A. Informal Resolution and Investigation

Unresolved complaints are escalated to Investigations (level 2). When a complaint escalates to Investigations, we will contact the customer and the PSP via an automated notice to explain the reason why the complaint has been escalated to Investigations and to set expectations about the next steps. The status on the PSP dashboard will change to “Pending Analysis”. A “Pending Analysis” status indicates that the complaint has been escalated to Investigations and is waiting for a Complaint Resolution officer (CRO) to begin the investigation. When the CRO starts working on the complaint this status will change to “Active Analysis”.

What you should do when the complaint escalates to Investigations

While you are waiting for a Complaint Resolution Officer (CRO) to begin the investigation, you should review your response to the complaint and make sure that it is complete. If your response is incomplete, you are expected to submit the missing information as soon as possible. Do not wait for a Complaint Resolution Officer to request it. Our Customer Relations Team will notify you if we receive additional information from the customer while the complaint is “Pending Analysis”.

If the complaint was initially resolved at level 1, but has since been deemed unresolved by the customer: The complaint is now considered “unresolved”. We recommend that you “update” your response to the complaint as soon as possible by submitting a complete unresolved response.

How to provide additional information/update the PSP Response

To add to or update the original PSP response after the complaint has escalated to investigations but before CRO activation, submit a General Update via the PSP Portal. You are responsible for sending a copy of the updated response to the customer and submitting a copy of this correspondence with the General Update.

Scenarios in which additional information or an updated response is warranted include (non-exhaustive):

  • When you need to submit additional information to complete the unresolved PSP Response, including information that you are requesting be kept confidential, pursuant to Section 15 of the CCTS Procedural Code.
  • When you need to change your response to “resolved” based on new developments; N.B. Complaints that are resolved by the PSP after the complaint escalates to Investigations, but before CRO involvement, will be closed and billed at level 2. In most cases, a CRO will reach out to the customer to obtain their confirmation of the resolution before closing the complaint.
  • When the complaint has been reopened and escalated to Investigations within the 20-day customer satisfaction period because the customer considers the complaint unresolved.

Standard of Review

When a complaint escalates to Investigations, we will continue our efforts to facilitate a mutually acceptable resolution while also investigating the issues raised in the complaint in accordance with our Standard of Review.

Our Standard of Review is to determine whether or not the Participating Service Provider (PSP) reasonably fulfilled its obligations to the customer; i.e., did the PSP do what it was supposed to do? Where applicable, we may also consider the impact of the PSP’s actions and any remedies already proposed and/or provided by the PSP.

Obligations

  • The onus falls on the PSP to demonstrate that it fulfilled its obligations to the customer. So, what are they?

    A PSP’s obligation includes any stated or implied commitment to the customer. Obligations can be formal, like a contract, policy or procedure, industry regulation, etc. Informal commitments made to the customer are also considered obligations; e.g. a promise made to the customer during a verbal conversation.

  • How do we find them?

    We find the PSP’s obligations by asking: What was supposed to happen? What is PSP’s usual process or policy?

  • Where do we find them?

    Most commonly, a PSP’s obligations are found in things like the PSP’s service terms, the contract, the PSP’s policies and procedures, the account records (e.g. call recordings, call/chat transcripts, emails, account notes, etc.), the invoices, advertisements, Codes of Conduct, and the customer’s records, to name a few. Appendix 2 includes a reference chart of the types of records we review to find obligations.

  • What happens once we’ve found the PSP’s obligations?

    Next, we need to investigate to determine whether the PSP actually fulfilled its obligations to the customer. We do this by asking, what happened? Does the available information show us that the PSP did what it was supposed to do? If not, did the PSP at least take action to remedy the situation? If so, were the PSPs actions reasonable given the circumstances?

  • How do we find out what happened?

    By reviewing and assessing at the available records; e.g. account notes, chat transcripts, call recordings, written correspondence, work orders, repair tickets, technical/diagnostic reports, invoices, billing/adjustment records, payment records, etc.

    The PSP must demonstrate that it fulfilled its obligations to the customer.

  • What happens if the PSP is unable, or refuses, to demonstrate what was supposed to happen and/or what actually happened?

    If the PSP does not show us what it was supposed to do, and/or what actually happened, we will have to rely on the facts presented by the customer, including any PSP obligations or facts alleged by the customer.

    If you believe that you did what you were supposed to, and that the customer’s complaint has no merit, be prepared to demonstrate to us how you reached that conclusion. It is not sufficient for you to simply tell us.  We need to see how you got there so that we can provide the customer with an unbiased, fact-based explanation.

