Access key 0 - Accessibility, Access key 2 - Jump to content, Access key 7 - Jump to navigation
Skip To Content | Skip To Navigation
 

Home > Telecoms > Industry Groups > NTS Focus Group > Notes of meetings > NTS Focus Group - 13th J


09|03|05

NTS Focus Group - 13th January 2005 - 2.15 pm Ofcom

Meeting Notes & Actions

Agenda item (1) - Introductions

Attendance:

Colin Scott THUS (Chair)
Gareth Davies Ofcom
Caroline Wallace Ofcom
Geoff Brighton Ofcom
Clive Hillier Ofcom
Richard Anderson COLT
Anne McCardle MCI
Dave Simpson Easynet
Toby Higho Centrica
Chris Pace IV Response
Andy Martin IV Response
Debbie Mulloy NTL
Andrew Wileman Telewest
Fabienne Dischamps Band-X
Helen Morgan Energis
Andrew Wileman Telewest
Matin Pagnamenta Gamma Telecom
Helen Morgan Energis
Kath Embleton BT
Durmuid Jennings Reality Telecom
Geoff Dennis Kingston
Huw Saunders Kingston
Dominic Carney Your Communications
Mike Barford Tiscali

Agenda item (2): Responses to Ofcom's - NTS - options for the future- & NTS call termination market review- consultation document (Ofcom)

Geoff Brighton said that to date Ofcom had received 153 responses to both consultation documents (although he was aware that a few were still outstanding).

127 responses were received on the Options for the future consultation and 38 were received on the Market Review.

The 127 responses received on the Options for the future Consultation, were broken down as follows:

The 38 responses received on the market review were broken down as follows:

Caroline Wallace said that Ofcom were now analysing these responses while developing Ofcom NTS policy. The next phases would require any statutory consultations to be published and the next stage of the Market Review document, this is expected to be published in March.

Andrew Wileman asked Caroline Wallace to clarify Ofcom's email of the 14 th of December where Ofcom stated that the Commission officials expressed the view that the NTS call termination market as defined by Ofcom may potentially broaden the market for 'call termination on individual public telephone networks provided at a fixed location' (market number 9 in the Commission's Market Definition Recommendation).

Caroline Wallace said that in the Commission's view that the market wasn't on the Commission's list.

Band X asked what this meant in terms of the process? Caroline Wallace said that a slightly different process had to be followed (although it was likely to take the same length of time). The next stage of the Market Review is the international consultation (which is open to other National Regulatory Authorities, the Commission and UK based respondents).

Debbie Mulloy asked if Ofcom replied to individual consumer responses. Geoff Brighton said that Ofcom didn't write individual replies. Consumer responses were posted on the website (if not marked confidential) and a collective commentary on all responses would be included within the next Ofcom publication on the subject.

IVR Response said that consumers tend to be very negative about almost all aspects of NTS. Geoff Brighton said that Ofcom had received some well worded and well argued consumer responses. Caroline Wallace said that she would urge industry players to read a selection of the consumer responses to get an understanding of consumer issues.

Tobby Higho said often consumers were complaining about an existing issue. For example many of the consumer complaints received following the introduction of 118 directory enquiry services related to issues which existed with 192, the change to 118 had just provided an opportunity to raise those concerns.

Agenda item (3): Update on analysis of NTS number usage trends (as set out in Annex 6 of the Options for the future CD (Ofcom).

Clive Hillier said that Ofcom wasn't able to publish number usage trends in the main consultation as the details for 2001 weren't available in time for the publication date as the company compiling the data on behalf of Ofcom had run into difficulties in obtaining a clean data set for 2001 (freephone volumes weren't available). It was hoped that this problem could be overcome, however this has proved impossible as the data available for 2001 isn't of a sufficient quality to enable any meaningful comparisons. Clive said that Ofcom believed they had taken this work as far as they could and would now abandon plans to publish further comparison data.

Toby Higho asked if an enormous jump in usage had been observed between the data available for 2001 and 2004, then you would have some confidence that there had been some increased usage.

Caroline Wallace said the research was specifically looking at the growth from geographic services moving to NTS (not growing traffic volumes on existing NTS numbers).

Clive Hillier added the data captured for 2004 will prove useful when tracking trends over time (eg. If the exercise was to be repeated in 2007).

Agenda item (4) - NTS Retail Uplift

Geoff Brighton said that Ofcom need to take account of the 03/04 volume data and additional volume forecast information presented by BT ( there had been a 20% decline in dial-up internet volumes using NTS over the last three quarters, compared to a 20% decline over the six quarters prior to that), consequently BT has a more pessimistic view of future NTS volumes.

