TELCO COMPETITION: THE LACK OF ESSENTIAL CONSUMER PROTECTIONS

1

• TELCO COMPETITION THE LACK OF ESSENTIAL
  CONSUMER PROTECTIONS

Barbara R. Alexander Consumer Affairs
Consultant 83 Wedgewood Dr. Winthrop, Maine 04364
[phone] E-mail barbalex_at_ctel.net
2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR CONTENT

• This presentation relies heavily upon and is a
  reflection of work of others, particularly Susan
  M. Baldwin and AARP
• Those who want copies of recent papers Susan has
  done for AARP on COLR and VoIP should contact
  Coralette Hannon at channon_at_aarp.org

3
TELCO DEREGULATION WHO IS IN CHARGE? NO ONE

• Due to federal/state jurisdictional complexity
  and ILEC moves to deregulate COLR obligation,
  essential consumer protections applicable to many
  competitive markets are missing
• Disclosures
• Service Quality
• Customer Service Complaints
• Unfair and deceptive marketing and contract terms

4
CONTRAST WITH ELECTRIC/GAS RESTRUCTURING

• State regulators have licensing and consumer
  protection mandates to oversee conduct of
  alternative suppliers
• Distribution utilities have default service
  obligation
• Customer complaints and service quality oversight
  is intact with respect to utilities and suppliers

5
COLR AND UNIVERSAL SERVICE

• The two are inextricably linked and elimination
  of COLR threatens achievement of long standing
  state and federal policy to ensure universal
  service
• While proposals for elimination of COLR and
  deregulation rely on presence of competition
  and customer choice, in fact trend is toward less
  competition, not more!

6
DEREGULATION OF VoIP

• Again, we have confusing state-federal
  jurisdictional issues (fixed and nomadic)
• FCC consumer protections are insufficient and
  not a reflection of typical competitive market
  policies
• Providers seek to eliminate state regulations and
  oversight
• VoIP is not a minor niche 32 of residential
  market served by non-ILEC providers of VoIP
  services 5 ILEC VoIP lines

7
CALIFORNIA REPORT ON GAPS EMERGE IN TELEPHONE
CONSUMER PROTECTIONS

• No oversight or monitoring of prices and
  competition in fact rather than theory
• No real complaint investigations and resolutions
  focus on closing cases
• No consumer information that allows informed
  selection of providers
• Cramming is rampant no real regulation of
  wireless carriers

8
AARP NATIONAL SURVEY AGE 40 AND OLDER

• 52 use landline over copper wires and 34 use
  cable provider
• 80 said were not going to disconnect landline
  for wireless
• Keep landline due to need for emergency and
  dependability and quality of calls compared to
  wireless
• http//www.aarp.org/home-family/personal-technolog
  y/info-05-2013/aarp-national-survey-of-residents-a
  ge-40---summary-of-opinions-o.html

9
NATURE OF REFORM DEBATE IS WRONG

• Dont eliminate COLR redistribute its
  obligations
• Restore market oversight with licensing and
  consumer protection policies for all carriers
• Require service quality standards and reporting
  from all carriers
• Unify and promote customer complaint handling

10
AGENDA

• Adopt proactive regulatory structure for
  competitive market
• The elimination of price regulation should not
  eliminate regulation
• Retain price regulation of basic local service
• Use licensing as gatekeeper and enforcement
  mechanism
• COLR is crucial and should be retained, but
  obligation distributed

11
AGENDA (CONT)

• Adopt strict regulations and enforce prohibitions
  on cramming, slamming, rate increases without
  proper notice and consent
• Service quality oversight for all providers
• Ensure stand alone purchase for basic service
• Resist obligation to purchase bundle to get
  what consumer wants
• Effective complaint resolution