  • How can you demonstrate that you fulfilled your obligations to your customer?

    By telling us what you believe you were supposed to do, what you believe actually happened, and then by showing us how you reached that conclusion.

    For example, a customer complains that you, the PSP, overcharged her by $10 in June. You review the June invoice and see that the customer was billed $30. You pull up the customer’s contract and see that she had agreed to pay $20/month for a basic plan. This prompts you to pull up the customer’s May invoice and her account records to see what happened. You see that a price increase was applied to the account on June 1st. You know from experience that your company implements regularly scheduled price increases twice a year, and that your company policy is to notify customers at least 30 days in advance of such actions. You review the May invoice and confirm that it includes a notice of the upcoming price increase. Finally, you review the customer’s contract and note that the contract states that the $20 base plan that the customer agreed to on a month-to-month basis is subject to your company’s Terms of Service, which was also included with the contract that you sent to the customer by email when she agreed to the contract last year. Together, this information confirms to you that the price increase is “valid”. To demonstrate this to the customer and to the CCTS, you must provide:

    • An explanation that includes your position, explains what happened and why, addresses the issue(s) raised by the customer, and describes the supporting evidence you are providing.
    • In this case the supporting evidence would include: a copy of the contract and related documents (e.g. the Terms of Service), the specific section within the documents that outline PSP’s obligations regarding price increases, a copy of the customer’s account records demonstrating the customer’s consent to the contract and related documents, complete copies of the May and June invoices and screen captures of account records showing when the price increase was applied. 

    Refer to Appendix 2 and the Case Studies for more information about required supporting documents and case studies.

  • Why can’t the CCTS just rely on what the PSP says?

    In order to maintain our integrity as an unbiased, neutral, independent third party, we have to review the supporting documentation independently.

    Consider a simple billing dispute where the customer alleges that the PSP billed them $25 for a monthly price plan instead of the $20 that the customer agreed to. The PSP tells us that the $25 monthly charge is correct. To support this position, the PSP needs to show us how they reached that conclusion. For example, the PSP should provide us with a copy of the applicable contract and the account record which demonstrates what monthly plan and price the customer consented to, and includes the record of consent (e.g. a call recording of the customer being informed of the plan details, and then providing their consent, etc.).

    Refer to Appendix 2 and the Case Studies for more information about required supporting documents and case studies.

  • What happens if the PSP failed to fulfill its obligations to the customer?

    If the available evidence demonstrates that the PSP did not do what it was supposed to do, that the PSP did something that it should not have done, or that the PSPs actions were otherwise unreasonable, we will conclude that the PSP failed to fulfill its obligations to the customer. When this happens, we expect the PSP to take appropriate steps to remedy its actions. We will give the PSP an opportunity to present a reasonable remedy to the complaint. If the PSP has already presented a reasonable remedy, we will present our findings to the customer and ask the customer to reconsider the PSP’s proposal.

    We encourage PSPs to be proactive. If you conclude that you failed to fulfill your obligations to the customer, take the initiative and present the CRO with a reasonable resolution for your customer to consider. We will present all offers to the customer.

  • What happens if the available evidence suggests that the PSP failed to fulfill its obligations to the customer, and the PSP presents an offer?

    We will present all offers to the customer. However, if the available evidence demonstrates that the PSP failed to fulfill its obligations to the customer, or if the available evidence is incomplete, we are obligated inform the customer.

    For example, a customer complained that the PSP increased their bill by $10 without their consent. The PSP claimed that it was allowed to increase the price but provided no supporting documentation. The complaint was reviewed by a CRO who concluded that more information was required. In response to the request for more information, the PSP simply offered to provide the customer with a $5 credit towards the $10 price increase. The CRO presented the PSP’s offer to the customer, and explained that based on the available information, we have not yet been able to confirm whether or not the PSP was in fact allowed to increase the price by $10. We then asked the customer if they wanted to accept the PSP’s offer or if the customer wanted CCTS to continue investigating the complaint. The customer refused the offer and asked CCTS to pursue the investigation.

  • What happens if you cannot demonstrate what you were supposed to do or what actually happened?

    If you do not show us what you were supposed to do, or if you fail to show us what actually happened – we will have no other choice but to conclude that the PSP failed to demonstrate that it fulfilled its obligations to the customer.

  • Are there circumstances when we expect the customer to provide supporting documentation?

