ARCHIVED - Telecom Decision CRTC 86-7

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. Archived Decisions, Notices and Orders (DNOs) remain in effect except to the extent they are amended or reversed by the Commission, a court, or the government. The text of archived information has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Changes to DNOs are published as “dashes” to the original DNO number. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.

	TELECOM DECISION
	Ottawa, 26 March 1986
	Telecom Decision CRTC 86-7
	REVIEW OF THE GENERAL REGULATIONS OF THE FEDERALLY REGULATED TERRESTRIAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMON CARRIERS
	TERMS OF SERVICE
	For related documents see: CRTC Telecom Public Notices 1983-56, 1983-68, 1983-75 and 1985-22.
	Table of Contents
	1. INTRODUCTION
	2. PROCEDURAL ISSUES
	2.1 Exceptions to this Proceeding 2.2 Implementation of the Terms of Service 2.3 Information to Customers 2.4 French Versions of the Terms of Service
	3. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
	3.1 Balancing of Competing Interests 3.2 Uniformity Among the Carriers
	4. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DETERMINATIONS REGARDING TERMS OF SERVICE
	4.1 Limitation of Carrier Liability 4.2 Obligation to Provide Service 4.3 Company Right to Enter Premises 4.4 Two-Party and Four-Party Service 4.5 Confidentiality of Customer Records 4.6 Payment Time Limit and Company-Initiated Suspension or Termination of Service
	5. COMMISSION DETERMINATIONS REGARDING RELATED PROPOSALS IN PUBLIC NOTICE 1985-22
	5.1 Notification of General Rate Increases 5.2 Quality of Service Standards 5.3 Classification of Service 5.4 Annoying or Offensive Calls or Messages 5.5 Telephone and Telex Directories 5.6 Elimination of Advance Payments Provision 5.7 Deposits 5.8 Billing and Payment 5.9 Dispute Procedures 5.10 Discontinuance of Certain Rules
	1. INTRODUCTION
	In CRTC Telecom Public Notice 1983-56, dated 8 September 1983 (Public Notice 1983-56), the Commission announced a public proceeding to review and, where appropriate, revise the General Regulations (the Regulations) of the four telephone companies under its jurisdiction. These companies are Bell Canada (Bell), British Columbia Telephone Company (B.C. Tel), NorthwesTel Inc. (NorthwesTel) and Terra Nova Telecommunications Inc. (Terra Nova), collectively referred to as the telephone companies.
	On 8 September 1983, the Commission published a document entitled Review of the General Regulations of the Federally Regulated Telephone Companies: Discussion Paper (the discussion paper), to accompany Public Notice 1983-56. In the discussion paper, the Commission reviewed its experience with, and proposed possible changes to, the Regulations of the telephone companies. In Public Notice 1983-56, the Commission called for comments on the discussion paper and indicated that, after it considered these comments, it intended to issue revised Regulations, in draft form, for further public comment.
	In CRTC Telecom Public Notice 1983-68, dated 28 October 1983, the Commission announced that it was adding the Regulations of CNCP Telecommunications (CNCP) to the review proceeding.
	The Regulations of the telephone companies and of CNCP (collectively referred to as the carriers) set out many of the basic rights and responsibilities of the carriers and of their customers regarding tariffed services and equipment.
	After considering the submissions of interested parties on the discussion paper, the Commission issued CRTC Telecom Public Notice 1985-22, dated 6 March 1985 (Public Notice 1985-22), which presented draft revised Regulations, which were renamed Terms of Service (the draft Terms). This public notice also proposed certain other changes which would not be reflected in these Terms of Service.
	Comments in response to Public Notice 1985-22 were received from 23 individuals and organizations, including the following: Nigel David Allen; Canadian Business Telecommunications Alliance (CBTA); Canadian Federation of Communications Workers (CFCW); Canadian Independent Telephone Association (CITA); Consumers' Association of Canada - National Office (CAC); Consumers' Association of Canada - Whitehorse Branch (CAC-W); Federated Anti-Poverty Groups of British Columbia and the B.C. Old Age Pensioners' Organization (FAPG et al); David H. Flaherty; Government of British Columbia (Government of B.C.); Government of Ontario (Ontario); Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (Privacy Commissioner); and, Planned Parenthood Society of Hamilton (Planned Parenthood of Hamilton)
	Replies were received from several interested parties, including the carriers.
	The Commission has considered these comments and replies and has made its final determinations. The revised Regulations, renamed Terms of Service (the Terms), are set out in Appendix I to this decision. The Commission's determinations on specific Articles in the Terms, on the additional proposals contained in Public Notice 1985-22, and on several procedural issues and general considerations are summarized below.
	2. PROCEDURAL ISSUES
	2.1 Exceptions to this Proceeding
	As identified in Public Notice 1983-56, or as a result of various proceedings instituted by the Commission thereafter, the following matters were not examined in depth in the course of this proceeding:
	(a) the attachment of subscriber-provided terminal equipment to the carriers' networks (Rule 9, Bell, B.C. Tel; Item 14.a, CNCP; Items 107B and 107C, Terra Nova, NorthwesTel)*;
	* References to Rule and Item numbers in parenthesis refer to the Regulations currently in force.
	(b) the resale of telecommunications services (Rule 18, Bell, B.C. Tel; Item 9.a, CNCP; Item 107A, Terra Nova, NorthwesTel);
	(c) the overall quality of service provided by the carriers [CNCP Telecommunications, Increase in Rates - 781982400, Telecom Decision CRTC 79-7, 12 April 1979, (Decision 79-7), and Quality of Service Indicators for Use in Telephone Company Regulation, Telecom Decision 82-13, 9 November 1982, (Decision 82-13)] and the content of possible quality of service criteria which could be applied on an individual subscriber basis;
	(d) telecommunications-related matters covered by federal statutes, such as the Criminal Code, which are not administered by the Commission;
	(e) account itemization for multiline subscribers [Bell Canada and British Columbia Telephone Company - Implementation of Decision Permitting Attachment of Subscriber-Provided Terminal Equipment, Telecom Decision CRTC 84-11, 30 March 1984, (Decision 84-11). NorthwesTel Inc. - Implementation of Decision Permitting Attachment of Subscriber-Provided Terminal Equipment, TeIecom Decision CRTC 84-12, 24 April 1984, (Decision 84-12), and Terra Nova Telecommunications Inc. - Implementation of Decision Permitting Attachment of Subscriber-Provided Terminal Equipment, Telecom Decision CRTC 84-13, 24 April 1984, (Decision 84-13)];
	(f) Automatic Dialing-Announcing Devices (Use of Automatic Dialing-Announcing Devices, Telecom Decision CRTC 85-2, 4 February 1985);
	(g) newspaper advertisements notifying customers of general rate increase applications (Telecom Order CRTC 85-48, 8 February 1985).
	The Terms contain revised wording of the Regulations in respect of (a) above (see Article 8.4 of the Terms). In respect of (b) above, some changes in wording in the related Terms (see Article 8.5) have been made in the cases of NorthwesTel and Terra Nova and more changes may arise regarding all the carriers due to the Commission's determination in the proceedings announced in CRTC Telecom Public Notice 1986-17, dated 24 February 1986, entitled Bell Canada - Resale, Sharing and Related Rate Revisions - Proposed Revisions to MTS/WATS, in CRTC Telecom Public Notice 1986-18, dated 24 February 1986, entitled British Columbia Telephone Company - Resale, Sharing and Related Rate Revisions and in CRTC Telecom Public Notice 1986-19, dated 24 February 1986, entitled CNCP Telecommunications, NorthwesTel Inc., Telesat Canada and Terra Nova Telecommunications Inc. - Resale, Sharing and Related Rate Revisions.
	2.2 Implementation of the Terms of Service
	On 1 May 1985, in a letter to interested parties, the Commission stated that a further round of comments would not be necessary before implementation of the Terms.
	In their replies on 12 June 1985, both Bell and B.C. Tel urged the Commission to allow interested parties to comment on the Terms before any implementation order. B.C. Tel was concerned that the Terms could differ substantially from the draft Terms, given the extent and diversity of the proposed revisions submitted by the interested parties. Bell submitted that implementation of the Terms would require substantial changes in administrative practices and automated systems.
	Bell stated that, if the Commission decided not to grant a further round of comments, a minimum of six months should be allowed to implement the Terms. Bell also submitted that, in such an event, the Commission decision should provide for flexibility so that carriers could defer implementation of specific Articles of the Terms upon application to, and approval by the Commission. It further stated that the Terms should be published in the Canada Gazette in accordance with s.62 of the National Transportation Act.
	In its 22 April 1985 response to Public Notice 1985-22, CNCP submitted that sufficient lead time should be allowed prior to the actual implementation of the Terms to facilitate orderly transition and to permit it to inform its employees of the changes.
	The Commission is of the view that the public process has been adequate and satisfactory and that no further round of comments is necessary. It has, however, adopted Bell's suggestion to allow a six month lead-time for implementing the Terms.
	Accordingly, the Commission directs the carriers to file for approval in both official languages, by 25 April 1986 proposed tariff revisions to implement the Terms within six months of the date of this decision. In accordance with past practice, the carriers will, upon request, be granted leave to publish the Terms in the Canada Gazette, pursuant to s.62 of the National Transportation Act.
	2.3 Information to Customers
	In Public Notice 1983-56, the Commission directed the telephone companies to advise their customers about the commencement of this proceeding by means of inserts mailed with their customers' monthly statements of account. As this proceeding has addressed and revised an important part of the individual customer's contract with the carrier, the Commission further directs the carriers to advise their customers, through a billing insert to be approved by the Commission, about the Terms before these Terms come into effect.
	2.4 French Versions of the Terms of Service
	The Commission notes that Bell and CNCP serve a significant proportion of their customers in both official languages and that both carriers have English and French versions of their Regulations. Given the Commission's desire for a uniform application of these Terms, it considers that both English and French versions of the Terms should be given equal weight throughout the operating territories of all the carriers.
	3. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
	The Terms are intended to update the existing Regulations to reflect changing circumstances, technology and carrier practices. In preparing the Terms, the Commission gave attention to the general considerations noted below.
	3.1 Balancing of Competing Interests
	The Commission has attempted to balance the rights and obligations of individual customers, those of the general body of customers as well as those of the carriers.
	In this endeavour, the Commission invited the carriers to provide estimates of the likely financial impact of the proposed changes to the Regulations as found in the draft Terms.
	Bell estimated the one-time costs associated with the introduction of the draft Terms to be about $405,000, and annual costs to be $520,000. These estimated costs related to the provision of additional information in directories, the increased itemization of customer accounts and the tracking of deposits. Although Bell was unable to estimate the impact of other proposed changes, including those affecting the carrier's liability, it noted that the possibility of increased damage claims could generate additional costs for administration, insurance and litigation.
	B.C. Tel estimated the cost of additional directory pages at $11,000 and cited other examples of additional cost elements, similar to those raised by Bell, which would be associated with the introduction of the Terms.
	Bell, CNCP, CAC, FAPG et al, and Ontario generally supported the balance struck by the draft Terms between the rights and obligations of customers and the carriers.
	In the Commission's view, additional costs to the carriers as a result of the implementation of the Terms are justified, given the need to establish Terms reflecting a better balance between the rights and obligations of customers and those of the carriers.
	3.2 Uniformity among the Carriers
	Unlike the Regulations, the Terms for each of the carriers are essentially uniform. However, due to the different nature of some of CNCP's operations, the Terms for CNCP are different in several instances.
	4. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DETERMINATIONS REGARDING TERMS OF SERVICE
	This section summarizes the Commission's determinations regarding changes to the draft Terms.
	The final Terms are set out in Appendix I to this decision; changes from the draft Terms are identified. Where no concerns were expressed by any party regarding a particular Article, that Article has generally been approved without change. Articles were approved without change where concerns expressed were restatements of those made in previous submissions without providing any new evidence or a different point of view.
	4.1 Limitation of Carrier Liability (Articles 1.2, 13.1, 15.1, 16.1 and 16.2)
	(a) Cases of Deliberate Fault or Gross Negligence (Article 1.2)
	In the draft Terms, the Commission proposed that the terms state expressly that a carrier's liability not be limited in cases of deliberate fault or gross negligence.
	The carriers, except Bell, opposed this proposal, arguing, for example, that it is difficult to distinguish between gross and simple negligence and that such a statement would lead to uncertainty and increased litigation. CAC, however, maintained that such a statement would clarify rights and obligations and that courts of law and Canadian statutes frequently distinguish between simple and gross negligence.
	The Commission notes that, in their comments on the discussion paper, Bell and B.C. Tel had argued that the current Regulations do not limit their liability in cases of deliberate fault or gross negligence.
	The Commission continues to believe that it would not be appropriate to limit carriers' liability in cases of deliberate fault or gross negligence. The Commission is of the view that the Terms should be explicit in this regard and that customers should be clearly informed of their rights. The Commission therefore has decided that Article 1.2 should expressly state that liability is not limited in cases of deliberate fault or gross negligence.
	(b) Gross Negligence and Breach of Contract (Articles 1.2 and 16.1)
	Bell, B.C. Tel and CAC argued that the references to gross negligence involving breach of contract, in Articles 1.2 and 16.1 of the draft Terms, are inappropriate. CAC suggested that the following phrase should be used instead: ... including breach of contract where the breach resulted from the gross negligence of the Company".
	The Commission accepts the essence of CAC's proposal and has changed Articles 1.2 and 16.1 of the draft Terms accordingly.
	(c) Directory Errors and Omissions (Article 13.1)
	In draft Article 13.1, the Commission proposed that, in cases of directory errors or omissions, the carriers be required to make a refund or cancel any charge proportionate to the length of the error or omission. It also proposed that, where a carrier is negligent, draft Article 16.1 would apply.
	Bell requested that the statement that the company is not liable for errors and omissions in its directory listings, as found in the current Regulations, be reintroduced because draft Article 13.1 did not preclude a customer from seeking further damages for breach of contract. NorthwesTel and Terra Nova agreed.
	The Commission agrees with the substance of Bell's position and has revised Article 13.1 to indicate that, in the absence of negligence, "the Company's liability is limited to making a refund or cancelling any charge...."
	(d) Refunds in Cases of Service Problems (Article 15.1)
	In draft Article 15.1, the Commission proposed that the carriers be required to provide refunds in a number of cases including interruptions, delays or defects. Where a problem is the result of company negligence, it proposed that draft Article 16.1 would also apply.
	Bell proposed to include a provision, currently found in the Regulations, to the effect that the company does not guarantee uninterrupted working of its service or equipment. Bell also stated that, under draft Article 15.1, a customer would once again not be precluded from seeking further damages before the courts for breach of contract.
	The Commission agrees with the substance of Bell's position and has amended draft Article 15.1 to indicate that, in the absence of negligence, the company's liability is limited to a refund of charges.
	Article 15.1 pertaining to CNCP has been modified so that it more closely corresponds with those pertaining to the telephone companies.
	(e) Limitation of Three Times the Applicable Rates and Charges (Article 16.1)
	In the draft Terms, draft Article 16.1 proposed that liability for negligence be limited to reasonably foreseeable damages, or three times the applicable tariffed rates and charges, whichever is less.
	Bell, B.C. Tel and CITA found the proposed limitation ambiguous and suggested that it be clarified. FAPG et al, NorthwesTel and Terra Nova agreed.
	The Commission acknowledges the concerns of these interested parties and has modified Article 16.1 in an effort to make it easier to determine the amount of liability. It has specified a minimum liability of $20.00, which would apply except, of course, where the reasonably forseeable damages are less than that amount. In cases of company negligence where there are mistakes, errors or interruptions, both the refund prescribed by Article 15.1 and the amount specified in Article 16.1 are to apply. Where directory errors or omissions are occasioned by company negligence, both the refund specified in Article 13.1 and the amount in Article 16.1 are to apply.
	(f) Exception for Physical Injuries, Death or Property Damage (Article 16.1)
	Draft Article 16.1 proposed that the carriers' liability for negligence should not be limited with regard to physical injuries, death or damages to premises or other property occasioned by their negligence.
	The carriers expressed concern about this proposed exception to their limitation of liability. The telephone companies submitted that they should not be responsible where physical injury, death or damage to property results indirectly from their negligence. CAC, however, supported Article 16.1 as proposed, stating that the carriers had not made a convincing argument to include a broader exclusionary clause.
	The Commission agrees with CAC that this provision should remain in Article 16.1 as proposed. It notes that the existing Regulations limit carrier liability for "damages" but generally not for physical injuries or death.
	(g) Inclusion of Several Non-Tariffed Services (Article 16.1
	B.C. Tel argued that the limitation of its liability should be extended to several non-tariffed services, namely intercept service, emergency service at coin telephones and directory information service.
	The Commission agrees that it would be appropriate to approve limitations of liability with respect to certain non-tariffed services which subscribers expect will be provided along with tariffed services. Draft Article 16.1 has been revised accordingly.
	4.2 Obligation to Provide Service (Article 3.1)
	In draft Article 3.1, the Commission proposed that the carriers be permitted to refuse service only in cases where applicants owe amounts that are past due, refuse to provide reasonably required deposits or alternatives, or refuse to assume unusual expenses which the carriers would have to incur.
	CBTA submitted that carriers should provide a written explanation if service cannot be provided or is delayed. B.C. Tel replied that this requirement would place an undue burden on the company and that verbal explanation, upon request, is sufficient.
	The Commission believes that written explanation should be provided on customer request. It has, as a result, made appropriate changes to draft Article 3.1 and included a new Article 3.2.
	4.3 Company Right to Enter Premises (Articles 5.1 to 5.4)
	The Commission proposed that carriers, before entering premises, would be required to give reasonable advance notice and to attempt to arrange a mutually convenient appointment, or, alternatively, to obtain permission from the applicant, customer or other responsible person. Entry would not be subject to these conditions in cases of emergency or when it was pursuant to a court order.
	Bell, B.C. Tel and CNCP agreed with this proposal. CAC submitted that, generally, the carriers should not be able to enter premises without an applicant's permission and that all service personnel should be required to carry proper identification.
	The Commission accepts CAC's suggestions and has revised draft Article 5.2 and added Article 5.4.
	4.4 Two-Party and Four-Party Service (Article 6.1)
	Under draft Article 6.1, the telephone companies would be required to advise all applicants for residential service of the existence of, and rates for, two-party and four-party residence service, where available. If an applicant were not so advised, any charges associated with the customer subsequently changing to a lower grade of service within ninety days of service commencement would not apply.
	Bell submitted that a similar provision already exists in its tariff. Terra Nova was opposed to the draft Article due to the additional administrative controls that would be required to eliminate future disputes. B.C. Tel opposed inclusion of 'four-party" service in this Article, and stated that its provisions were addressed in British Columbia Telephone Company - General Increase in Rates, Telecom Decision CRTC 85-8, 30 April 1985.
	The Commission notes that both Bell's and B.C. Tel's tariffs provide for change to a lower grade of service without charge. It has, therefore, added Article 6.2 to reflect this specific point, and it directs NorthwesTel and Terra Nova to file proposed tariffs to provide customers with at least the same flexibility as provided by B.C. Tel's tariffs.
	4.5 Confidentiality of Customer Records (Article 11.1)
	The Commission proposed, in draft Article 11.1, that a carrier be prohibited from disclosing most information regarding a customer to anyone other than the customer or another telephone company, unless customer consent in writing is obtained or disclosure is legally required.
	This proposal was supported by CNCP, FAPG et al, David H. Flaherty and the Privacy Commissioner. While Bell agreed with the general intent of draft Article 11.1, it expressed the view that the following amendments should be made to avoid problems in administering this Article: elimination of the written authorization requirement; adoption of "reasonable precautions" to ensure confidentiality; permitted disclosure to an "apparent agent" of the customer, an agent retained by the company for collection purposes, and a company supplying the customer with telephone or directory-related services.
	NorthwesTel and Terra Nova agreed with Bell's position. CAC-W submitted that addresses should not be published. B.C. Tel, supported by NorthwesTel and Terra Nova, replied that publication of addresses can be withheld on request.
	The Commission agrees with some of Bell's suggestions. It has amended draft Article 11.1 to permit disclosure to customers, their agents, telephone directory suppliers, and collection agents retained by the carrier of required information. The general requirement for written customer consent prior to disclosure, in other circumstances, has been retained as this is appropriate and the carriers have been given additional flexibility in disclosing records to third parties. The Commission has decided that disclosure should not be permitted to another telephone company except with written customer consent. This is consistent with Article 3.1, which does not allow one telephone company to refuse service to an applicant whose account with another telephone company is in arrears.
	With regard to publication of addresses, the Commission encourages all the carriers to withhold publication of addresses on request.
	4.6 Payment Time Limit and Company-Initiated Suspension or Termination of Service (Articles 17 and 22)
	(a) Payment Time Limit in Exceptional Circumstances (Article 17.2) or Extreme Situations (Article 17.4)
	In draft Article 17.2, the Commission proposed that in exceptional circumstances, as when a customer incurs significant long distance charges and presents an abnormal risk of loss to a carrier, a carrier could demand interim payment from the customer of non-recurring charges provided that it gives the customer details regarding the charges in question.
	In such circumstances, the Commission proposed that customers would have three days to make payment.
	Bell proposed that another provision be added to allow a carrier to demand immediate payment in extreme situations where fraud is suspected or where abnormal risk of loss has substantially increased subsequent to issuance of the notice described in Article 17.2. In these circumstances, it proposed that the requirement for a three-day payment period be waived. B.C. Tel made a similar proposal. CAC expressed qualified support for both Bell's and B.C. Tel's proposals. NorthwesTel and Terra Nova agreed with Bell's proposal.
	The Commission agrees with the need to adopt such a provision in the extreme situations cited by Bell and B.C. Tel. It has therefore adopted the substance of Bell's proposal in Article 17.4, with the modification that a notice must have been issued, pursuant to Article 17.2, before any "request" for immediate payment may be made.
	(b) Company-Initiated Suspension or Termination of Service(Article 22)
	In draft Article 22.1, the Commission proposed certain grounds on which a carrier could suspend or terminate a customer's service and, in draft Article 22.2, it proposed certain circumstances in which a carrier could not suspend or terminate. Draft Article 22.4 required carriers to give, generally, twenty-four hours notice that suspension or termination is imminent and draft Article 22.5 proposed the times during which disconnection could take place.
	Bell proposed that draft Articles 22.1, 22.4 and 22.5 be amended to conform with their proposal for a new Article 17.4, permitting it to demand immediate payment in extreme situations; failure to provide payment when demanded would permit the Company to disconnect immediately. Bell further suggested that draft Articles 22.4 and 22.5 should not apply where imminent risk of network harm requires immediate action.
	In addition, Bell proposed deletion of the provision in draft Article 22.2(b) which would prevent the company from suspending or terminating service when customers fail to pay charges for a different class of service. The company argued that different classes of service are often used at the same premises, or at different locations for a single business and that, if draft Article 22.2(b) were not changed, the company would be restricted in its ability to collect its unpaid accounts. CAC supported Bell's proposal. However, FAPG et al stated that Article 22.2(b) should remain as drafted.
	The Commission agrees that Articles 22.1 and 22.4 should be amended, given its acceptance of Bell's proposals for a new Article 17.4. Accordingly, it has included a new Article 22.1(h) and added Article 22.4(c). Modification of Article 22.5 is viewed as unnecessary, as the Commission believes that Bell's concerns are met by the phrase "except... in exceptional circumstances". It notes that customers would still receive advance notice in such circumstances under Article 22.3.
	With regard to Bell's concern over imminent risk of network harm, the Commission agrees and has included Article 22.4(b) to deal with such circumstances. Again, it has decided that modification of Article 22.5 is unnecessary and it notes that customers would still receive advance notice under Article 22.3.
	Finally, regarding the submissions on Article 22.2(b), the Commission agrees with Bell that a customer indebted to the company for business service could make use of his residence service at the same premises and thus have little incentive to pay arrears on the business service account. It has decided, therefore, that the carriers may suspend or terminate service because of a subscriber's failure to pay charges for a different class of service at the same premises. Accordingly, it has amended Article 22.2(b) so that the telephone companies may not suspend or terminate service because of failure to pay charges for a different class of service at different premises.
	(c) Carrier Procedures for Suspension or Termination of Service in Cases of Non-Payment (Articles 17.1 to 17.3 and 22.1 to 22.5)
	The procedures which the carriers are directed to follow for suspension or termination in cases of non-payment by customers, found in Articles 17 and 22, are summarized for ease of reference in Appendix II.
	5. COMMISSION DETERMINATIONS REGARDING RELATED PROPOSALS IN PUBLIC NOTICE 1985-22
	This section outlines the Commission's decisions regarding related proposals, found in Public Notice 1985-22.
	5.1 Notification of General Rate Increases
	(a) Notice Requirements for Proposed General Rate Increases
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission expressed its view that detailed notice requirements regarding general rate increase applications should remain in the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure (Rules of Procedure); it would not be reasonable to require that customers be notified of each and every proposed rate increase included in such an application.
	Bell, B.C. Tel and Ontario concurred with the Commission's proposal; FAPG et al said that the Terms should prescribe a format for summarizing proposed increases for inclusion in the notice to subscribers.
	With regard to FAPG et al's request, the Commission considers that it is difficult to know in advance all the various types of proposed increases likely to arise in a general rate application. It notes that, pursuant to the Rules of Procedure, the notice to subscribers requires prior Commission approval and contains particulars of increases in each service category. It also notes that toll-free telephone access to the carriers' business offices (see the next section) would allow customers to make further inquiries regarding proposed increases.
	The Commission has decided, therefore, that the notice requirements for general rate increase applications should remain as specified in the Rules of Procedure.
	(b) Toll Free Number
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed that, at the time of general rate increase applications, carriers should be required, in the Commission's directions on procedure, to provide a toll free telephone service so that information regarding the proposed rate increases could be obtained by callers.
	FAPG et al, Ontario, the Government of B.C. and Terra Nova agreed with the Commission's proposal.
	Bell, B.C. Tel and NorthwesTel, however, disagreed with the proposal, arguing that it would provide information from a single contact point and thereby detract from the role of the local business offices where customers' detailed service records are readily accessible. FAPG et al claimed that local managers and offices lack accurate information.
	CNCP submitted that it should not be required to provide the toll-free telephone service: it would have to incur leasing costs from the telephone companies; it currently provides adequate notice; and it offers further details from any business office.
	The Commission agrees that information regarding proposed rate increases is best provided by carrier local offices where personnel are familiar with the company's application and have access to customer service and equipment records. The Commission therefore directs each carrier to advise customers, in its notice to subscribers, that they can call the local business office, toll free, to obtain further information.
	(c) Notice Requirements for New or Changed Services or Equipment
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed that the carriers not be required to advise applicants for new or changed services or equipment of rate increases affecting such services or equipment proposed in a general rate application. At the same time, it noted that the carriers frequently provide such information and encouraged them to do so as a matter of practice.
	Bell concurred with this proposal, noting that the vast majority of customers have access to information about proposed general rate increases through the news media, newspaper advertisements and billing inserts. FAPG et al and the Government of B.C. disagreed; FAPG et al was of the view that standardized treatment should be prescribed by regulation. B.C. Tel opposed this suggestion.
	The Commission has found no reason to modify its original proposal. It notes again that the carriers frequently provide this information voluntarily.
	5.2 Quality of Service Standards
	(a) Quality of Service Standards on a Customer-by-Customer Basis
	The Commission considered, in Public Notice 1985-22, that quality of service standards, applicable on a customer-by-customer basis, should not be established as this would impose an undue financial and administrative burden on the carriers.
	Bell and FAPG et al supported the Commission's proposal. CAC again urged the adoption of quality of service standards, on a customer-by-customer basis for transmission, installation and repair. Bell and B.C. Tel opposed CAC's suggestion, citing the cost and administrative burden which would be associated with the development of these new indicators. Further, they indicated that with the current system of rebates for out-of-service conditions, with the complaints procedure which addresses individual service concerns, and with the existing method of monitoring quality of service for the vast majority of customers, as established in Decision 82-13, CAC's proposed solution is unnecessary.
	The Commission notes the potential cost of implementing CAC's proposal. Further, it is satisfied that the current monitoring systems and means of redress are adequate at this time. Accordingly, the Commission has concluded that standards, on a customer-by-customer basis, are not required.
	(b) Information on Overall Standards in Directories
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed that the telephone companies be required to summarize, in the introductory pages of their directories, the requirements and procedures regarding the overall quality of service standards established pursuant to Decision 82-13. The text of such a summary would be approved by the Commission. CNCP would be exempt from this requirement, as its quality of service monitoring program applies only to Public Message Service (PMS).
	Bell and FAPG et al supported the proposal. FAPG et al suggested that the information should be worded so as to promote subscriber understanding and subscriber reporting to the Commission of the carriers' service performance. B.C. Tel and NorthwesTel argued that the directory is an inappropriate means to disseminate this information due to costs, space limitations and the possibility that subscribers may be misled by incomplete information. Nigel David Allen submitted that CNCP should summarize quality of service standards for PMS in its directories as CNCP's introductory pages have already been designed to provide information on how to send telegrams and telepost messages.
	The Commission maintains its view that, in the interests of keeping customers fully informed, the introductory pages of directories should contain information regarding quality of service standards. The telephone companies are therefore directed to file, pursuant to section 5.5(b), a text of such pages summarizing the requirements and procedures regarding the overall quality of service standards established pursuant to Decision 82-13. The Commission is of the view, however, that CNCP should be exempted from this requirement as only its PMS is subject to quality of service standards and as there is no directory for PMS customers.
	5.3 Classification of Service (not applicable to CNCP)
	(a) Definitions and Conditions Relating to Business and Residence Services
	The Commission proposed in Public Notice 1985-22 that NorthwesTel and Terra Nova's definitions of business and residence service be amended to conform with those of Bell and B.C. Tel, to permit greater flexibility in applying residential rates where there is mixed residential and business use. It also suggested that these definitions and related conditions not be moved to the Terms but remain in other portions of the telephone companies' tariffs.
	No concerns were expressed by any of the parties regarding these proposals. Accordingly, the Commission directs NorthwesTel and Terra Nova to file appropriately revised tariffs.
	(b) Normal Business Rates For Occasional or Seasonal Business Use
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed that special telephone rates should not be introduced for occasional or seasonal business use and that normal business rates should continue to apply in these instances.
	None of the interested parties expressed concerns with regard to this proposal and the Commission therefore adopts this recommendation.
	(c) Business Rates for Charitable or Non-Profit Organizations
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed to maintain the existing practice that charitable or non-profit organizations pay full business rates rather than approving preferential treatment at the expense of the general body of subscribers. It referred to its obligation under the Railway Act not to permit unjust discrimination, and it noted that, if reduced rates for charitable or non-profit organizations were permitted, difficulties might arise in dealing fairly with similar requests for preferential treatment from other groups. The Commission stated its general preference to keep rates for all subscribers as low as possible.
	Bell agreed with the Commission's proposal while CFCW, FAPG et al and Planned Parenthood of Hamilton were opposed .
	The Commission has considered the concerns of these parties. It is of the view, however, that its original proposals should not be modified for the reasons stated above. In addition, the Commission notes that it has previously denied special rate concessions for senior citizens (Bell Canada - General Increase in Rates, Telecom Decision CRTC 81-15, 28 September 1981) and for hospital guests (Rates for Hotels and Hospitals, Telecom Decision CRTC 85-24, 20 November 1985).
	5.4 Annoying or Offensive Calls or Messages
	The Commission proposed in Public Notice 1985-22 that the Terms, including those applicable to CNCP, should prohibit annoying or offensive calls or messages and the use of service or equipment in any manner which is contrary to law. It also proposed that, to ensure adequate flexibility of response, the Terms should not stipulate the specific procedures to be followed by the telephone companies when dealing with customer complaints regarding annoying or offensive telephone calls. It further proposed to permit a carrier to terminate the service of a customer who engages in such abuse. It stated that it expects the telephone company to co-operate with law enforcement officials, to provide supporting evidence where legally possible, and to provide adequate information about abuse to subscribers. In response to CAC concerns, the Commission agreed that customer recourse regarding the content of calls should be through the courts. Finally, the Commission proposed that information regarding the measures which are taken by the carriers in response to annoying or offensive calls be included in the introductory pages of their directories.
