| Home |
| About Us |
| Latest News |
| Features |
| R-100 Index |
| Newsdesk |
| Free Email Alerts |
| - - - - - - - |
| Wireless Business Review |
| - - - - - - - |
| Portability pussycats |
|
|
| Wednesday, 18 July 2007 | |
|
UK regulator Ofcom takes a tentative approach to mobile number portability. Is this yet another case of institutional favouritism towards the UK’s most established wireless operators?
Ofcom has suggested piecemeal reform of the rules applied to number portability in the UK wireless market. After lengthy consultation (what else?), it has proposed a change from the current five working day transfer period for customers moving networks but wishing to retain their existing number, to two working days by April 2008. The pressure for change has come from 3 UK, the newest of the UK’s five major operators. It had lobbied for a two-hour transfer period, pointing out that this already exists in markets such as Australia. Ofcom has since implied that two-hour transfer might be put in place by September 2009. In other words, don’t hold your breath. 3 UK argues, understandably given its position as the junior player in the market, that the current system is a major obstacle to free competition for consumer contracts. It argues that the system either deters customers outright from switching networks or makes the process appear unduly negative and painful for users. The situation may be worsened as large operators sometimes fail to meet the five-day target. On top of this, the current system gives incumbents a window in which to woo back their most prized customers with new handsets or sweetened deals. This is clearly the most obvious reason for keeping the system as it is, rather than some bull about the technical complexity of portability itself. So are there any legitimate counter-arguments that could explain Ofcom’s caution or the opposition of the largest operators to the changes? Only one. UK consumer law contains many references to ‘cooling-off periods’ in most forms of transaction, notably those applied to utilities. These are designed to protect users from the effects of pressure selling and the like. Rightly so. Sadly, 3 UK has not helped its case in this respect by employing the sort of sickening sales techniques and ruses that result in the possibility of customers being thus duped into agreeing a contract. There is nothing to say that a ‘cooling-off period’ could not be built into an accelerated portability process, but the mutterings of 3’s rivals in this respect are justified to an extent. The surprising thing here is that the Brussels has yet to get fully involved on this issue across Europe. If the UK row goes up one or two more notches, expect this to happen soon. Jim Chalmers |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|