ARCHIVED - Public Notice CRTC 2000-91

This page has been archived on the Web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.

	Public Notice CRTC 2000-91
	Ottawa, 30 June 2000
	Soliciting comments to extend telemarketing restrictions across Canada
	Reference: 8665-C12-09/00
	The Commission is seeking comments to ensure geographical uniformity for telemarketing rules using automatic dialing and announcing devices, live voice calls and facsimile transmission. The restrictions currently apply to certain telephone companies and the Commission proposes to extend them to apply uniformly to all telecommunications service providers.
1.	In Use of telephone company facilities for the provision of unsolicited telecommunications, Telecom Decision CRTC 94-10, dated 13 June 1994, the Commission reviewed its regime regarding the use of telephone company facilities for unsolicited telecommunications. The Commission defined solicitation as selling or promoting a product or service, or soliciting money or money's worth, whether directly or indirectly and including solicitations made on behalf of another party.
2.	In this decision the Commission:
	a) prohibited the use of automatic dialing and announcing devices (ADADs) to make unsolicited calls for the purpose of solicitation in the territories of all telephone companies under its jurisdiction and put conditions on permitted uses of ADADs for non-solicitation purposes. The prohibition and conditions for permitted uses of ADADs applied to AGT Limited (now TELUS Communications Inc.), BC TEL (now TELUS Communications (B.C.) Inc.), Bell Canada, Island Telecom Inc., Maritime Tel & Tel Limited (MTT), NBTel Inc., NewTel Communications Inc., Northwestel Inc. and to MTS Communications Inc. by virtue of Telecom Order CRTC 94-1073, dated 12 September 1994;
	b) established in Bell Canada's territory, conditions for unsolicited live voice solicitations which were in later decisions extended to the territories of MTS and TELUS;
	c) established conditions for unsolicited facsimile (fax) solicitations in Bell Canada's territory which were in later orders extended to BC TEL, MTS and TELUS; and
	d) established a procedure for enforcement of this regime by the service providers in question.
3.	In Telecom Order CRTC 96-1229, dated 7 November 1996, the Commission limited the hours during which unsolicited fax calls can be made.
4.	In Local competition, Telecom Decision CRTC 97-8, dated 1 May 1997, the conditions regarding ADADs, live voice and fax solicitations were extended to the competitive local exchange carriers (CLECs) operating in the territories of the incumbent telcos to whom the regime applies.
	No uniform application of solicitation rules
5.	Presently, the Commission's regime regarding ADADs, live voice and fax solicitations do not apply uniformly across Canada. For example, the rules relating to live voice and fax solicitations apply only to specific incumbent local exchange carriers (ILECs) and CLECs who operate in areas where the rules are in force for the ILECs. These rules do not apply to the independent telephone companies, or to interexchange carriers (IXCs), or wireless service providers (WSPs).
	Implications for resolution of complaints
6.	The lack of uniformity in the application of the voice/fax rules has led to a number of difficulties.
7.	The Commission notes that problems in resolving complaints have occurred when voice/fax solicitations originating in local exchange carriers' (LECs') territories where the rules do not apply, reach customers in other LECs' territories where the rules do apply. For example, an unsolicited telemarketing call may originate in New Brunswick and be directed to a prospect in Ontario. Similarly, problems in resolving complaints have occurred when unsolicited telemarketing calls originate from someone using the facilities of an independent telco or a WSP, to whom the rules do not apply.
8.	Under the Commission's regime, those who violate any of the restrictions on unsolicited calls may have their service terminated after two business days' notice from the telephone company. However, enforcement can only be used by LECs on their own customers in territories where the current rules apply.
9.	The Commission also notes that NBTel has a tariff for per-line call display blocking which allows telemarketers to call without having their names and numbers displayed on the called party's telephone set. This appears contrary to the present rules where the call to solicit must display the originating calling number or an alternate number at which the call originator can be reached.
10.	The Commission is of the view that as CLECs become established as alternate service providers in traditional ILEC territories, the inconsistent application of the rules will become more confusing and problematic. For example, a CLEC to which the rules do not apply in one ILEC territory may also provide service to customers in the territory of another ILEC where the rules do apply.
11.	The Commission has also received complaints where the originator of the solicitations is using an IXC or reseller.
12.	Although IXCs are not subject to the voice/fax rules, it may be appropriate for them to let their customers know when their networks are used for certain telemarketing practices which are contrary to the rules in place for the ILECs.
