NASUCA June 20131 TELCO COMPETITION: THE LACK OF ESSENTIAL CONSUMER PROTECTIONS Barbara R. Alexander...
-
Upload
dwain-parrish -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of NASUCA June 20131 TELCO COMPETITION: THE LACK OF ESSENTIAL CONSUMER PROTECTIONS Barbara R. Alexander...
NASUCA June 2013 1
TELCO COMPETITION: THE LACK OF ESSENTIAL CONSUMER
PROTECTIONS
Barbara R. AlexanderConsumer Affairs Consultant83 Wedgewood Dr.Winthrop, Maine 04364 (207)395-4143E-mail: [email protected]
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 [email protected]
NASUCA June 2013 2
NASUCA June 2013 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
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
NASUCA June 2013 4
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!
NASUCA June 2013 5
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
NASUCA June 2013 6
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
NASUCA June 2013 7
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-technology/info-05-2013/aarp-national-survey-of-residents-age-40---summary-of-opinions-o.html
NASUCA June 2013 8
NATURE OF “REFORM” DEBATE IS WRONG
Don’t 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
NASUCA June 2013 9
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
NASUCA June 2013 10
AGENDA (CON’T)
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
NASUCA June 2013 11