CRTC Introduces New Wireless Code for consumers

[ken0042]

Canadians can cancel their wireless contracts without fees after two years, under the new wireless code unveiled Monday by the CRTC.

The wireless code also caps charges for extra data at $50 per month and charges for international data roaming at $100 per month to prevent bill shock, the CRTC said in a release.


Good to see something for the consumer for once. It also taks about:

- being able to unlock your phone after 90 days
- have more rights to decline changes to existing contracts
- return cell phones within 15 days.

[Igster]

Nice. About time the consumer got some help in the wireless world.

[FlamesAllTheWay]

Damn doesn't kick in until all new contracts after Dec 2. Makes sense they'd have to grandfather it though.

I remember how paranoid I was about roaming charges the first time I travelled abroad with my first iPhone. Step in the right direction putting some caps on all that for sure!

[Slava]

I wonder if the caps are just the amount they're allowed to bill per month? So if you rack up say $500 in roaming they can bill $50/month for 10 months? Anyone know?

[ken0042]

i.A service provider must suspend national and international data roaming charges once they reach $100 within a single monthly billing cycle, unless the customer expressly consents to pay additional charges.

[Knut]

Just moving where they gouge you around essentially.

Nothing will change until they open up the market to foreign investment.

[Jimmy Stang]

Originally Posted by Hesla

Just moving where they gouge you around essentially.

Nothing will change until they open up the market to foreign investment.

Exactly. This gives the oligopoly a shorter leash, but they'll just find other areas to make up the difference.

Don't get me wrong, there are some good, pro-consumer things to take from this. More flexible unlocking, roaming caps, and shorter terms all give a little more leverage to the consumer.

[SuperMatt18]

They pretty much implemented 24 month contracts, without clearly stating that. You can only spread out the subsidy of the device over 24 months, and basically that is what the Big 3 contract around already today.

All it means is you are going to pay more for your phone up front, or pay more each month to cover the higher subsidy.

I actually preferred the three year model where I could get the phone for $0 up front, and then choose when in a three year period that I wanted to upgrade.

No I am forced into a 24 month subsidy where I am paying more up front, and if my phone is still usable after 2 years and I don't really want to upgrade I don't get any added benefit.

[GGG]

The extra data fees should have been implemented 8 years ago when the moblie browsers first started. Nice to see the crtc finally do it but they sure took their time.

I'm not sure why limiting contacts to two years benefits the consumer as th. Upfront price will just increase.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GGG

The extra data fees should have been implemented 8 years ago when the moblie browsers first started. Nice to see the crtc finally do it but they sure took their time.

I'm not sure why limiting contacts to two years benefits the consumer as th. Upfront price will just increase.

In the days where cancellation fees were the ridiculous $20 spread out over the length of the remaining contract it made sense.

Now that all a contract really is, is the subsidy of the device spread out over the term I am not sure why it matters.

Technically as a customer I would prefer more flexibility. I should be able to choose a subsidy amount (or the amount I want to pay up front) and a contract term and that will determine my monthly fee. The monthly rate plan would then be say $45 plus whatever my monthly subsidy was supposed to be.

I was hoping the CRTC would implement a fix like this, where the subsidy was actually implicitly removed from the monthly service fee. That would have been the most customer friendly change, especially with the growing trend of customers just buying their own phone outright. Remove the subsidy from the monthly service charge and it is a better situation for everyone.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by fotze

Ya, cancellation fee revenue will just move to the front end of the contract. The $100 roaming fee thing is the bigger news.

Except it doesn't sound like it prevents them from gouging you, they will just cut you off. That doesn't help someone who wants to go down to the U.S. and not get screwed on data (although Rogers' new 7.99/day plan helps that).

[FlamesAddiction]

The contract flexibility should help with competition though. Companies will have to be more competetive if they know you can cancel sooner and also have a 15 day window to reconsider. They are going to have to do more to keep customers happy, so they can still gouge, but it might not be in their best interest to.

I also love that the contracts have to be written with more clarity. The average person isn't that savvy when it comes to understanding "fine print" details and I believe there is intent to take advantage of those people, so hopefully this helps protect them.

[ken0042]

I actually hope this doesn't bring us to the 2 year contracts like what they have in the US. I know many people have mentioned that they have 2 year contracts and we have 3 years. However upon closer inspection the upfront fee is actually the "down payment", and for the 24 months you are making payments on top of your cellular bill.

http://www.t-mobile.com/shop/phones/...e-5-Black-16GB

[mykalberta]

Im glad they will just cut people off. I got tired of all those stories for these mouth breathers whining and complaining about their cell phone bill after they go to the US and use another carriers network assuming that their pizzles monthly contract covers service on a different provider in a different country.

Almost as bad as the geniuses who use their cell as a modem then complain why the get a large bill for watching porn in Peace River.

[PsYcNeT]

I wonder what this means for those who buy factory unlocked phones (ie Nexus 4) and purchase plans, other than shorter terms.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

I wonder what this means for those who buy factory unlocked phones (ie Nexus 4) and purchase plans, other than shorter terms.

If you have an unlocked phone, you shouldn't be on a term at all. Also, currently, I get 10% off per month for having an unlocked phone with no contract (with Virgin, but I think they all offer something similar).

[GirlySports]

So if one were to buy a phone now, should one take the current 3 year contract or wait for Dec 2? What are the big differences?

[Azure]

It all depends on how the carriers react to the ruling. Prices for the contracts could go up by a fair margin.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

They pretty much implemented 24 month contracts, without clearly stating that.

Yeah, it's just an awkward way of wording it... if you don't have to pay a fee after 24 months, there is zero incentive for them to offer 36 months. Very few people will actually benefit from this, and a lot of people don't realize it yet.

[Regular_John]

Well on the surface level this seems like great news for the consumer, I remain skeptical of how this will materialize on our bills.

It was just about a year ago that the CRTC "allowed" unbundling of TV channels, for the first time. How's everyone's cable bill looking this month? Still paying for channels you never watch?

Given the history of the telcos in this country I have little faith in this working out in the consumers best interest, or even saving us any money. I'm sure Bell/Rogers/Telus will find a creative way to roll those extra 12 months of billing into a CRTC Actualization Credit Payment or something equally as smarmy sounding on our bills.