	Bell supported the above proposals. B.C. Tel, however, objected to the proposal to include a description of the specific measures taken by the carriers in response to annoying or offensive calls in the introductory pages because this would limit company discretion and flexibility in dealing with nuisance calls, because specification of procedure may create an inappropriate customer expectation, and because nuisance callers would thereby be alerted to remedial actions.
	The Commission sees insufficient reason to change its proposals. The carriers are directed to file, pursuant to section 5.5(b), proposed directory information pages.
	5.5 Telephone and Telex Directories
	(a) Ownership and Use
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed that customers should own directories provided for their use by the carriers but that this matter need not be dealt with in the Terms. Also, the Commission proposed that the contents of the directories should not be published or reproduced without the carriers' written consent. Finally, the Commission proposed that the prohibition against defacement and use of labels, binders and covers should no longer apply.
	As no concerns were expressed by interested parties, the Commission adopts these proposals as its final determination in this matter.
	(b) Customer Information in Introductory Pages
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed that information pages, the text of which would be approved by the Commission, should be required in the introductory section of the carriers' directories, to summarize:
	- procedures for resolving complaints and disputes (see also section 5.9 below);
	- general tariff provisions, if any, regarding charges for disconnection, reconnection, late payment, non-negotiable (NSF) cheques, and problems with customer-provided equipment;
	- the time period for objecting to bills and provisions regarding underbilling and overbilling;
	- rates of, and terms and conditions relating to, interest paid on deposits;
	- procedures regarding annoying and offensive telephone calls or messages (see also section 5.4 above);
	- requirements and procedures regarding quality of service standards, except for CNCP (see also section 5.2(b) above);
	- information regarding the attachment of customer-provided equipment to the carriers' networks; and
	- accessibility to special needs centres and voice relay services, where applicable.
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission noted that the text of the Regulations and some of the above information are presently provided in the introductory pages. Further, it stated that the carriers would continue to be required to include either a summary or the full text of the Terms in the introductory pages.
	The Commission proposed that these information pages should include a warning that they are provided for convenience only, and that the full text of the applicable Tariffs should be consulted for official purposes. It also suggested that the table of contents page of the directory emphasize the importance of the information pages.
	Bell, Nigel David Allen and FAPG et al agreed with these proposals with certain additions or modifications. FAPG et al wanted to include information on different residential telephone lease rates, set loss charges, installment payment options and payment of overdue bills. Bell, along with B.C. Tel and CITA, submitted that with regard to the rate of interest on deposits, only the formula on which it is based, and not the actual rate of interest, should be published. Bell also maintained that it would be necessary to implement the Commission's proposal for information pages in stages, due to nearly full directory capacity in some cases and to the time it would take to change the format.
	B.C. Tel and CITA questioned the need to provide certain information, such as a summary of the general tariff provisions relating to reconnection, late payment, and NSF cheques, and the requirements and procedures regarding quality of service standards. Both parties also expressed concern regarding the potential increase in the number of introductory pages; they felt that the objective of providing essential and useful information to customers would be jeopardized by a bulky presentation.
	FAPG et al suggested that the carrier's proposed introductory pages be circulated in advance to consumer groups for their review. B.C. Tel opposed this suggestion and felt that parties already have had an adequate opportunity to convey their views.
	The Commission has considered these comments and adopts its original proposals regarding customer information in the introductory pages, with the following modifications. It agrees with Bell, B.C. Tel and CITA that the formula and not the actual rate of interest on deposits should be included. It also directs the carriers to add a statement urging customers to inform them of any anticipated major increases in long distance or message toll usage by the customer, so as to avert the possibility of premature or unnecessary disconnection.
	Finally, while both English and French versions of the Terms have equal weight throughout the operating territories of the carriers (see section 2.4), the carriers are only required to include a summary or full text of the Terms in both official languages in the introductory pages of a directory where significant numbers of both language groups warrant such inclusion. The Commission does consider it appropriate, however, that a statement be included, where a directory contains a summary or text in only one language, that the Terms are available in English and French and have equal force in both official languages.
	The Commission considers that there should be no additional requirements regarding information to be included in the directory introductory pages. It notes the concern that these pages may become too extensive and is of the view that the list, as modified above, is sufficient.
	The carriers are therefore directed to file for Commission approval, by 27 June 1986, proposed information pages incorporating the above determinations, and those in sections 5.2(b), 5.4 and 5.9, together with a proposed implementation schedule. The Commission directs the carriers to take note of its desire for early implementation.
	5.6 Elimination of Advance Payments Provision
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed to eliminate the current provision in the Regulations regarding advance payments and suggested that advance payments should no longer be required.
	Bell agreed with this proposal, subject to the wording changes which it proposed for draft Articles 3.1(a), Obligation to Provide Service, and 7, Deposits. B.C. Tel disagreed, stating that in some circumstances, deposits do not provide protection, as advance payments would, against risk of loss for service for short periods of time.
	The Commission adopts its original proposal as its final determination. It considers that the revisions it has made to the draft Terms, particularly Articles 7.1, 7.2, 17.4, 22.1 and 22.4 adequately meet Bell's and B.C. Tel's concerns.
	5.7 Deposits
	(a) Interest on Deposits
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed that the rate of interest to be paid on customer deposits, and the terms and conditions regarding its payment, be specified in other portions of the carriers' tariffs.
	No concerns were expressed by any of the parties about this proposal.
	Accordingly, the Commission directs the carriers to file tariffs as appropriate, reflecting the above and incorporating a formula for the calculation of the interest rate based on the bank prime rate or equivalent.
	(b) Records of Deposits
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed that it would not be necessary, in the Terms, to require the carriers to maintain records of deposits and alternatives to deposits as they already maintain such records.
	No concerns about this issue were expressed by any party and the Commission adopts this proposal. It notes that Article 7.7 will require the amount of a deposit to be shown on monthly account statements, and Article 11.3 will permit customer access to their service records.
	5.8 Billing and Payment
	(a) Itemization of Accounts for Customers
	The Commission proposed, in Public Notice 1985-22, to require CNCP to provide its customers, and the telephone companies to provide their single-line customers, with a detailed itemization of service and equipment charges at service commencement, after any service and equipment changes, after general rate proceedings and, at a minimum, once a year.
	B.C. Tel stated that its billing procedures already satisfy this requirement. Bell indicated that it is prepared to offer itemization as proposed and suggested that it implement this by the end of 1986, co-incidentally with the redesign of its customer bill.
	The Commission adopts its original proposal, and directs the carriers to implement this requirement by 31 December 1986.
	(b) Deletion of Payment Locations Provision
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission suggested the deletion of the current provision in the Regulations relating to the locations where customers may pay accounts. It was of the view that customers should be able to pay their accounts by mail as well as at designated carrier locations and at authorized agencies.
	No party expressed concerns, and the Commission adopts this proposal.
	5.9 Dispute Procedures
	The Commission stated its view in Public Notice 1985-22 that the procedure for resolving billing disputes should not be specified in the Terms. It did propose, however, that it should be summarized in the introductory pages of the carriers' directories. This proposed summary would indicate that:
	- customers can object to charges;
	- customers should promptly pay undisputed charges;
	- if the carrier wishes to insist on payment of disputed amounts, it must promptly investigate to determine the customer's responsibility and make available the results of the investigation:
	- the carrier must advise customers of their right to refer disputes to a senior manager of the company;
	- deferred payment arrangements should, where appropriate, be negotiated; and
	- carriers cannot suspend or terminate service for disputed amounts unless they have reasonable grounds for believing that the purpose of the dispute is to evade or delay payment.
	Bell and FAPG et al supported the Commission's proposals. B.C. Tel objected to portions of the proposed procedure, specifically to the proposed right of customers to refer disputes to senior managers and to negotiate deferred payment agreements. FAPG et al, in reply to B.C. Tel, submitted that disputes only occasionally ended inappropriately at the senior management level and that such cases could be referred back to an appropriate level. With regard to deferred payment arrangements, FAPG et al noted that inclusion of the words "where appropriate" in the Commission's proposal made it clear that deferred payment arrangements are not available as a right.
	The Commission notes that in response to the discussion paper, the carriers, with certain exceptions, advised that they generally followed the proposed dispute procedure. In the interests of uniformity, the Commission adopts its original proposals as its final determination. It draws attention to the fact that Article 22.2(d) deals with the matter of suspension or termination for disputed amounts. The carriers are directed to file, pursuant to section 5.5(b), a proposed text for the introductory pages.
	5.10 Discontinuance of Certain Rules
	In Public Notice 1985-22, the Commission proposed the discontinuance of some Regulations which contain terms and conditions relating to the provision of a specific service or to particular circumstances. The Commission was of the view that these should be dealt with in other portions of the carriers' tariffs, where appropriate. Examples of these Regulations included:
	- restrictions on the transmission of messages (Bell, B.C. Tel, Rule 3);
	- agreements with railway companies or other subscribers (Bell, B.C. Tel, Rule 10);
	- the provision of mobile telephone service (Bell, Rules 21 and 42);
	- the requirement that customers establish their identity (Bell, B.C. Tel, Rule 22);
	- clauses relating to liability for damages caused by, or to, a vehicle containing a mobile telephone unit (Bell, Rule 43);
	- clauses relating to liability for damages or injuries occuring through lightning or through electrical currents carried over the circuits of a service system (Bell, Rule 44) or a rural connecting system (B.C. Tel, Rule 44);
	- multi-party rural line service and business message rate service (Bell, B.C. Tel, Rules 47 and 48);
	- initial contract periods for special equipment (NorthwesTel, Terra Nova, Items 104B and C);
	- charges for late payment and NSF cheques (NorthwesTel, Terra Nova, Items 114C and D);
	- charges for reconnection of suspended service (Terra Nova, Item 115);
	- customer-requested suspension of service (NorthwesTel, Terra Nova, Item 116A to D; CNCP, Item 12);
	- subscription charges (NorthwesTel, Terra Nova, Item 118; CNCP, Item 20).
	The Commission adopts its original proposals regarding the above Regulations. Accordingly, it directs the carriers to file tariff revisions for those provisions in the Regulations that the carriers feel should be incorporated in other portions of their tariffs.
	Fernand Bélisle Secretary General

