11 July 2001

Contents

Summary

Annex 1

Summary

S.1 Oftel’s Statement entitled Numbering Directive, Number Portability Requirements of January 2000 (www.oftel.gov.uk/ind_info/numbering/port0100.htm) set out, in detail, UK policy and the new regulations following the adoption of number portability provisions in the Interconnection Directive (97/33/EC) by the amendments provided for in the Numbering Directive (98/61/C). The ‘Number Portability Regulations’ - Telecommunications (Interconnection) (Number Portability, etc.) Regulations 1999, S.I. 1999 No. 3449 – came into force on 19 January 2000.

S.2 Oftel notes that there are no technical impediments to the introduction of appropriate systems and processes to ensure that compliance with the Number Portability Regulations is achieved. Consumers now have greater choice in their use of telecommunications providers by being able to keep their telephone number when they switch to other providers.

S.3 Oftel recently released further revisions to the Number Portability Functional Specification (which, amongst other things, details the technical and operational scope of number portability), for consultation. It anticipates that these proposed revisions will assist industry to further its efforts to establish robust systems and processes to enable number portability to be satisfactorily implemented in the UK.

S.4 However, Oftel’s consumer research survey has indicated that the compliance level within the industry to provide fixed number portability has not achieved the goals set out in Oftel’s Statement of January 2000. Oftel’s Statement made clear that under the new Number Portability Regulations all telecoms operators and service providers are required to let customers keep their telephone number when changing companies. Oftel’s research indicates that some consumers who have switched operators since the introduction of fixed number portability have not been able to port their number. The main reason cited by consumers was that the new operator informed them that they would be unable to take their number with them. This clearly raises questions of compliance with the regulatory requirement to provide number portability to subscribers.

S.5 Oftel will ensure that compliance is achieved with the respective licence obligations for operators and under the appropriate regulations for systemless service providers if Oftel receives complaints.

S.6 In 2000, Oftel undertook a review of the introduction of the Number Portability Regulations by industry. Attached at Annex 1 is a summary of the review. The initial view of the analysis of the responses to Oftel’s request, show that while operators were making efforts to comply with their obligations, further work was required to establish a robust fixed number portability regime.

S.7 Early in 2000 Oftel received consumer complaints against several operators, Eurobell, Telewest and ntl, that they were failing to provide number portability. After several months of investigation, Oftel was satisfied that each of the operators had implemented appropriate number portability systems.

S.8 However, Oftel has been informed by some operators of their concern that because systemless service providers are not regulated in the same way as operators, there is a risk of the rules not being enforced. The proposed revisions to the Functional Specification should assist industry in meeting its obligations to provide number portability to consumers. Oftel will be vigilant in its enforcement of the provisions of the Number Portability Regulations including the obligations of systemless service providers.

S.9 Under these regulations Oftel has the power to take injunctive relief to ensure compliance. If Oftel receives formal complaints from the industry and/or consumers against service providers, Oftel will take action.

Annex 1

Review of Industry Compliance with regulatory obligations to provide number portability

A.1 In 2000, Oftel conducted a review of the implementation of the introduction of geographic and non-geographic number portability. The review asked the following questions:

Analysis of Responses

A.2 A total of 77 responses were received to Oftel’s request for information. At the time of responding to Oftel it appears that many operators had at least begun negotiations with other operators to support where relevant, either Geographic Number Portability (GNP) and/or Non-Geographic Number Portability (NGNP).

Geographic Number Portability

A.3 The information provided in the responses suggests that most operators where relevant had established, or were in the process of establishing portability arrangements with BT. However, there does not appear to be arrangements between Licensed Operators and Systemless Service Providers.

Non Geographic Number Portability

A.4 In relation to NGNP, there does not appear to be a significant number of agreements other than with BT and progress appears to be based on a needs basis between operators wishing to obtain particular customers. This is consistent with the policy set out in the January 2000 Statement.

Reasons for Number Portability Requests Failing

A.5 Of the limited information that was supplied in response to this question, it appears that the most common reasons were customers wishing to move and to port a number outside an exchange area (a legitimate reason for rejecting a port request under the current number portability arrangements); customers changing their requirements or incorrect customer information.

A.6 Of concern was information from an operator that during a period of delay in attempting to establish a NGNP arrangement with another operator, the potential customer was recontracted for another 12 months effectively nullifying the porting arrangement request from the operator. However, a formal complaint was not submitted to Oftel.

Charges for Portability

A.7 The majority of respondents to the survey commented that they would not charge for portability or simply charge at cost for the service. Oftel’s Compliance Directorate investigated a complaint that ntl’s charge for portability (£50 plus VAT) was unreasonable and in breach of its obligations. On the basis that ntl have now introduced an automated system and reduced the charge for portability, Oftel has closed its investigation.

Systemless Service Providers

A.8 The responses highlight that the industry at the time of the review had yet to develop appropriate processes for Subsequent Portability. BT has indicated that the industry continues to work towards an appropriate procedure for Subsequent Porting and porting arrangements with Systemless Service Providers. BT note that the GNP industry forum has established a sub group of industry representatives to establish appropriate procedures. The release of the revised functional specification should further assist industry in this regard.

Oftel Research

A.9 Preliminary information on number portability in August 2000 from Oftel’s regular consumer surveys dealing with switching (www.oftel.gov.uk/consumer/research/research_index.htm) suggested that a proportion of consumers who had switched during the survey period had wanted to keep their numbers, but had not been able to do so.

A.10 This suggests that operators could be in breach of their licence obligations to provide fixed number portability to consumers when entering into contracts for service. However, information provided in the review suggested that some reasons for not being able to port was often that an end user wanted to move residence and port their number at the same time outside an exchange area. This is not allowed under the current arrangements but more flexible proposals are set out in the draft revisions to the Functional Specification.

A.11 Further survey work carried out by Oftel in relation to fixed number portability has been completed (www.oftel.gov.uk/consumer/research/research_index.htm). The most recent work continues to suggest that telecommunications providers have failed to fully implement fixed number portability in the UK. The information suggests that a significant proportion of customers who switched providers in the most recent quarter were unable to port their number. One of the main reasons cited by consumers was that they had been informed by the new telecoms provider that they could not take their number with them.