Geoff invited other Focus Group members to submit any other views / forecast information. In relation to forecasts, these would be most useful if separate 08 and 09 traffic volume forecasts could be provided.

New Action #Q1 : All Focus Group members to send Ofcom NTS volume forecasts (and details of the methodology used to compile the forecast) by the 27 th of January.

Geoff said that due to the change in the volume forecasts, the numbers in Ofcom's next NTS Retail Uplift document are likely to have changed from the draft.

Mike Barford said that the issue of forecast information is being discussed in the context of the Network Charge Control Review. Mike asked how Ofcom would know if the forecast information presented by BT is the same as BT's real internal management forecasts (especially when BT would benefit financially if lower volumes were forecast).

Geoff Brighton said Ofcom could only believe what BT was telling them. Caroline Wallace said Ofcom did try to cross reference the information presented with information given by BT to Ofcom in other contexts, to ensure that it was all consistent.

Dominic Carney asked what impact the revised forecast would have on the numbers? Geoff said the lower the forecast, the higher the pence per minute charge. Band-X asked had Ofcom considered increased PRS volumes - ICSTIS were predicting an increase in volumes? Ofcom said that they didn't believe any substantial increase in PRS volumes would make a material difference as the vast majority of NTS traffic is internet related (~90%), so from such a low base, PRS wasn't likely to replace internet volumes.

Dominic Carney said that with the advent of 21CN, there was a danger caused by Ofcom looking at the costs in arrears, while using predictions of future volumes. Geoff said Ofcom were aware of this issue.

Dave Simpson asked if the revised volume forecast meant that the charge control graph for the retail uplift would now point up and not remain on a downward path? Geoff Brighton said that the charge was still projected to drop, albeit not as steeply, however the freephone pence per minute charge was likely to increase.

Agenda Item (5) - Kingston Operator Specific Charging  

Huw Saunders said that Kingston have raised the issue of Kingston specific origination charges (within the Hull area) both at the Standard Contract Forum (in May - 04) and the NTS Focus Group (in August - 04).

Huw summarised the Kingston position, stating that Kingston believe that they have a higher regulated call origination retention in the Hull area than the standard BT rate and believe operators who receive NTS traffic from the Hull area should meet the cost of this higher retention.

BT circulated a letter from Kingston to all interconnected operators back in November - 04 asking operators for views on how the additional charge should be recovered (two options were identified). Kingston said that they had received five written responses (and one verbal response). The preferred option appeared to be Option 2 - where Interaccounting arrangements via BT remain in place, with Kingston raising a separate invoice for the short fall in conveyance.

Kingston will now send a commercial offer to terminating providers. If the offer is accepted the surcharge invoicing will commence. If rejected, Kingston and the TNO concerned will be in dispute and Kingston will refer the matter to Ofcom or suspend the traffic.

Band-X asked if the additional paper work and administrative effort outweighed the additional costs? Huw said that Kingston believe it was worth the effort.

Huw added that two interconnect operators had already accepted the offer.

Mike Barford asked why Kingston couldn't do this via cascade billing? Huw said BT would not do it for them. Mike Barford said this shouldn't be our problem, Huw said he didn't believe it should be Kingston 's problem either. Geoff Brighton said it was a standard problem with all operator specific charging.

Dominic Carney asked if the charge would be forward looking? Huw Saunders said there was an argument to make it retrospective.

Colin Scott asked if the Kingston offer would contain details of the costs and charges as well as details of average retail discounts within Hull . Huw Saunders said the offer would contain sufficient detail.

Agenda Item (6) - Implementation of price changes in the CPL

Helen Morgan raised the issue of BT making changes to the Carrier Price List without operators accepting the change. The last set of NTS changes had been implemented via a process which provides operators two weeks to lodge any objections to the change, if no objections were received BT would automatically update the CPL and the rates within the INCA system (ie no response was taken as acceptance, not a rejection).

Kath Embleton said this process was agreed as part of a previous Direction and was implemented to avoid the problems associated with operators simply ignoring pricing letters (which results in disputes about disputes). Geoff Brighton said that the process allowing BT to automatically progress with a pricing change unless an operator objects was a one-off and only covered the direction that contained the proposal. Kath Embleton said BT had assumed it was a standard decision.

Kath Embleton and Geoff Brighton agreed to check the scope of the opt-out proposal. Geoff said he was mindful that some pricing could be wrong and that the two week period prior to implementation was designed to give operators an opportunity to object.

Dominic Carney asked what process BT has for sending the pricing notifications to individuals within companies (to avoid pricing letters being misdirected). Kath Embleton said a standard process existed (with BT holding the name of individuals within each organisation).