    Yes. While the onus primarily falls on the PSP, there are some circumstances where we require the customer to demonstrate what happened. For example, if the customer has requested compensation for inconvenience, we may request that the customer submit supporting documentation to demonstrate losses incurred arising from the core issue(s) of the complaint. In general, we ask customers to provide us with any supporting documentation that they deem relevant to their complaint.

How we use the Codes of Conduct at Investigations

The Wireless Code of Conduct, the Internet Code, the Television Service Provider Code and the Deposit & Disconnection Code establish minimum standards against which we measure PSP conduct. More specifically, the Codes of Conduct impose additional obligations on the PSPs, covering the following key areas:

  • Language & Clarity
  • Contracts/related documents, including consent, disclosure, changes, and cancellation of contracts and related documents
  • Deposits & Disconnections
  • Bill management, including bill shock
  • Warranty & Repairs; e.g. device issues, related fees; service calls, outages, etc.

How can you identify whether or not the Code(s) apply to the issues raised in the complaint? If the core issue(s) of the complaint falls into any of the key areas listed above, there is a good chance that the Code(s) applies.

When you receive a complaint about a home phone deposit or disconnection dispute, a wireless, internet or television service, we recommend that you refer to the relevant Code of Conduct, and consider its applicability to the complaint. For example, you a should ask yourself whether or not the Code establishes obligations for the PSP, rights for the customer, etc. as they related to the complaint. We also recommend that you keep the Code of Conduct in mind when you respond to the complaint. Your response should also explain whether or not you complied with the Code of Conduct and include supporting documentation to demonstrate your position; e.g. if the customer is complaining about wireless data charges that they allege they did not incur, you will have to provide copies of the records demonstrating that the $50 data cap was applied (if applicable) in accordance with the Wireless Code of Conduct.

Performance Standards and Timelines

We process complaints escalated to the Investigation level on a ‘first come, first served’ basis.

For complaints that are concluded at this stage, our performance target is to conclude 80% within 60 days of referral to Investigations.

The actual time required to investigate a complaint will vary based on various factors, including:

  • The current volume of complaints and available investigative resources;
  • The complexity of the case or the number of issues to be resolved;
  • The degree of cooperation we receive from the customer and the service provider; and
  • Any delays resulting from unsuccessful efforts at resolution during the course of the investigation.

Our performance standards are available on our website.

Deadlines for Information Requests

During the investigation we may need to request more information, which the PSP will be required to promptly provide.

Deadlines will be assigned at our discretion, based on the following guidelines:

  • 1-2 business days for information that ought to have been included in the PSP’s unresolved response.
  • 2-5 business days for information that could not have reasonably been seen as being relevant to the complaint at the pre-investigation stage.

If the PSP fails to respond to our information by the deadline, we will conclude our investigation based solely on the information we have at hand, while assuming that:

  • the information you requested is either unavailable; or
  • the PSP is unable to provide the information.

Additional deadlines are prescribed under sections 12 and 13 of the CCTS Procedural Code.

How the CCTS Approaches an Investigation

Further to the CCTS Procedural Code, during an investigation we have the authority to:

  • Continue to pursue an informal resolution throughout the investigation
  • Ask for any information that we deem relevant to the investigation, including but not limited to:
    • The customer’s account records
    • Call recordings and transcripts
    • Correspondence between the customer and the PSP
    • Contracts and related documents
    • Invoices
    • A PSP’s policies and procedures
  • Recommend a reasonable resolution to the complaint, subject to Sections 12 and 14 of the CCTS Procedural Code
  • Impose a remedy, subject to Section 13 of the CCTS Procedural Code

The process of informal resolution happens alongside our investigation of the complaint. Regardless of the merit of the complaint, we will attempt to find a solution that satisfies both parties.

Step 1: Review the PSP’s response and the complaint

We begin every investigation by reviewing the complaint and the PSP’s response, including any new information submitted by the customer and the PSP.

Before we take action, we will also conduct a new Procedural Assessment to verify that we can continue handling the complaint. Throughout the investigation, we will conduct a new Procedural Assessment every time we receive new information from the PSP or the customer. 

N.B. Refer to Appendix for a quick guide to the Procedural Assessment.

Step 2: Analyze the available information

Next, we assess the available information by asking, do we know what the complaint is about? What are the core issues? If any part of the complaint is unclear, we will reach out to the customer to ask for clarification.

We consider the following while analyzing the available information:

Is the PSP’s response complete? Has the PSP responded to all of the customer’s allegations? Has the PSP provided all of the relevant documents? If not, we will reach out to the PSP to open a line of communication for resolving the complaint and to request the missing information.

