ARCHIVED - Letter
This page has been archived on the Web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.
ABRIDGED
Ottawa, 10 November 2009
Our Reference: 8661-C122-200815889
BY E-MAIL
Mr. Bill Abbott
Senior Counsel - Regulatory Law
Bell Canada
160 Elgin Street, 19th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2C4
Mr. Marcel Mercia
Chief Operating Officer
Cybersurf Corp.
300 West Tower, 1144-29th Ave. NE
Calgary, Alberta T2E 7P1
Ms. Monica Song
Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP
99 Bank Street, Suite 1420
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1H4
Dear Mr. Abbott, Mr. Mercia, and Ms. Song:
Re: Cybersurf application for relief against Bell Canada regarding certain billing practices and disconnection – Staff opinion on the amounts owing
On 26 November 2008, Cybersurf Corporation (Cybersurf) filed an application in accordance with Part VII of the CRTC Telecommunications Rules of Procedure requesting that the Commission issue a number of orders with respect to Bell Canada’s billing practices and the alleged arrears incurred by Cybersurf as a result of those billing practices.
Commission staff has reviewed and carefully considered all of the material submitted by both Cybersurf and Bell Canada and is providing its view as to the outstanding amounts owing for the period covering 1st January 2002 to 31st December 2008.
It is apparent from the record that the dispute between Bell Canada and Cybersurf involves a complex reconciliation of about 30 accounts over a period of seven years. Several rounds of interrogatories were issued and a number of submissions were made by both parties in an attempt to properly quantify the bills issued by Bell Canada, the payments made by Cybersurf, the credits issued by Bell Canada as well as the additional credits claimed by Cybersurf. Parties produced most of the information on an aggregate level since producing documentation for all of the disputed invoices by account by service and by billing item, as well as payments and other associated information, would have resulted in an unmanageable process for all parties.
In light of the above, the parties should understand that Commission staff’s view is necessarily an approximation of the actual arrears incurred, which reflects the aggregate information filed on this record.
Staff is not prepared to mediate any remaining disputes between the parties.
The parties are two sophisticated commercial entities that have been involved in what is essentially a protracted, fact-specific, commercial dispute. If the parties continue to be unable to come to an agreement, there are more appropriate avenues available to the parties other than the Commission, such as mediation, arbitration or recourse before a court of competent jurisdiction. In this regard, staff notes, for example, that Bell Canada filed a statement of claim before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on 20 February 2009, to seek a resolution of this matter. On 6 October 2009, Cybersurf responded by filing a statement of defence and counterclaim.
Yours sincerely,
Original signed by
Paul Godin
Director General
Telecommunications - Competition, Costing & Tariffs
- Date modified: