Telecom - Secretary General Letter addressed to Philippe Gauvin (Bell Canada)
Gatineau, 28 November 2025
Reference: 1011-NOC2016-0293
BY EMAIL
Philippe Gauvin
Assistant General Counsel
Bell Canada
Floor 19, 160 Elgin Street
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 2C4
bell.regulatory@bell.ca
Subject: Bell’s non-compliance with the Wireless Code
Dear Philippe Gauvin,
Thank you for the letter from Bell Canada and its flanker brand Virgin Plus (collectively, Bell) dated 22 April 2025 informing the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (the Commission) of Bell’s intention to start selling locked cellphones. According to Bell, this practice is in response to an increase in crime at its points of sale.
The Commission acknowledges the importance of ensuring the safety and security of customers and employees at retail outlets. The Commission, however, considers that Bell has not demonstrated that the practice of locking cellphones for up to 60 days after purchase is a necessary and proportionate response in this case. Specifically, Bell has not demonstrated that this practice is effective, nor that it has exhausted alternative solutions that comply with the Wireless Code (the Code). The Commission is concerned that Bell has opted to disregard a key consumer protection outlined in the Code, which is not in the best interest of consumers.
To address these concerns and help protect consumers, this letter sets out the Commission’s determinations on Bell’s practice of locking cellphones for up to 60 days after purchase.
Background
As you know, the Code’s rules on device unlocking require service providers to provide cellphones to customers unlocked at or before the time of sale. This rule was created to contribute to a more dynamic marketplace to the benefit of Canadians, by making it easier for consumers to take advantage of competitive offers.
After the Commission was informed of Bell’s practice, Commission staff asked Bell, in a letter dated 9 May 2025, to provide additional information and to explain how Bell would ensure that it remained in compliance with the Code.
In response, Bell stated that the practice of providing locked cellphones complies with the Code, because the Code does not indicate a specific moment at which they must be unlocked. Bell indicated that locking cellphones is in the best interest of consumers and is necessary to address an increase in crime and financial loss experienced by the wireless industry. Should the Commission disagree with that position, Bell requested that the Commission issue a decision to temporarily allow Bell and other providers to maintain this practice and launch a proceeding on an expedited basis to consider changes to the Code.
Commission’s decision
In the Commission’s view, the Code and the related policy are clear. In particular, section F.1. of the Code requires that any device provided by a service provider to the customer for the purpose of providing wireless services must be provided unlocked. In addition, paragraph 306 of Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2017-200, Review of the Wireless Code, requires that devices must be unlocked at or before the time of sale. The Commission therefore considers that Bell’s position is not supported.
The Commission also considers that locking cellphones is not in the best interest of consumers and that this practice has not been shown to be necessary to address any increase in crime and financial loss experienced by the wireless industry. While the Commission recognizes that potential criminal activity at points of sale is a legitimate concern that should be addressed, and that there may be a need for collaborative action that includes wireless service providers, manufacturers, law enforcement and other industry representatives, Bell has not demonstrated how this specific practice is effective in addressing the issue.
Moreover, Bell did not show that it had considered other measures that would allow it to remain compliant with the Code. In sum, the Commission finds that Bell did not demonstrate that amending the Code’s device unlocking rules is needed to address these issues, nor the necessity or the proportionality of the practice as a possible justification for its apparent non-compliance with a key requirement of the Code. Ultimately, any solution that Bell, or other wireless service providers, implement as a means of addressing potential criminal activity at points of sale, must be in compliance with the Code.
In light of the above, the Commission:
- denies Bell’s request for a decision to temporarily allow it and other wireless service providers to continue the practice of providing locked cellphones after purchase;
- denies Bell’s request to launch a proceeding to consider changes to the Code;
- directs Bell to immediately cease selling locked cellphones and ensure that all future cellphone sales comply with this direction and the Code;
- directs Bell to unlock, free of charge, any cellphone still locked to its network because of this practice, and to notify the affected customers that Bell has done so; and
- directs Bell to submit the following information to assess the scope of the issue by 9 January 2026: the number of locked cellphones sold since 22 April 2025, and of customers who requested unlocking before the 60-day term; of those, the number of requests granted, and how long it took to unlock each cellphone; and the number of complaints received about locked cellphones, and a description of the actions taken to resolve them.
All wireless service providers are responsible for remaining compliant with the Code at all times. In this case, Bell informed the Commission just days before putting its new practice into effect, as a fait accompli. In the Commission’s view, when a company is seeking relief from its regulatory obligations, they should engage the Commission sooner. Commission staff would be pleased to discuss potential collaborative action, and we encourage you to contact Nanao Kachi, Director of Social and Consumer Policy, at Nanao.Kachi@crtc.gc.ca.
Sincerely,
Original signed by
Marc Morin
Secretary General and Executive Vice-President
CC: Scott Hutton, Vice-President, Consumer, Analytics and Strategy, CRTC, Scott.Hutton@crtc.gc.ca
Nanao Kachi, Director, Consumer, Analytics and Strategy, CRTC, Nanao.Kachi@crtc.gc.ca
- Date modified: