ARCHIVED -  Telecom Order CRTC 99-21

This page has been archived on the Web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 Order


Ottawa, 13 January 1999


Telecom Order CRTC 99-21


On 11 December 1998, BC TEL filed Tariff Notice (TN) 3892 proposing to implement a promotion to provide customers with an incentive to change from an Alternate Provider of Local Services (e.g., Centrex reseller or Competitive Local Exchange Carrier (CLEC)) to BC TEL for the provision of their Centrex service. The promotional offer would provide customers with a credit on their 7th month's bill based on the average of their 2nd to 6th months' bills for their Centrex station lines.


File No.: TN 3892


1.The Commission notes that in its covering letter to TN 3892, BC TEL stated that customers must register for the proposed promotion by responding to a marketing contact from the company.


2.In a letter dated 16 April 1998 re:  Commission Decision Regarding CRTC Interconnection Steering Committee Dispute on Competitive Winback Guidelines, the Commission directed that an Incumbent Local Exchange Carrier is not to attempt to win back a customer from a CLEC for a period of three months after that customer's service has been completely transferred to another local service provider.


3.The Commission notes that BC TEL's proposal does not preclude winback attempts, by way of communications with customers on an individual basis, within the three month restricted period. In these circumstances, the Commission is not persuaded that BC TEL's proposal is consistent with the Commission's direction.


4.The Commission therefore denies the application.


Secretary General


This document is available in alternative format upon request and may also be viewed at the following Internet site:


Date modified: