Consumer groups have attacked the major telcos over their responses to a report compiled by the Australian Communications and Media Authority on customer service, saying they are not doing enough to address the growing number of complaints over telco services.
The move comes as Vodafone revealed over the weekend that it has lost tens of thousands of customers in the last six months, as it struggles to deal with customer service and network issues that have sparked a class-action lawsuit with more than 20,000 signatories.
While most of the telcos submitting to the report acknowledged that more needs to be done to improve customer service, some have said the complexities of certain products will mean they are naturally confusing and that cannot be changed.
ACMA chairman Chris Chapman said in a statement that the submissions show that while customer service is a real issue for companies, there is more work needed.
“While some of the industry submissions set out steps that they have taken to improve their customer care practices, we will need to consider whether those improvements are both effective and enduring.”
Teresa Corbin from the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network says she is disappointed in the responses.
“We just thought the industry would have come out with something a little bit new, rather than just relying on the old solutions that haven’t really worked,” she says, hinting that ACMA may respond with more regulation.
“The ACMA draft report actually maps out some pretty clear directions for the future, including some preferred options which in some instances actually hint at stronger regulation if there isn’t big changes in the code of practice.”
“From what we gather from these submissions there aren’t going to be major changes to the code.”
VHA says the Australian mobile market has developed an “included value” pricing plan that provides different prices for different calling tips.
“This is more difficult to translate in a unit price than the UK and US pricing plans that are sold on the basis of a bucket of minutes,” it says.
VHA also said that it does not believe that the number of repeat customer contacts within a certain time period “can necessarily serve as an indicator of timely issue resolution”.
It also says that while ACMA assumes that repeat contacts insinuates a negative outcome, “VHA is actively engaged in promoting customer engagement”.
Optus said ACMA should focus on consumer protection principles and objectives listed in the ACMA report, rather than focusing on some prescriptive proposals “some of which are neither technically nor practically feasible”.
Overall, it says the current style of co-regulation is sufficient and that it continues to offer the best long-term results.
One of ACMA’s proposals is to rearrange the responsibilities of the TIO, perhaps making it more powerful.
In its submission Telstra said while there is a gap between what customers expect and what they receive, “we understand there is no silver bullet which will change how the telecommunications industry performs on customer service and satisfaction overnight”.
Both Telstra and Optus have approved of the submission given by the Communications Alliance. In this submission, it specifically references improved advertising practices, and says that varying products and technology can make it difficult for consumers to understand key elements of telco offers.
Telco experts say the complexity of these deals confuses many customers, and that there should be more regulation to ensure deals and bills are easier to understand. The Telecommunications Ombudsman has echoed those concerns, saying the number of complaints regarding telco firms is growing by some of the highest figures out of any industry.
Optus was recently fined over $5 million by the Federal Court for misleading advertising relating to its phone and broadband packages.
However, the Communications Alliance said “advertisements are not suitable to provide more detailed product information”, and says there should be references in advertising to an extended “Summary of Offer”.
The Alliance also expressed concern at ACMA’s proposal to advertise “effective prices”, which would reference the actual rates or call volumes applicable in a certain deal.
“The inclusion of effective rates, along with their assumptions in either advertising and/or the Summary of Offer is most likely to further confuse consumers or to contribute to consumer frustration with information overload,” it says.
But Corbin says this is actually insulting towards consumers.
“This is saying that even if they tell you the real price, consumers will still get confused. It’s a really lame excuse for not providing transparency in pricing.”
Patrick Stafford is a freelance journalist and a former deputy editor of SmartCompany.