IVR Response said a process which involved fax, email and post was probably appropriate.

Geoff Brighton said the process didn't strike him as unreasonable. Colin Scott and Mike Barford said they were happy with the process in principle. Debbie Mulloy said NTL had issues with the process (and in particular BT's failure to supply CLI pricing). NTL want to ensure that the process laid down in contract is followed and that operators get an opportunity to accept pricing into contract.

Agenda Item (7) - Transit Pricing - different effective dates for transit rates not shown on the CPL where retrospective adjustments are made.

Energis raised the issue. As non-BT originated traffic isn't subject to retrospection, it makes billing for this traffic harder if a price is implemented retrospectively in the Carrier Price list (as the effective date wouldn't be relevant for non-BT originated traffic, only the date the Carrier Price List was updated).

Kath Embleton said that a note in Section 1.02 would contain the date of the CPL update and details of the Direction. In the case of the updated Twix charge, Kath said that the charge was back dated by 1 month.

Agenda item (8): BT Interconnect Notification 5001 - change to the BT Retail time bandings

BT Retail has announced plans to change the start of the daytime period for residential customers from 8am to 6am (effective from mid-February). To avoid a fourth interconnect time period BT have decided to make an adjustment to the evening period interconnect rate for 0845 long calls.

Mike Barford said that the difficulty with the change was that the calculation used to derive the revised interconnect rate couldn't be shared and Ofcom would need to review it. Mike also said that BT has stated that the average duration calculation didn't need to be reviewed until after the change, however the change itself may lead to a change in traffic profile.

Mike agreed to send an email to Kath Embleton (copied to the FG) with some questions on the change.

Agenda item (9): Review of Outstanding Actions

# O/1

BT to confirm if it is applying both the APC and the TWIX in cases where a calls is exported to a recipient and if so - is this compliant with the regulatory framework applicable to number portability

 

Closed - BT confirmed that the Twix & APC were being applied.

 

Post meeting update - BT provided a written clarification on action point #0/1 : BT does not charge both a TWIX and an APC as when the call enters the BT network (it is at this point that TWIXs are calculated) the BT range dialled digits invoke a BT-terminating charge not a TWIX; when the call leaves (having now been prefixed) no TWIX is ever charged, no matter who owns the CLI as transit calls have the TWIX charged with the incoming record.

 

New Action : #Q/2 Geoff Brighton agreed to forward the question of how to resolve the issue of BT charging APC and the TWIX charges in cases where a calls is exported to a recipient to Warwick Izzard ( numbering portability manager at Ofcom) to help identify which forum was best placed to resolve this issue.

 

# O/2

Colin Scott to add the issue of NGNP for BT imports and the minimum call fee to the next NTS FG Agenda.

 

Closed - see actions #P/1 & #Q/1

 

#P/1:

All Focus Group Members to get comments on the INCA/CLI billing document to Colin Rochester by the 23 rd of December.

 

 

Closed.

 

#P/2 :

BT to come back to the Focus Group with timescales for implementing the long/short mechanism on 0844 and 0871.

 

 

Carried Forward

 

#P/3:

BT to confirm the date / location of the INCA/CLI billing workshop.

 

 

Closed - INCA / CLI workshop scheduled for the 7 th of February.

 

# P/4:

Colin Scott agreed to put the issue of changes to the CPL / treatment of retrospective rates in the CPL on the agenda for the next meeting.

 

 

Closed - issue cover on the agenda

 

Agenda item (9) - Any Other Business

Colin Scott said that ICSTIS couldn't attend the meeting, however an ICSTIS rep should hopefully be able to attend the next meeting.

Debbie Mulloy raised the issue of the AIT schedule being debated in the Standard Contract Review sessions. Debbie said that anyone with views on the AIT refunds process should take them to Charles Walker at BT and John Roberts at Kingston.

Date of Next Meeting :

Thursday 24th February 2005 - 2.15pm Ofcom - Riverside House, London

Remaining Focus Group meeting dates for 2005:

Summary of New and Outstanding Actions:

#Q1:

All Focus Group members to send Ofcom NTS volume forecasts (and details of how the methodology used to compile the forecast) by the 27 th of January.

 

#Q/2

Geoff Brighton agreed to forward the question of how to resolve the issue of BT charging APC and the TWIX charges in cases where a calls is exported to a recipient to Warwick Izzard ( numbering portability manager at Ofcom) to help identify which forum was best placed to resolve this issue.

 

#P/2 :

BT to come back to the Focus Group with timescales for implementing the long/short mechanism on 0844 and 0871.

 


Back to top Back to top


Further information

Help

Keep up-to-date