Do any of the CRTC Codes of Conduct apply to the issue(s) raised in the complaint? Are there any other compliance issues raised in the complaint? e.g. collections issues (Section 7 of the CCTS procedural Code), CCTS Participation requirements such as CCTS Awareness, etc.

For more information about how we track and report on Code of Conduct breaches, refer to our website.

Finally, we’ll ask, what does the available information suggest? Does it demonstrate that the PSP fulfilled its obligations to the customer? Or, do we need more information? Do the customer and the PSP seem willing to resolve the complaint? Do we see an opportunity to explore alternative resolutions?

Step 3: Contact the PSP and the Customer

After we review the complaint, we will contact the customer and the PSP to confirm that we understand their positions and to obtain any missing information. We will use this opportunity to begin engaging the customer and the PSP in discussions about resolving the complaint.

We will act as the intermediary between the customer and the PSP.

What can you expect from us?
The informal resolution and investigation stages are fluid and interchangeable, meaning that we may move back and forth between trying to informally resolve the complaint and investigating the complaint. For this reason, our approach may vary from one Complaint Resolution Officer to another and from complaint to complaint. We have found that this flexibility enables us to achieve faster results and resolve more complaints. Some complaints are resolved because the customer and the PSP agree to a resolution, while other complaints are resolved based on the investigator’s explanation of our analysis of the complaint following an investigation of the facts underlying the complaint.

What can you do to help?
Be responsive to our requests for additional information/documentation and clarifications. Sometimes we need to ask more questions, either to fully understand what happened, the impact on the parties or to confirm what obligations were in place at the time that the events underlying the complaint transpired. Be sure to provide the required information within the prescribed timelines. If you have questions about a request made by the Complaint Resolution Officer, we encourage you to pick up the phone and give them a call so that your concerns can be addressed as quickly as possible and the investigation can proceed in a timely manner.

Step 4: Resolving the Complaint

Requested resolutions and exploring alternatives

Any and all resolutions proposed by either party will be considered and presented to the other party, regardless of whether the CCTS has completed its investigation of the facts underlying the complaint. However, If the Complaint Resolution Officer feels that the information provided by PSP appears to demonstrate that the provider met its obligations or has offered a reasonable remedy, we would also provide the customer with a preliminary analysis along with the proposal. This is to ensure that the customer is able to make an informed decision.

If we present you with a remedy proposed by the other party, it does not necessarily mean that we believe that the remedy is warranted or reasonable. This is especially the case in the early stages of an investigation, before we’ve had a chance to complete our investigation and analyze the available information.

We may ask the PSP and the customer to reconsider any offer(s) proposed at the pre-investigation level. Sometimes, this is the best alternative to a negotiated agreement; other times, it may be more appropriate to simply proceed with the investigation.

Wherever possible, we will also encourage both parties to generate new/alternative resolutions. Sometimes, meeting in the middle is the best alternative. There are two possible conclusions at this stage of the investigation, resolution or closure further to section 9 or 10 of the CCTS Procedural Code.

Resolved

A complaint is deemed resolved when the customer confirms that they consider the complaint resolved and has provided their consent to close the complaint.

We may also deem a complaint to be resolved without the customer’s consent if the PSP has offered the exact resolution requested by the customer, and we have been unable to contact the customer to confirm their consent.

Implementing the resolution

Section 6.12 of the CCTS Procedural Code states that “When a complaint is resolved to the mutual satisfaction of the Customer and the Participating Service Provider, implementation of the resolution is binding upon the Participating Service Provider.”

When a service provider agrees to resolve a customer’s CCTS complaint, it must implement the resolution.

We expect PSPs to implement the resolution immediately upon receipt of our written confirmation of the resolution. In the exceptional event that the PSP is unable to implement the resolution immediately, the PSP must clearly inform the customer and the CCTS of the date on which it expects to be able to implement the resolution.

What’s Next?

The complaint will move to the “Concluded” tab on your dashboard and its status will change to “Resolved” and the reason will be listed as “Informal resolution successful”.