	Appendix I TERMS OF SERVICE
1.	General
1.1	Except as otherwise specified¹, these Terms of Service apply with regard to services for which the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission has approved a tariff.*
	*CNCP's, NorthwesTel's and Terra Nova's Terms would continue: "and, subject to other applicable provisions of the Company's² tariffs, they do not apply with regard to Public Message Service and TELEPOST service".
1.2	These Terms do not limit the Company's liability in cases of deliberate fault or gross negligence, or of breach of contract where the breach results from the gross negligence, or of breach of contract where the breach results from the gross negligence of the Company.
1.3	Tariffed services offered by the Company are subject to the terms and conditions contained in:
	(a) these Terms;
	(b) applicable provisions of the Company's tariffs; and
	(c) any written application, to the extent that it is not inconsistent with these Terms or the tariffs.
	All of the above bind both the Company and its customers.
2.	Effective Date of Changes
2.1	Subject to Article 2.2, changes to these Terms or the tariffs, as approved by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, take effect on their effective date even though applicants or customers have not been notified of them or have paid or been billed at the old rate.
2.2	The old non-recurring charges for the transaction in question apply where service which was to be provided by a certain agreed-upon date was, through no fault of the applicant or customer, not so provided and in the meantime a rate increase has gone into effect.
3.	Obligation to Provide Service
3.1 (draft)*	The Company must provide service to all who apply for it, except where:
	(a) the Company would have to incur unusual expenses which the applicant will not assume, for example to secure rights of way or undertake special construction;
	(b) the applicant owes amounts that are past due; or
	(c) the applicant does not provide a reasonable deposit or alternative required pursuant to these Terms.*
	* CNCP's Terms would contain these additional sections under this heading:
	"CNCP must provide service twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, subject to other applicable provisions of CNCP's Tariffs and the availability of facilities."
	"Where it is necessary to obtain facilities from another communications organization to provide a service, CNCP may levy all charges imposed on it by the other organization."
3.1 (final)	The Company is not required to provide service to an applicant where:
	(a) the Company would have to incur unusual expenses which the applicant will not pay; for example, for securing rights of way or for special construction;
	(b) the applicant owes amounts to the Company that are past due other than as a guarantor; or
	(c) the applicant does not provide a reasonable deposit or alternative required pursuant to these Terms.
3.2 (new)	Where the Company does not provide service on application, it must provide the applicant with a written explanation upon request.
4.	Company Facilities
4.1	Except where otherwise stipulated in its tariffs or by special agreement, the Company must furnish and install all facilities required to provide service.
4.2 (draft)	The Company remains the owner of its facilities and the customer must return Company equipment on termination of service.
4.2 (final)	Upon termination of service, the customer must return Company equipment.
4.3	The Company must bear the expense of maintenance and repairs required due to normal wear and tear to its facilities, except that the Company may charge for the additional expense incurred when the applicant or customer requires maintenance and repair work to be performed outside of regular working hours. This section does not apply where otherwise stipulated in Company tariffs or by special agreement.*
	* CNCP's Terms would contain this additional heading and section:
	"Tests and Adjustments
	CNCP may make tests and adjustments once during each twenty-four hour period, at a time agreeable to the customer, of services furnished on a continuous basis, so as to satisfactorily maintain them. No credit need be provided for resulting service interruptions."
4.4	A customer who has deliberately, or by virtue of a lack of reasonable care, caused loss or damage to the Company's facilities, may be charged the cost of restoration or replacement. In all cases, customers are liable for damage caused to Company facilities by customer-provided facilities.
5.	Company Right to Enter Premises
5.1	The Company's agents and employees may, at reasonable hours, enter premises on which service is or is to be provided, to install, inspect, repair and remove its facilities, to inspect and perform necessary maintenance in cases of network-affecting disruptions involving customer-provided facilities, AND TO COLLECT PROCEEDS FROM COIN TELEPHONES.*
	* The capitalized words would he deleted in the case of CNCP.
5.2 (draft)	Prior to entering premises, the Company must give the applicant or customer reasonable advance notice and attempt to arrange a mutually convenient appointment, or alternatively obtain permission from the applicant, customer or other responsible person.
5.2 (final)	Prior to entering premises, the Company must obtain permission from the applicant, customer or other responsible person.
5.3	Entry is not subject to Articles 5.1 and 5.2 in cases of emergency or where entry is pursuant to a court order.
5.4 (new)	Upon request, the Company's agent or employee must show valid Company identification prior to entering premises.
6.	Two-Party and Four-Party Service*
	* For CNCP, this heading and these sections would he deleted.
6.1 (draft)	At the time a person applies for residential telephone service, the Company must state the rate for two-party and four-party service, where available. If the Company does not do so, the customer is entitled to change to a lower grade service, where available, free of charge within ninety days of the commencement of service.
6.1 (final)	At the time a person applies for residential telephone service, the Company must state the rate for two-party and four-party service, where available.
6.2 (new)	Customers who wish to change to a lower grade of service that is available may do so without charge.
7.	Deposits and Alternatives
7.1	Except as otherwise stipulated in its Tariffs, the Company cannot require deposits from an applicant or customer at any time unless the applicant or customer:
	(a) has no credit history with the Company and will not provide satisfactory credit information;
	(b) has an unsatisfactory credit rating with the Company due to payment practices in the previous two years regarding the Company's services; or
	(c) clearly presents an abnormal risk of loss.
7.2	The Company must inform the applicant or customer of the specific reason for requiring a deposit, and of the possibility of providing an alternative to a deposit, such as arranging for third party payment, a bank letter of credit or a written guarantee from a third person whose credit is established to the satisfaction of the Company.
7.3	An applicant or customer may provide an alternative to a deposit provided it is reasonable in the circumstances.
7.4	At no time may the total amount of all deposits and alternatives provided by or for an applicant or customer exceed three months' charges for all services, including anticipated LONG DISTANCE charges.*
(draft)*	In the case of CNCP, the capitalized words would be deleted.
(final)*	In the case of CNCP, the capitalized words would read: "message tolls".
7.5	Deposits earn interest in accordance with the formula set out in the applicable provisions of the Company's Tariffs.
7.6 (draft)	Deposits and accrued interest must be applied by the Company to charges that have been incurred.
7.6 (final)	Delete.
7.7 (draft)	The Company must show the total of all deposits with accrued interest on the customer's monthly bill.
7.6 (final)	The Company must show the total amount of deposits held with accrued interest on each customer monthly account.
7.7	The Company must review the continued appropriateness of deposits and alternative arrangements at six month intervals. When service is terminated or the conditions which originally justified them are no longer present, the Company must promptly refund the deposit, with interest, or return the guarantee or other written undertaking, retaining only any amount then owed to it by the customer.
8.	Restrictions on Use of Service
8.1	Service may be used by the customer and all persons having the customer's permission to use it. In the case of business telephone service, joint use within the meaning of the Company's tariffs is permitted only upon approval by the Company in accordance with the applicable provisions of its tariffs.*
	* This sentence would be deleted in the case of CNCP.
8.2	Customers are prohibited from using the Company's services or permitting them to be used for a purpose or in a manner that is contrary to law or for the purpose of MAKING ANNOYING OR OFFENSIVE CALLS.*
	* For CNCP the capitalized words would be replaced by "sending annoying or offensive messages".
8.3	Customers are prohibited from using the Company's services or permitting them to be used so as to prevent a fair and proportionate use by others. For this purpose, the Company may limit use of its services as necessary. In the case of any party line customer who unduly interferes with the use of any other service on the same line, the Company may require the customer to obtain a higher grade of service, where facilities are available.*
	* For CNCP, this section would he deleted.
8.4 (draft)	The Company's facilities must not be re-arranged, disconnected, removed, repaired or otherwise interfered with, nor can any equipment not provided by the Company be attached to, connected with or used in conjunction with the Company's facilities, except in cases of emergency or where specified in the Company's tariffs or by special agreement.*
	* For CNCP, section 8.4 would be replaced by the following, based upon Items 15(b) and 9(e) to (i) of CNCP's existing Regulations:
	"8.4 CNCP's facilities shall not be re-arranged, disconnected, removed, repaired or otherwise interfered with, except in cases of emergency or where specified in its Tariffs or by special agreement.
	The operating characteristics of any customer-provided facilities must be such as not to interfere with any of the services offered by CNCP or the telephone company in the case of interconnected services.
	Customer-provided facilities must not endanger the safety of CNCP or the public, damage or interfere with proper functioning of OICP facilities, impair the operation of CNCP facilities or otherwise injure the public in its use of CNCP services.
	Upon notice from CNCP that customer-provided facilities are causing or are likely to cause any hazard or interference, the customer must take such steps as shall be necessary to eliminate or prevent such hazard or interference.
	The facilities furnished by CNCP, or by CNCP together with other carriers, must not be connected either directly or indirectly with facilities provided by any person other than CNCP or such carriers, except as provided in its Tariffs.
	With regard to interconnected services:
	(a) the operating characteristics of any facilities provided by CNCP or by its customer must be such as not to interfere with any of the services offered by the telephone company; and
	(b) the facilities provided by QJCP or by its customer must not endanger the safety of the telephone company employees or the public, damage or interfere with the proper functioning of the telephone company's facilities, impair the operation of the telephone company's facilities or otherwise injure the public in its use of the telephone company services.
	Upon notice from the telephone company that the facilities provided by CNCP or by its customer are causing or are likely to cause such hazard or interference, QICP must take such steps as shall be necessary to remove or prevent such hazard or interference".
8.4 (final)	The Company's facilities must not be re-arranged, disconnected, removed, repaired or otherwise interfered with except in cases of emergency, where specified in the Company's tariffs or by special agreement. Terminal equipment provided by the customer may be connected with the Company's facilities, pursuant to the provisions of the General Tariff or by special agreement.
8.5	No payment may be exacted, directly or indirectly from any person by any party other than the Company for the use of any of the Company's services, except where otherwise stipulated in the Company's Tariffs or by special agreement.*
	* For CNCP, the wording of Article 8.5 shall be that of Item 9.a of CRTC 4001, pending the Commission's determination in the proceeding announced in CRTC Telecom Public Notice 1986-19, dated 24 February 1986, entitled CNCP Telecommunications, NorthwesTel Inc., Telesat Canada and Terra Nova Telecommunications Inc. - Resale, Sharing and Related Rate Revisions. The Commission's decision in that proceeding may give rise to changes in wording.
9.	Customer Liability for Calls*
9.1	Customers are responsible for paying for all calls originating from, and charged calls accepted at, their telephones, regardless of who made or accepted them.
	* For CNCP, this heading and section would be replaced with:
	"Customer Liability for Mess ages
	Customers are responsible for paying for all messages originating at their terminals, regardless of who made them."
10.	Dispute Procedure
10.1	Customers may dispute charges for CALLS WHICH THEY DO NOT BELIEVE ORIGINATED FROM OR WERE ACCEPTED AT THEIR TELEPHONES³. The dispute procedure set out in the introductory pages of the TELEPHONE⁴ directory should he followed and customers must pay the undisputed portion of the bill.
11.	Confidentiality of Customer Records
11.1 (draft)	All information kept by the Company regarding a customer, other than the customer's name, address and LISTED TELEPHONE* number, are confidential and may not be disclosed by the Company to anyone other than the customer or another telephone company unless the customer consents in writing or disclosure is required pursuant to a legal power.
	* For CNCP, the capitalized words would he replaced by "Telex".
11.1 (final)	Unless a customer consents in writing or disclosure is pursuant to a legal power, all information kept by the Company regarding the customer, other than the customer's name, address and LISTED TELEPHONE* number, are confidential and may not be disclosed by the Company to anyone other than:
	the customer; a person who, in the reasonable judgement of the Company, is seeking the information as an agent of the customer; a company involved in supplying the customer with telephone directories, provided the information is required for that purpose; or an agent retained by the Company in the collection of the customer's account, provided the information is required for that purpose.
	* For CNCP, the capitalized words would he replaced by "Telex".
11.2	The Company's liability for disclosure of information contrary to Article 11.1 is not limited by Article 16.1.
11.3	Upon request, customers are permitted to inspect any Company records regarding their service.
12.	Directories
12.1	Customers are entitled to receive, without charge, as many copies of the most recent TELEPHONE DIRECTORY FOR THEIR DISTRICT, BOTH WHITE AND YELLOW PAGES⁵, and as many copies of subsequent updated directories as they are published, as are reasonably required, up to a maximum of one per TELEPHONE⁶, whether provided by the customer or the Company.
12.2	The Company must provide, without charge, replacement directories required as a result of reasonable wear and tear.
12.3	The contents of the Company's directories may not be published or reproduced in any form without the Company's written consent.
13.	Directory Errors and Omissions
13.1	In the case of errors or omissions in directory white and YELLOW⁷ page standard listing,~, whether or not the error or omission is with regard to a TELEPHONE⁸ number, the Company's liability is limited to making a refund or cancelling any charge associated with such listings for the period during which the error or omission occurred. However, where the error or omission is occasioned by Company negligence, the Company is also liable for the amount calculated in accordance with Article 16.1.
13.2	In the case of errors in telephone numbers in directory white and yellow page listings, unless central office facilities are unavailable, the Company must provide reference of call service, free of charge, until termination of the customer's service or distribution of updated directories for that district in which the number or listing is correct.*
	* For CNCP, this Article would be deleted.
14.	Company-Initiated Changes in Telephone* Numbers and Service Arrangements
14.1	Customers do not have any property rights in TELEPHONE* numbers assigned to them. The Company may change such numbers, provided it has reasonable grounds for doing so and has given reasonable advance written notice to the customers in question, stating the reason and anticipated date of change. In cases of emergency, oral notice with subsequent written confirmation is sufficient.
	* For CNCP, the word "telephone" would be replaced by "dial".
14.2	Whenever the Company changes a customer's telephone number on its own initiative, it must, unless there are insufficient central office terminations available, provide reference of call service without charge until termination of the customer's service or distribution of updated directories for that district showing the new number, whichever occurs first.*
	* For CNCP, this section would he deleted.
14.3 (draft)	The Company may, at any time, change BASE RATE, EXCHANGE AND LOCAL SERVICE AREAS.*
	* For CNCP, the capitalized words would he replaced by "rate areas".
14.3 (final)	Delete.
15.	Refunds in Cases of Service Problems*
15.1 (draft)	Where there are omissions, interruptions, delays, errors or defects in transmission, or failures or defects in Company facilities, the Company must, on request, refund charges proportionate to the length of time the problem existed. With regard to long distance service and short period private line service, the refund shall he computed only from the time the Company is advised of the problem. No request is necessary where a problem in primary exchange service lasts twenty-four hours or more from the time the Company is advised of the problem. Where the problem is occasioned by Company negligence, section 16.1 also applies.
	* For CNCP, this heading and section would be replaced with:
	"Refunds in Cases of Service Interruption
	In the event of service interruption, CNCP must, upon notice from the customer, use its best efforts to remove the cause of such interruption as promptly as practicable, and in the following cases must, where a monthly rate is charged, upon customer request make refunds calculated on a pro-rated hourly basis or major fractions thereof:
	(a) for service interruption of eight or more consecutive hours to terminal equipment and/or access channels; and
