Home > Telecoms > Industry Groups > NTS Focus Group > Notes of meetings > 2nd March 2006 – 2.00 pm

16|05|06

NTS Focus Group – 2nd March 2006 – 2.00 pm Ofcom

Meeting Notes & Actions

Agenda item (1) - Introductions

Attendance:

Andrew Wileman	Telewest (Chair)
Marcus Rudkin	Band-X
Kath Embleton	BT
Colin Annette	BT
Rob Day	BT
Becky Hewlett	Cable & Wireless
Florence Duffield	Colt
Richard Anderson	Colt
Dave Simpson	Easynet
Will Goodall	Flextel
Andy Martin	IV Response
Lesa Green	Kingston
Nancy Saunders	Kingston
Gareth Davies	Ofcom
Steve Unger	Ofcom
Clive Hillier	Ofcom
Ruth Gibson	Ofcom
Nic Green	Ofcom
Robert MacDougall	Ofcom
Serafino Abate	Ofcom
Ray Copeland	Opera Telecom
Dirmuid Jennings	Reality Telecom
Nicola McKenna	Thus
Anne McCardle	Verizon Business
Lee Alloway	Verizon Business

Agenda (2): Update/discussion on the current live NTS/PRS related consultations (Ofcom/All)

Clive Hillier said that Ofcom had nothing to add to the consultation documents already published, but was happy to take any questions/clarify additional points.

NTS: A Way Forward/Modifications to GC 14 for NTS & PRS

Gareth Davies said that Ofcom had essentially finished analysing the responses received. A series of internal meetings would take place over the coming 2-3 weeks with a view to reaching a final decision. Gareth said that the target date for publication was 29th March, although this date was contingent upon the aforementioned decision making process.

Nancy Saunders asked if it would be possible for NTSFG attendees to receive an embargoed, pre-release copy of the final statement. Gareth Davies said that this was not the normal practice. Nancy asked if attendees could have preliminary sight of the press release. Gareth agreed to investigate the possibility with Ofcom's communications team.

New Action Z/1: Gareth Davies to confirm if it would be possible for NTSFG attendees to receive an advance copy of any press release relating to the publication of the 'NTS: A Way Forward' statement.

Andrew Wileman requested that Ofcom inform the Chair of any delay to the publication date as soon as this became apparent. This information would then be cascaded to NTSFG attendees via the normal email distribution list.

Gareth Davies confirmed that Ofcom intended to publish the conclusions of the General Condition 14 consultation at the same time as the NTS: A Way Forward final statement.

NTS call termination market review/NCCN 500 investigation

Gareth Davies said that a decision had not yet been reached, but the investigation remained ongoing. One of the complainants to the case had recently notified Ofcom that additional information had come to light. This additional information would need to be taken into account once it was received. Gareth confirmed that Ofcom hoped to conclude this investigation in April 2006.

The call termination market review remains on hold, pending the outcome of the NCCN 500 investigation.

INCA/CLI Dispute

Robert MacDougall confirmed that Ofcom had recently accepted a dispute, brought by BT, relating to the implementation of the amended INCA/CLI charging arrangements for NTS calls. Robert said that 7 CPs had either refused to sign or had not responded to the BT OCCN that sought to bring the amended rates relating to this initiative, and hence the new charging regime itself, into contract.

Nancy Saunders asked how CPs could refuse to implement the new charging arrangements given that they had effectively been mandated by an Ofcom determination. Robert said that this question would be considered as a part of the forthcoming investigation.

Andrew Wileman asked if the dispute was limited to the original, specific 'INCA/CLI' OCCNs from October 2005, or if the scope extended to subsequent OCCNs (e.g. PRS bad debt surcharge and updates to NCC basket components) that perpetuated the new regime. Robert said that the dispute would consider only the initial, implementation specific OCCN.

Robert confirmed that the dispute would run to Ofcom's standard dispute resolution timetable (4 months for publication of a final statement) and that this 4-month period would include the publication of a draft decision.

Agenda Item (3) – Update on BT's proposal for call termination payments under prospective new NTS regime (BT)

Rob Day said that BT had not altered its thinking since the previous NTS Focus Group, and confirmed that formal BT board approval was yet to be sought/obtained. The proposal assumes that Ofcom's favoured reforms to the NTS regime will prevail - and BT would welcome feedback. Rob noted that no feedback had been received to date.

Becky Hewlett expressed concern that such an arrangement could be construed as collusive or result in allegations of price fixing. Becky referred attendees to the previous 'NTS Futures Group' initiative (December 2003) that sought to achieve, via commercial negotiation, an alternative regulatory and commercial framework for NTS services. Colin Annette recognised the concern, but said that BT's suggested approach was simply a proposal at present and Ofcom would likely have to consider the implications of any such initiative once CPs had discussed the prospect.

Nancy Saunders said that she had some initial concerns around the impact on number portability, but noted that it was difficult to provide more comprehensive feedback in the absence of any documented detail. A number of CPs shared this view. BT agreed to provide written details of the proposal on an informal basis.

New Action Z/2: BT to provide written details of its proposal for call termination payments under the prospective new NTS regime (by 17th March 2006).

Agenda Item (4) - Telephone Numbering: Safeguarding the Future of Numbers - Introduction to the Ofcom Consultation (Ofcom)

Steve Unger described the key points of the consultation and introduced Nic Green as the project manager for the review.