Closure further to section 9 or 10 of the CCTS Procedural Code

We may close a complaint at any time during the informal resolution/investigation stage if we conclude that it is appropriate to exercise our discretion to decline to take action (Section 9 of the CCTS Procedural Code), or if the available information demonstrates that we have a duty to decline to take action (Section 10). The most common scenarios include:

  • We’ve concluded that the person who filed the complaint is not the account holder, and we have failed to obtain the account holder’s consent to have the complainant act on their behalf; Section 9.1 (b)
  • We’ve concluded that the complaint is about an ineligible service or subject matter, or that the subject matter of the complaint is more appropriately addressed by another tribunal, court, or agency; Section 9.1 (c)
  • When the customer has failed to respond to our attempts to contact them, or when the customer is otherwise uncooperative with the complaint handling process; Section 9.1 (e)
  • Duplicate complaints; 10.2 (a)
  • Complaints that are currently being, or have been, another tribunal, court, or agency with the authority to compensate the customer for losses arising from the complaint; Section 10.2 (b)
  • Complaints that fall outside of the CCTS’ limitation period; Section 10.3

These types of closures are not based on the merits of the complaint. Merit based closures fall under section 9.1(d) and 9.1(f) of our Procedural Code and are used once our investigation is complete.

What’s Next?

The complaint will move to the “Concluded” tab on your dashboard and its status will change to “Closed” and the reason listed will indicate which section of the Procedural Code we based our closure on. If appropriate, the level will change to Triage.

Informal Resolution FAQs

  • What is a “preliminary analysis”?

    A preliminary analysis is essentially an explanation of the available information at that time, and whether or not the available information demonstrates, or seems to demonstrate, that the PSP did or did not fulfill its obligations. We will also explain whether or not we are still missing information that is necessary to complete our investigation. We often use the preliminary analysis as a leverage tool when we are trying to resolve the complaint.

  • What is considered a “goodwill” gesture?

    An offer that is extended solely on the basis of resolving the complaint, particularly when the PSP fulfilled its obligations, is considered a goodwill gesture. An offer that is extended to correct an error made by the PSP is considered a corrective measure, not a goodwill gesture.

  • When a PSP failed to fulfill its obligations, how does the CCTS decide what is “reasonable”?

    We start by weighing the consequences of the PSPs actions against the requested resolution and any offers that the PSP has already extended to the customer. We then consider what is fair and reasonable in the circumstances. Consequences of a PSPs actions can vary widely, from limitations on the customer’s ability to use their service(s), incorrect billing and associated collections activity, including late payment fees incurred, to inconvenience. If we conclude that the PSP was at fault, the minimum expectation is that PSP will make the customer whole again by correcting the failure.

  • How does the CCTS approach compensation requests?

    First and foremost, we will only consider a request for compensation if we have concluded that the PSP failed to fulfill, or failed to demonstrate that it fulfilled, its obligations to the customer. Next, we’ll consider any remedies already presented, or provided, by the PSP. We will also consider how the PSP’s actions impacted the customer’s ability to use their service(s) and whether or not the customer suffered any direct losses as a direct result of the PSP’s actions. Finally, we will consider the likelihood of any undue hardships or inconvenience that the customer may have suffered as a direct result of the PSP’s actions.

  • What are “Other Remedies” (non-monetary)?

    Non-monetary remedies can range from providing the customer with an explanation, to letters of apology, plan changes, repairs, and non-monetary compensation (e.g. free equipment, free upgrade), etc. 

    For examples of how we analyze resolution requests when a PSP has failed to fulfill its obligations, refer to the Case Studies.

Step 5: Completing the Investigation

Not all files will be amenable to informal resolution. At a certain point, the CRO may conclude that it would be more efficient to abandon their attempts to informally resolve the complaint, at least for the time being. When this happens, we will shift our primary focus to completing the investigation.

We will expect the PSP and the customer to actively participate as we complete our investigation and analysis of the complaint. If required, we will make a final attempt to obtain missing information and any new information that either party would like us to consider.

Once we have obtained all of the required information that the PSP and the customer are willing to provide, we will finalize our analysis. The CRO will have to determine whether or not we can dispose of the complaint under section 9.1 (d) or (f) of the Procedural Code: (d) further investigation is not warranted, or, (f) the provider has presented a reasonable resolution to the complaint. The disposal of the complaint through this process is considered a merit-based closure.

As part of this process, the CRO will prepare a comprehensive report detailing both parties’ position and our analysis of the available information. This report is for internal CCTS use only. However, we may provide the customer and the PSP with a formal written copy of the report if the customer insists on receiving our findings in writing.

What’s Next?

If we close the complaint, it will be moved to the “Concluded” tab on your dashboard and its status will change to “Closed” and the reason listed will indicate which section of the Procedural Code we based our closure on.

However, if we conclude that the PSP failed to fulfill its obligations to the customer, we will request that the PSP present a reasonable resolution. If the PSP refuses to offer a reasonable resolution, we will proceed to issue a Recommendation.