	(b) for service interruption of thirty or more consecutive minutes to inter-city channels.
	For the purpose of computing refunds for service interruptions, each month is considered to have thirty days. Where the interruption is occasioned by CNCP negligence, section 16.1 also applies."
15.1 (final)	Where there are omissions, interruptions, delays, errors or defects in transmission, or failures or defects in Company facilities, the Company's liability is limited, to a refund of charges, on request, proportionate to the length of time the problem existed. WITH REGARD TO LONG DISTANCE SERVICE AND SHORT PERIOD PRIVATE LINE SERVICE, THE REFUND SHALL BE COMPUTED IN A SIMILAR MANNER_, PROVIDED THE COMPANY IS ADVISED PROMPTLY OF THE PROBLEM*, NO REQUEST IS NECESSARY WHERE A PROBLEM IN PRIMARY EXCHANGE SERVICE LASTS TWENTY-FOUR HOURS OR MORE FROM THE TIME THE COMPANY IS ADVISED OF THE PROBLEM. However, where the problem is occasioned by Company negligence, the Company is also liable for the amount calculated in accordance with Article 16.1.
	* For CNCP, the capitalized words would read: "For interruptions not occasioned by negligence, CNCP must make such a refund only:
	(a) for service interruption of eight or more consecutive hours to terminal equipment and/or access channels; and
	(b) for service interruption of thirty or more consecutive minutes to inter-city channels."
16.	Limitation of Company Liability
16.1 (draft)	The Company's liability for negligence, including negligent breach of contract, is limited to reasonably foreseeable damages or three times the applicable tariffed rates and charges, whichever is less, except with regard to physical injuries, death or damage to premises or other property occasioned by its negligence.
16.1 (final)	Except with regard to physical injuries, death or damage to customer premises or other property occasioned by its negligence, the Company's liability for negligence, INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE WITH REGARD TO INTERCEPT, REFERENCE OF CALL SERVICE AND EMERGENCY SERVICE FROM COIN TELEPHONES*, and also for breach of contract where the breach results from the negligence of the Company, is limited to the greater of $20 and three times the amounts refunded or cancelled in accordance with Articles 13.1 and 15.1, as applicable.
	* The capitalized words would be deleted in the case of CNCP.
16.2	The Company is not liable for:
	(a) any act or omission of a telecommunications carrier whose facilities are used in establishing connections to points which the Company does not directly serve;
	(b) defamation or copyright infringement arising from material transmitted or received over the Company's facilities;
	(c) infringement of patents arising from combining or using customer-provided facilities with the Company's facilities; or
	(d) copyright or trademark infringement, passing off or acts of unfair competition arising from directory advertisements furnished by a customer or a customer's directory listing, provided such advertisements or the Information contained in such listings were received in good faith in the ordinary course of business.
17.	Payment Time Limit
17.1	Subject to Articles 17.2 and 17.3, charges cannot be considered past due until the time prescribed in the Company's Late Payment Charge tariff has expired.
17.2	In exceptional circumstances, for example when a customer has incurred a significant amount of LONG DISTANCE* charges and presents an abnormal risk of loss to the Company, prior to the normal billing date the Company may request payment from the customer on an interim basis for the non-recurring charges that have accrued, providing the customer with details regarding the services and charges in question. In such cases, subject to Article 17.3, the charges can he considered past due three days after they are incurred or three days after the Company demands payment, whichever occurs later.
	* In the case of CNCP, the capitalized words would be replaced by "billable".
17.3	No charge disputed by a customer can he considered past due unless the Company has reasonable grounds for believing that the purpose of the dispute is to evade or delay payment.
17.4 (new)	The Company may request immediate payment in extreme situations, provided that a notice has been issued pursuant to Article 17.2 and the abnormal risk of loss has substantially increased since that notice was given or the Company has reasonable grounds for believing that the subscriber intends to defraud the Company.
18.	Liability for Unbilled and Underbilled Charges
18.1 (draft)	Customers are not responsible for paying a previously unbilled or underbilled charge unless there has been customer deception with regard to the charge or it is correctly billed within a period of one year in the case of a recurring charge, or 150 days in the case of a non-recurring charge, from the date it was incurred.
18.1 (final)	Unless there has been customer deception with regard to a charge, customers are not responsible for paying a previously unbilled or underbilled charge except where:
	(a) in the case of a recurring charge or a charge for an international long distance message, it is correctly billed within a period of one year from the date it was incurred; or
	(b) in the case of a non-recurring charge other than for an international long distance message, it is correctly billed within a period of 150 days from the date it was incurred.
18.2	In the circumstances described in Article 18.1, unless there has been customer deception, the Company cannot charge the customer interest on the amount of the correction. If the customer is unable to promptly pay the full amount owing, the Company must attempt to negotiate a reasonable deferred payment agreement.
19.	Liability for Charges That Should Not Have Been Billed and Those That Were Overbilled
19.1	In the case of a recurring charge that should not have been billed or that was overbilled, a customer must he credited with the excess back to the date of the error, subject to applicable limitation periods provided by law. However, a customer who does not dispute the charge within one year of the date of an itemized statement which shows that charge correctly, loses the right to have the excess credited for the period prior to that statement.
19.2	Non-recurring charges that should not have been billed or that were overbilled must he credited, provided that the customer disputes them within 150 days of the date of the bill.
19.3	A customer who is credited with any amount that should not have been billed or that was overbilled must also be credited with interest on that amount at the rate payable for interest on deposits that applied during the period in question.*
(draft)*	CNCP's Terms would contain this additional heading and section:
	"Combination of Channels
	When a combination of two or more channels is necessary to provide channel facilities for a single purpose, charges are determined on the basis of the types and numbers of channels required".
(final)*	Delete.
20. (draft)	Minimum Contract Period
20. (final)	Minimum Contract Period and Cancellation Before Service Commencement
20.1	The minimum contract period for Company services is one month commencing from the date the service is provided, except where otherwise stipulated in the Company's tariffs or where the Company has stipulated a longer period in instances in which special construction is necessary or special assemblies are installed.*
(draft)*	CNCP's Terms would contain these additional headings and sections:
	"Customer-Initiated Cancellation Before Service Commencement
	"A customer who cancels or delays a request for service before installation work has started cannot he charged by the Company. Installation work is considered to have started when the customer has advised the Company to proceed, and the Company has incurred any related expense. A customer who cancels or delays a request for service after installation work has started but before service has started will be charged the lesser of the full charge for the entire minimum contract period plus the installation charge, or the estimated costs incurred in installation less estimated net salvage (such estimated installation costs include the cost of unsalvaged equipment and materials specifically provided or used plus the cost of installing, including engineering, supply expense, labour and supervision, and any other disbursements resulting from the installation and removal work)".
	"Customer-Initiated Suspension of Service
	After the expiry of the minimum contract period, customers may suspend their service in whole or in part, without cancelling it, for a period of not less than two weeks and not more than three months. During the period of suspension, customers cannot be charged by CNCP unless CNCP is leasing facilities from others or other provisions of CNCP's Tariffs provide 'for charges".
(final)*	Delete.
20.2 (new)	A customer who cancels or delays a request for service before installation work has started cannot be charged by the Company. Installation work is considered to have started when the customer has advised the Company to proceed, and the Company has incurred any related expenses. A customer who cancels or delays a request for service after installation work has started, but before service has started, will be charged the lesser of the full charge for the entire minimum contract period plus the installation charge and the estimated costs incurred in installation less estimated net salvage. The estimated installation costs include the cost of unsalvaged equipment and materials specifically provided or used plus the cost of installing, including engineering, supply expense, labour and supervision, and any other disbursements resulting from the installation and removal work.
21.	Customer-Initiated Termination of Service
21.1	Customers who give the Company reasonable advance notice may terminate their service after expiry of the minimum contract period, in which case they must pay charges due for service which has been furnished.
21.2	Before expiry of the minimum contract period, customers may terminate their service in which case they must pay the full charges for the entire minimum contract period or, in the following circumstances, charges due for service which has been furnished:
	(a) in the event of the death of the customer during the minimum contract period, the termination is effective from the date the Company is notified of the death;
	(b) where the customer's premises are destroyed, damaged or condemned by reason of fire or other causes beyond the customer's control, so that they must he abandoned, the termination is effective from the date the Company is notified;
	(c) in the case of directory listings for which a specific charge applies and in the case of directory listings with regard to joint use of service, in the event of the death of the listed party or any joint user or when either acquires separate telephone service, the termination is effective from the date the Company is notified of the death or from the date of the commencement of the separate service;⁹
	(d) where a change to the BASE RATE, EXCHANGE OR LOCAL SERVICE AREA¹⁰ affects the customer's service, the termination is effective from the date the Company is notified of the customer's desire to terminate service;
	(e) where a customer replaces any Company service with another Company service, the termination is effective from the date of the replacement, subject to the terms of the Company's tariffs and, notwithstanding Article 1.3(c), the terms of the contract for the service in question;
	(f) where a customer's service is taken over without lapse by a new customer at the same location, the termination with respect to the original customer is effective from that date. However, if at that time the new customer discontinues any of the original service or facilities, the original customer must pay the full charge for such discontinued service or facilities for the entire minimum contract period;
	(g) where the circumstances specified in Article 21.2(a) through (f) do not apply, the minimum contract period is greater than one month at the same location, and the customer has given the Company advance notice, the termination is effective when the customer pays the termination charge specified in the contract for the service in question or, where such charge is not specified, a termination charge of ONE-HALF OF THE CHARGES REMAINING FOR THE UNEXPIRED PORTION OF THE MINIMUM CONTRACT PERIOD¹¹; and
	(h) in the case of directory listings for which a specific charge applies AND IN THE CASE OF DIRECTORY LISTINGS WITH REGARD TO JOINT USE OF SERVICE¹², where the listing has appeared in a directory and the customer's service is terminated or the listed party OR JOINT USER¹³ moves to another location, and the customer has given the Company advance notice, the termination is effective on the date of that service termination or move, subject to a minimum charge of one month, AND AS OF SUCH TIME AS NO REFERENCE OF CALL SERVICE IS PROVIDED FROM THE OLD TO THE NEW NUMBER¹⁴.
22.	Company-Initiated Suspension or Termination of Service¹⁵
22.1	The Company may suspend or terminate a customer's service only where the customer:
	(a) fails to pay an account of the customer that is past due, provided it exceeds fifty dollars or has been past due for more than two months;
	(b) fails to provide or maintain a reasonable deposit or alternative when required to do so pursuant to these Terms;
	(c) falls to comply with the terms of a deferred payment agreement;
	(d) repeatedly fails to provide the Company with reasonable entry and access in conformity with articles 5.1 and 5.2;
	(e) uses or permits others to use any of the Company's services so as to prevent fair and proportionate use by others¹⁶;
	(f) uses or permits others to use any of the Company's services for a purpose or in a manner that is contrary to law or for the purpose of MAKING ANNOYING OR OFFENSIVE CALLS¹⁷;
	(g) contravenes Articles 8.4 or 8.5; or
	(h) fails to provide payment when required by the Company pursuant to Article 17.4.
22.2	The Company may not suspend or terminate service in the following circumstances:
	(a) failure to pay non-tariffed charges;
	(b) failure to pay charges for a different class of service at different premises or for service in the name of another customer, including failure to pay the account of another customer as a guarantor;
	(c) where the customer is prepared to enter into and honour a reasonable deferred payment agreement; or
	(d) where there is a dispute regarding the basis of the proposed suspension or termination, provided payment is being made for undisputed outstanding amounts and the Company does not have reasonable grounds for believing that the purpose of that dispute is to evade or delay payment.
22.3	Prior to suspension or termination, the Company must provide the customer with reasonable advance notice, stating:
	(a) the reason for the proposed suspension or termination and the amount owing (if any);
	(b) the scheduled suspension or termination date;
	(c) that a reasonable deferred payment agreement can be entered into (where the reason for suspension or termination is failure to pay);
	(d) the reconnection charge;
	(e) the telephone number of a company representative with whom any dispute may be discussed; and
	(f) that disputes unresolved with this representative may be referred to a senior company manager.
	Where repeated efforts to contact the customer have failed, the Company must deliver such advance notice to the billing address.
22.4	In addition to the notice required by Article 22.3, the Company must, at least twenty-four hours prior to suspension or termination, advise the customer or another responsible person that suspension or termination is imminent, except where:
	(a) repeated efforts to so advise have failed;
	(b) immediate action must be taken to protect the Company from network harm resulting from customer-provided equipment; or
	(c) the suspension or termination occurs by virtue of a failure to provide payment when requested by the Company pursuant to Article 17.4.
22.5	Except with customer consent or in exceptional circumstances, suspension or termination may occur only on business days between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., unless the business day precedes a non-business day in which case disconnection may not occur after 12 noon.
22.6	Suspension or termination does not affect the customer's obligation to pay any amount owed to the Company.
22.7	In the case of services that have been suspended, unless suspension occurs during the minimum contract period, the Company must make a daily pro rata allowance based on the monthly charge for such services.*
(draft)*	For CNCP, this section would be deleted.
(final)	(*CNCP's Terms will include Article 22.7).
22.8	The Company must restore service, without undue delay, where the grounds for suspension or termination no longer exist or a payment or deferred payment agreement has been negotiated.
22.9	Where it becomes apparent that suspension or termination occurred in error or was otherwise improper, the Company must restore service during business hours on the next working day, at the latest, unless exceptional circumstances do not permit this, and no reconnection charges shall be levied.
	Notes to Appendix I: ¹ Underlined portions indicate changes from the draft Terms, except in headings and in citations. Where substantive changes have been made, both the draft and the final Article are given. ² Thoughout the actual Terms, the name of the particular carrier will replace "the Company". * The term "draft" refers to draft Articles which appeared in CRTC Telecom Public Notice 1985-22. The terms "final" and "new" refer to Articles which have been accepted by the Commission as part of the Terms; similarly, where no notation appears, the Article has also been accepted by the Commission as part of the Terms. ³ For CNCP, the capitalized words would be replaced with "messages which they do not believe originated at their terminals". ⁴ For CNCP, the word "telephone" would be replaced by "Telex". ⁵ For CNCP, the capitalized words would read: "Telex directory, both white and gold pages". ⁶ For CNCP, the capitalized word would read: "Telex terminal". ⁷ For CNCP, "ye1low" would be replaced by "gold". ⁸ For CNCP, "telephone" would be replaced by "dial". ⁹ For CNCP, this paragraph would be deleted. ¹⁰ For CNCP, the capitalized words would be replaced by "rate area". ¹¹ For CNCP, the capitalized words would be replaced with: "the percentage of the remaining unpaid charge for the minimum contract period that is equivalent to the proportion which the unexpired portion of the minimum contract period bears to the full minimum contract period". ¹²,¹³,¹⁴ For CNCP, the capitalized words would be deleted. (draft) ¹⁵ For CNCP, in this heading and in Articles 22.1 to 22.9, all references to suspension would he deleted. (final) ¹⁵ Delete. ¹⁶ For CNCP, this paragraph would he deleted. ¹⁷ For CNCP, the capitalized words would he replaced with "sending annoying or offensive messages".

	APPENDIX II TABLE 1
	SUMMARY OF PROCEDURES FOR SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION IN CASES OF NON-PAYMENT FOR TARIFFED SERVICES
		1.	2.	3.
	When payment may be requested	Regular Monthly Bill	In exceptional circumstances: interim bill (Article 17.2)	In extreme circumstances: immediate, payment (Article 17.4)
	When charges can be considered past due (subject to Article l7 .3)	When LPC applies (37-41 days) (Article 17.1)	Three (3) days after details of charges are provided and payment is demanded (Article 17.2)	Immediately, in circumstances set out in Article 17.4
	Requirements before suspension/termination may take place*	Reasonable advance notice, stating amount owing, reasons, scheduled date of suspension/termination, reconnection charge, availability of deferred payment agreement, telephone number of company representative, and the right to refer unresolved disputes to a senior company manager (Article 22.3).
		At least twenty-four hours prior to suspension/termination, advise that suspension/termination is imminent unless repeated efforts to so advise have failed (Article 22.4).		N/N
	The times when suspension/ termination may take place	Except with customer consent or in exceptional circumstances, only on business days between 8 am - 4 pm but before noon if the business day preceeds a non-business day (Article 22.5).		N/N
	N/N = Not Necessary	Suspension/Termination
	* Subject to Articles 22.1(a) and (c) and 22.2(b),(c) and (d), suspension/termination for non-payment can occur for all tariffed charges.

