when they only had copper wires running to their homes. In fact, it revealed that its own officers have been “the recipients of false or misleading representations during on-line chat sessions with Bell residential sales specialists, at the door by third-party marketing agents and in-person at Bell corporate retail stores.” The watchdog is now seeking a subset of complaint information, including the complainant’s name, contact information, the nature of incidents, the code breaches, the customer’s initial complaint details and the date the complaint was submitted. All relate to Bell’s residential services marketed in-person at corporate or third-party retail stores, online and door-to-door and which are tagged by the CCTS as “out of scope” for false or misleading advertising. It also wants to know the nature and frequency of these representations to the public. It is also asking about how the CCTS identifies and reports on issues and complaints related to the practices, how it conveys information to the providers related those issues, as well as to show which complaints were provided to Bell, which “generic” Bell email address is used by the CCTS to notify the company of the complaints and the “executive points of contact” the CCTS provides copies and follow-ups of complaints, including who specifically at Bell is currently receiving, reviewing and following-up on complaints. “The CCTS is likely to have information relevant to the Commissioner’s inquiry,” the bureau said in the court filing, adding during 2017 and 2018, the CCTS accepted over 4,000 complaints about Bell. To be specific, that annual report found Bell made up 33 per cent of accepted complaints. The bureau said the request is proportionate and not “unduly burdensome.” It is riding on subsection 11(1) of the Competition Act to get the information, which stipulates that a judge can order that information be handed over if there’s an inquiry and the information is relevant to that inquiry. The only time a bureau investigation is made public is through means including court proceedings and filing of charges, Albert said. In February, NDP MP Brian Masse asked the bureau to launch an inquiry into the matter. The nature of a court proceeding is typically adversarial, but in this case, it’s not. The CCTS, the documents say, was fully cooperative with the bureau. It was on the advice of the CCTS that the bureau compelled it through a court order, because it said it cannot reveal the information on a voluntary basis due to a confidentiality clause in its participation agreement with the providers, the documents show. The major service providers are members of the CCTS. The CCTS "is aware that the Commissioner of Competition is investigating Bell Canada and Bell Aliant," it said in an emailed statement. "The CCTS intends to cooperate with the as required by any court order," it said, adding it cannot give any further comments because it's an ongoing investigation. Since being handed a full five-year term as commissioner of competition, Matthew Boswell has raised some eyebrows with his discovery requests. He is attempting to compel wireless service providers to hand him what they consider sensitive information related to the CRTC’s review of the mobile wireless framework. The bureau is already studying whether broadband competition is sufficient. In September 2018, Boswell sent letters to 12 Canadian video streaming operators asking them to conduct their own reviews into the clarity and transparency of their marketing practices. Before that, in June, Innovation Minister Navdeep Bains ordered the CRTC to initiate a public inquiry to “determine what recommendations are required to deal with these high pressure sales tactics.” The call lead to a hearing on the matter, a subsequent CRTC finding that an “unacceptable degree” of such misleading practices do exist in the industry, a report, and a consultation on a proposed internet service provider code of conduct. The bureau has previously sought and obtained court orders to further its investigations. In December, it convinced a court to require one former and five current employees of Torstar to be interviewed under oath, in relation to a newspaper deal the company struck with Postmedia. — With reporting by Ahmad Hathout at ahathout@thewirereport.ca and editing by Anja Karadeglija at akarad@thewirereport.ca

Comp Bureau investigating Bell sales practices, going to court for CCTS info

News | April 10, 2019

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us

Comp Bureau investigating Bell sales practices, going to court for CCTS info

News | April 10, 2019

Unlock all the Canadian telecom, broadcasting and digital media news you need.

FREE TRIAL

SUBSCRIBE

Related Stories

Telecoms testing their networks for the future of quantum connectivity

Telus’ arguments for incumbent access to wholesale regime not supported by competitors

Bell won’t participate in subsidized broadband projects if wholesale access for Big Three continues, signs agreement with CNOC

Rogers’ purchase of Bell’s MLSE stake not being challenged by Competition Bureau ‘at this time’

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us