Search

ARCHIVED - Telecom Commission Letter - 8638-C12-71/02

This page has been archived on the Web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.

Archived

This page has been archived on the Web.

Letter

Ottawa, 12 August 2005

File No . 8638-C12-71/02

BY E-MAIL

To: Distribution List

Re: Follow-up to Decision 2002-58: GT Group Telecom Services Corp. v. Bell Canada - Non-compliance with Bundling Rules

In paragraphs 22 and 24 of Decision 2002-58, the Commission directed Aliant Telecom Inc., Bell Canada, MTS Communications Inc. (now MTS Allstream Inc.), Saskatchewan Telecommunications, Société en commandite Télébec, TELUS Communications Inc. and TELUS Communications (Québec) Inc. (collectively, the ILECs), to file by 21 October 2002 a report identifying, separately in respect of each of its business, Centrex and residential services, each service, including a promotion, offered as of 20 September 2002 without an approved tariff, where the service involved a tariffed service and one or more forborne services of the company and the customer is offered a reduction, discount, rebate, incentive or any other benefit depending on the customer's user of any of those services.  

The Commission also directed the ILECs to include in the report the following information in respect of each service:

•  a description of the service;

•  the conditions a customer or potential customer must satisfy to receive the service and the associated reduction, discount, rebate, incentive or other benefit;

•  the date when the service was first offered;

•  whether the service is offered, or described to, customers or potential customers as a "promotion";

•  if the company considers that it does have regulatory authority for providing the service in question, the specific regulatory authority under which it is provided; and

•  the number of customers to whom each of the rebates, credits, discounts, benefits or incentives has been provided.

In paragraph 25 of Decision 2002-58 the Commission invited GT Group Telecom Services Corp. and AT&T Canada Corp. (now MTS Allstream Inc.) to file comments with respect to the reports filed pursuant to Decision 2002-58 and to include their views as to appropriate remedies.

In Decision 2002-58, the Commission also noted that once it had received the above material from the ILECs, it would determine what further action, if any, would be appropriate with respect to the follow-up to Decision 2002-58.

On 10 February 2003 the Commission, in a letter, directed Aliant Telecom Inc., Bell Canada, MTS Allstream Inc., Saskatchewan Telecommunications, and, TELUS Communications Inc. to provide additional information and to answer supplementary interrogatories by 21 February 2003 with respect to the reports they filed 21 October 2002.  

All the material submitted by the ILECs and interested parties in respect to the follow-up to Decision 2002-58 has been assessed and no further action is required in this matter, therefore the file will be closed.

Yours sincerely,

'Original signed by P. Godin for S. Hutton '

Scott Hutton

Directory General, Competition, Costing and Tariffs
Telecommunications

cc: Nancy Webster Cole CRTC (819)934-6377  

Date Modified: 2005-09-08

Date modified: