Telecom Order CRTC 2016-282

PDF version

Ottawa, 21 July 2016

File numbers: Tariff Notices 507, 507A, 507B, 662, 662A, and 662B

TELUS Communications Company - Withdrawal of certain call management features

Applications

1. The Commission received two applications from TELUS Communications Company (TCC), dated 15 February 2016, in which the company proposed to withdraw the following features from item 235 - Call Management Services of its General Tariff 18001 and item 300 - Call Management Services of its General Tariff 21461, effective 31 July 2016:

   • Advanced Call Forwarding^{Footnote 1}

   • Call Gate^{Footnote 2}

   • Do Not Disturb^{Footnote 3}

   • Call Director^{Footnote 4}

2. TCC subsequently filed revisions to its applications, dated 25 February 2016, to correct information in its proposed tariff pages. The company filed additional revisions, dated 20 April 2016, to modify its proposed withdrawal of the Do Not Disturb feature.

3. TCC submitted that the Call Director feature was launched on the Network Applications Vehicle (NAV) platform, while the other features were introduced as part of the Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN) platform. TCC indicated that its withdrawal applications were part of the second phase of its staged approach to migrate customers away from the AIN platform due to outdated technology and the risk of service failure.^{Footnote 5} TCC also requested to withdraw the Call Director feature since the NAV platform had been discontinued by the manufacturer.

4. The Commission received interventions regarding TCC’s applications from individuals and businesses. The public records of these proceedings, which closed on 6 June 2016, are available on the Commission’s website at www.crtc.gc.ca or by using the file numbers provided above.

Positions of parties

5. Interveners expressed concern about TCC’s proposal to withdraw the above-noted call management features, particularly Advanced Call Forwarding for business customers and Do Not Disturb for residential customers.

6. Several customers indicated that they use the Do Not Disturb feature to block unwanted telemarketing calls, and that the Commission should deny TCC’s request to withdraw it.

7. One customer submitted that the withdrawal of Call Director would affect the functionality of his Vista 480 phone.

8. In response to the intervention about Call Director, TCC submitted that incoming and outgoing calls could still be received and placed without this feature. Further, the underlying features of Call Director, which are Call Display and Visual Call Waiting, would continue to work. However, some soft key options to direct incoming calls would no longer be available.

9. TCC also provided clarification and additional information regarding proposed alternative features.

10. TCC proposed Call Forwarding Variable as an alternative to Advanced Call Forwarding for its residential and business customers. TCC indicated that it would be offered at the same rate and that it provides the same functionality as Advanced Call Forwarding. For business customers, TCC also offers ServiceSaver, which sends incoming calls to alternative phone numbers at any time to keep businesses operating, and can be activated remotely using an interactive response service.

11. TCC indicated that it offers a number of free alternatives to Call Gate, including Directory Assistance Block, Call Guardian Toll Block, and Pay-Per-Use feature block.

12. Given the number of interventions regarding the Do Not Disturb feature, TCC proposed to withdraw the feature only for business customers, and to retain it for residential customers at the current rate while the company builds the capability to support the feature on another platform in its network.

Commission’s analysis and determinations

13. In Telecom Order 2009-192, the Commission approved TCC’s request to destandardize some of these features due to low subscriber numbers and the availability of other options. As a result, a number of the features have not been available to new customers since 2009.

14. In addition, the AIN platform is at risk of failure, while the NAV platform has been discontinued by the manufacturer.

15. TCC has addressed the concerns raised by interveners by providing clarification and additional information. The company also recognized the importance of the Do Not Disturb feature by deciding to retain it for residential customers.

16. Further, TCC’s applications meet the requirements set out in Telecom Information Bulletin 2010-455-1, in which the Commission set out its procedures for dealing with applications to destandardize and/or withdraw tariffed services.^{Footnote 6} In particular, TCC provided sufficient rationale for the withdrawal of the features in question and identified reasonable substitutes for customers to migrate to.

17. In light of the above, the Commission approves on a final basis TCC’s applications.

Secretary General

Related documents

• Approval processes for tariff applications and intercarrier agreements, Telecom Information Bulletin CRTC 2010-455-1, 19 February 2016
• TELUS Communications Company - Withdrawal of Anonymous Caller Identification feature, Telecom Order CRTC 2015-344, 29 July 2015
• Telecom Order CRTC 2009-192, 15 April 2009
• Mandatory customer contract renewal notification and requirements for service destandardization/withdrawal, Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-22, 6 March 2008

Date modified:

2016-07-21