ARCHIVED -  Telecom Order CRTC 97-463

Telecom Order

Ottawa, 4 April 1997

Telecom Order CRTC 97-463

IN THE MATTER OF a proposal filed by Stentor Resource Centre Inc. (Stentor) under Tariff Notice 379 (TN 379) dated 22 November 1996, on behalf of and with the concurrence of all federally regulated Stentor owners, to modify National Services Tariff Item 515, Advantage 900, by revising the Program and Service Provider definitions to permit Business/Government Exchange service providers to offer programs that provide value other than that which may be associated with information transferred by the service provider during a call to the program's Advantage 900 number.

WHEREAS the Commission issued Telecom Order CRTC 96-1489, dated 19 December 1996, approving the proposed tariff revisions on an interim basis;

WHEREAS the Commission received comments from the Canadian Alarm and Security Association (CANASA) and from the Independent Professional Alarm Dealers (IPAD), reply comments from Stentor, additional comments from CANASA and additional reply comments from Stentor;

WHEREAS CANASA submitted that it is not in the public interest to permit the use of the billing and collection systems of local telephone companies for the billing and collection of accounts for services, not consisting entirely of a message, provided during an Advantage 900 call by a service provider, prior to the establishment of local competition and a determination by the Commission that the billing and collection function of Stentor members is no longer integral to their regulated monopoly operations;

WHEREAS CANASA submitted that it appears that TN 379 is intended to facilitate the billing and collecting by Bell Canada (Bell) of a charge that has recently been enacted by the Metropolitan Toronto Police Services Commission for police dispatch services provided in response to alarms;

WHEREAS CANASA submitted that the Metropolitan Toronto Police want to use the monopoly leverage and buffer that billing and collection by Bell would provide to achieve maximum recovery of such charges;

WHEREAS CANASA submitted that the nature of the Metropolitan Toronto Police charge is not such as to merit a conclusion that it would be in the public interest to permit its collection through the local telephone company's billing and collection system;

WHEREAS CANASA submitted that the current restrictions in the Accounts Receivable Management (ARM) Agreement recognize the fact that, even though the assigned receivables do not relate to a General Tariff service, by virtue of their local monopoly position, Stentor members have a unique capacity to leverage the collection of accounts by tying, through the use of a joint monopoly/competitive services billing and collection process, the current and future supply and quality of essential or monopoly services to the payment of Advantage 900 charges and to the resolution of disputes over such charges in favour of the telephone company;

WHEREAS CANASA submitted that it is fundamentally objectionable to provide the telephone company with an opportunity to relate the supply of telecommunications services to payment of receivables which it has been assigned by a third party, especially where these receivables are prone to government/chargee disputes;

WHEREAS CANASA and IPAD submitted that any consideration by the Commission of TN 379 should occur only after a full public process following a Public Notice, given the fundamental changes that would flow from approval of TN 379;

WHEREAS IPAD submitted that the main problem with the Stentor proposal is that the charge will apply at the time of the call being made and there is no proof of delivery of the service at a future time;

WHEREAS IPAD submitted that the charges are applied not only to actual dispatches but also on cancelled calls and on non-dispatched calls and that the burden is on the industry to prove that the service was not provided and to submit an appeal for credit;

WHEREAS Stentor submitted that TN 379 was filed in response to needs expressed by a number of service providers and to potential service providers, not just to a request by the Metropolitan Toronto Police;

WHEREAS Stentor considered that the ability of the member companies to bill for services will be the major growth area for the 900 portfolio;

WHEREAS Stentor replied that CANASA's arguments regarding monopoly power abuse with respect to billing and collecting are without merit since, pursuant to the Terms of Service for each Stentor company, service cannot be suspended or terminated for failure to pay non-tariffed charges;

WHEREAS Stentor submitted that specific program applications should not be addressed as part of the tariff filing process, but should be addressed as part of Service Provider Program applications, when Stentor reviews the applications to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions associated with all Advantage 900 agreements and tariffs;

WHEREAS Stentor submitted that the resolution of the problems envisioned by IPAD concerning the method of charging rests with the service provider and the service provider's clients and is independent of the means of charging for service;

WHEREAS the Commission disagrees with CANASA's arguments and agrees with Stentor regarding the issue of monopoly power abuse with respect to billing and collecting, given that service cannot be terminated or suspended because of failure to pay non-tariffed charges;

WHEREAS the Commission considers that Stentor's proposal is in the public interest; and

WHEREAS the Commission disagrees with CANASA and IPAD that a further proceeding is needed prior to disposition of TN 379 -

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

TN 379 is approved on a final basis.

Allan J. Darling
Secretary General