13.	With respect to resellers, it may be appropriate for the Commission to impose conditions under section 24 of the Telecommunications Act on the underlying carrier to ensure that appropriate protections are in place regarding unsolicited telemarketing.
14.	The lack of uniform rules makes it increasingly difficult for a telephone company to take action and for the Commission to resolve complaints regarding unsolicited telemarketing.
	The Commission's preliminary view favours geographical uniformity
15.	The Commission is of the preliminary view that the rules regarding unsolicited communications using ADADs, live voice and fax should apply uniformly throughout Canada. Such uniformity would enable service providers and the Commission to deal effectively with complaints and clearly explain rules consistently to customers wherever they are located, regardless of their service provider.
16.	Accordingly, the Commission initiates a proceeding to seek comments on the preliminary view that the rules as set out in Decision 94-10 and Order 96-1229 regarding unsolicited communications using ADADs, live voice and fax should be applied uniformly to telecommunications service providers. In this proceeding, the Commission will consider whether the rules should be applied to all ILECs, CLECs, independent telephone companies, IXCs and WSPs (through tariffs or section 24 conditions, as appropriate). Further, the Commission will consider whether conditions should be imposed on the underlying carriers in respect of services provided to resellers.
	Procedure
17.	Persons wishing to participate in this proceeding must notify the Commission of their intention to do so by writing to the Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2, fax: (819) 953-0795, by 10 July 2000. Parties are to indicate in the notice, their email address, where available. If parties do not have access to the Internet, they are to indicate in their notice whether they wish to receive disk versions of hard copy filings. The Commission will issue, as soon as possible after the registration date, a complete list of interested parties and their mailing address (including their email address, if available), identifying those parties who wish to receive disk versions.
18.	Interested parties may file comments with the Commission, serving a copy on other interested parties, by 31 July 2000.
19.	Interested parties may file reply comments with the Commission, serving a copy on other interested parties, by 21 August 2000.
20.	Where a document is to be filed or served by a specific date, the document must be actually received, not merely sent, by that date.
21.	Parties wishing to file electronic versions of their comments can do so by email or on diskette. The Commission email address is procedure@crtc.gc.ca.
22.	Electronic submissions should be in the HTML format. As an alternative, those making submissions may use "Microsoft Word" for text and "Microsoft Excel" for spreadsheets.
23.	Please number each paragraph of the comment. In addition, please enter the line *End of Document* following the last paragraph. This will help the Commission verify that the document has not been damaged during transmission.
24.	The Commission will make comments filed in electronic form available on its web site at www.crtc.gc.ca in the official language and format in which they are submitted. This will make it easier for members of the public to consult the documents.
25.	The Commission also encourages interested parties to monitor the public examination file (and/or the Commission's web site) for additional information that they may find useful when preparing their comments.
26.	Submissions may be examined or will be made available promptly upon request at the following Commission offices during normal business hours:
	Central Building Les Terrasses de la Chaudière 1 Promenade du Portage, Room G-5 Hull, Quebec K1A 0N2 Tel: (819) 997-2429 - TDD: 994-0423 Fax: (819) 994-0218
	Bank of Commerce Building 1809 Barrington Street Suite 1007 Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 3K8 Tel: (902) 426-7997 - TDD: 426-6997 Fax: (902) 426-2721
	405 de Maisonneuve Blvd. East 2^nd Floor, Suite B2300 Montréal, Quebec H2L 4J5 Tel: (514) 283-6607 - TDD: 283-8316 Fax: (514) 283-3689
	55 St. Clair Avenue East Suite 624 Toronto, Ontario M4T 1M2 Tel: (416) 952-9096 Fax: (416) 954-6343
	Kensington Building 275 Portage Avenue Suite 1810 Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 2B3 Tel: (204) 983-6306 - TDD: 983-8274 Fax: (204) 983-6317
	Cornwall Professional Building 2125 - 11^th Avenue Room 103 Regina, Saskatchewan S4P 3X3 Tel: (306) 780-3422 Fax: (306) 780-3319
	Suite 520 - 10405 Jasper Avenue Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3N4 Tel: (780) 495-3224 Fax: (780) 495-3214
	530-580 Hornby Street Vancouver, British Columbia V6C 3B6 Tel: (604) 666-2111 - TDD: 666-0778 Fax: (604) 666-8322
	Secretary General
	This document is available in alternate format upon request and may also be examined at the following Internet site: http://www.crtc.gc.ca

Date modified:: ????-??-??

Language selection

Search and menus

Search

ARCHIVED - Public Notice CRTC 2000-91

This page has been archived on the Web

Public Notice CRTC 2000-91

Soliciting comments to extend telemarketing restrictions across Canada

No uniform application of solicitation rules

Implications for resolution of complaints

The Commission's preliminary view favours geographical uniformity

Procedure