Date modified:: 1986-03-26

ARCHIVED - Telecom Decision CRTC 86-7

This page has been archived on the Web

TELECOM DECISION

REVIEW OF THE GENERAL REGULATIONS OF THE FEDERALLY REGULATED TERRESTRIAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMON CARRIERS

TERMS OF SERVICE

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION

2. PROCEDURAL ISSUES

2.1 Exceptions to this Proceeding

2.2 Implementation of the Terms of Service

2.3 Information to Customers

2.4 French Versions of the Terms of Service

3. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

3.1 Balancing of Competing Interests

3.2 Uniformity among the Carriers

4. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DETERMINATIONS REGARDING TERMS OF SERVICE

4.1 Limitation of Carrier Liability (Articles 1.2, 13.1, 15.1, 16.1 and 16.2)

4.2 Obligation to Provide Service (Article 3.1)

4.3 Company Right to Enter Premises (Articles 5.1 to 5.4)

4.4 Two-Party and Four-Party Service (Article 6.1)

4.5 Confidentiality of Customer Records (Article 11.1)

4.6 Payment Time Limit and Company-Initiated Suspension or Termination of Service (Articles 17 and 22)

5. COMMISSION DETERMINATIONS REGARDING RELATED PROPOSALS IN PUBLIC NOTICE 1985-22

5.1 Notification of General Rate Increases

5.2 Quality of Service Standards

5.3 Classification of Service (not applicable to CNCP)

5.4 Annoying or Offensive Calls or Messages

5.5 Telephone and Telex Directories

5.6 Elimination of Advance Payments Provision

5.7 Deposits

5.8 Billing and Payment

5.9 Dispute Procedures

5.10 Discontinuance of Certain Rules

Appendix I

TERMS OF SERVICE

APPENDIX II

TABLE 1

SUMMARY OF PROCEDURES FOR SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION IN CASES OF NON-PAYMENT FOR TARIFFED SERVICES