Steve said that there were a number of key drivers/considerations behind this initiative. In particular:

Efficiency/effectiveness of the numbering process
Addressing consumer criticisms
Consumer knowledge and protection issues

Steve distributed a graph demonstrating the steep growth in number allocation over the last 4 years. He said that Ofcom's proposals included measures to address the issue of number exhaustion.

Steve then outlined the key points of Ofcom's proposal:

The implementation of a consumer protection test when allocating telephone numbers, which will permit Ofcom to cut off the supply of telephone numbers to those CPs that persistently and/or seriously abuse consumers;
A restructuring of the means by which geographic numbers are allocated in order to increase the efficiency with which they are used by CPs, and thereby avoid future number changes. (Steve confirmed, for the avoidance of doubt, that Ofcom was not proposing the introduction of 'Wide Area Codes', contrary to some reports in the press);
The creation of a new type of number – starting with ‘03’ - for those businesses and public services that require a national presence, but who do not wish to charge consumers a premium for contacting them. (Charges for calls to these numbers would be tightly linked to the charges for calls to normal geographic numbers);
A simplification of the meaning of those ‘08’ and ‘09’ numbers which are used to provide chargeable services to consumers, so that consumers can easily understand the price that they are paying and the service that they are receiving. (Ofcom proposes to protect the existing brand of ‘Freephone’ services on ‘0800’);
The creation of a new type of number – starting with ‘06’ - for existing ‘personal numbering’ services, and perhaps in the future for ‘individual numbers’ which are allocated directly to consumers. Ofcom proposes to protect against abuse of these numbers by applying a ceiling to call charges. The migration of personal numbering services to the '06' range would coincide with the consolidation of the use of the ‘07’ range for mobile numbers.
An exploration of whether the best means of promoting efficiency in the future might be through the use of market-based incentives, such as a modest charge made to communications providers for the numbers that they receive, rather than through the application of ever more complex regulatory rules and processes.

Steve said that the main focus of the numbering review in the context of NTS was as follows:

Sustaining and maintaining existing business
Enhancing transparency
A desire to avoid the perpetuation of the indiscriminate evolution of the 09 number range

Ofcom's preferred approach for NTS is split into two parts. The first part focuses on managing the growth of non-revenue share services (i.e. 0870 - assuming that Ofcom's preferred outcome of the NTS: A Way Forward Consultation prevails - and the implementation of the '03' range). The second part focuses on the growth of revenue share services on contiguous ranges. Ofcom proposes that over time, the structure of these ranges should be simplified/become more transparent such that consumers can easily understand the price that they are paying and the service that they are receiving (for example, services could be allocated number ranges in order of price: 083 would cost less than 084 etc…)

In the context of 09 numbers, Steve said that a large number of service designations currently existed, but consumers had little understanding of them in practice. Ofcom proposed that in future the 09 number range could provide distinctions by price and/or content. This would facilitate more manageable and intelligent call barring and would incorporate additional measures to prevent fraudulent activity.

The full content of Ofcom's consultation can be accessed via the following link:

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/numberingreview/

Ray Copeland sought clarity around Ofcom's plans to charge for the allocation of numbers. Steve said that the intention was to implement a small charge aimed at incentivising efficiency (Ofcom was not, for example, intending to treat this as a revenue generation exercise). Ray asked if there would be a charge for all numbers or just 01/02 codes. Steve said that this was one of the questions being consulted upon.

Dirmuid Jennings asked what would constitute a 'small charge' in practice. Steve said that while the absolute level of any charge would be determined by the consultation process. Ofcom intended to make CPs consider number applications from a purchasing perspective.

Will Goodall asked if Ofcom would be addressing the issue of mobile call charges to NTS numbers. Steve said that the tariff designations apply only to BT lines at present, but in an ideal world, such pricing restrictions could apply to at least all fixed lines (with perhaps pre-call announcements where the price deviates from the set level). Steve said that while Ofcom continued to consider the issue, pricing regulation of CPs that do not have SMP in call origination was a complex issue - and Ofcom could not use the numbering policy consultation to implement such regulation by 'stealth'.

Will said that he saw merit in Ofcom's proposals for a new '03' code, but that he regarded the proposals around existing NTS number ranges as less favourable. In particular, Will expressed concern at what he regarded as the proposed disruption to the existing '08' ranges when he believed that the '03' range would address many of the current issues. He added that the NTS: A Way Forward initiative could be premature: The numbering strategy proposals had, in his opinion, a solid basis, but Ofcom was likely about to implement additional micro regulation on the 084/087 ranges in the interim.

Gareth Davies said that Ofcom had attempted to avoid a direct overlap between the two initiatives. Ofcom does not view the numbering strategy consultation as providing an alternative solution for NTS to that proposed in the NTS: A Way Forward consultation - on the contrary, they are intended to be complimentary.

Will Goodall said that Flextel would likely seek to change its input to the NTS: A Way Forward consultation as a result of the proposals in the numbering strategy consultation. Gareth Davies said that Ofcom was happy to accept further representation.

Andrew Wileman sought clarity around the overlap between the NTS: A Way Forward consultation and the numbering strategy review. Gareth said that Ofcom had gone to great lengths to ensure that one was not contingent upon the other. Ofcom was satisfied that the numbering strategy initiative did not constrain the NTS: A Way Forward consultation.

Steve Unger confirmed that the deadline for responses to the numbering strategy consultation was 4th May 2006 and that Ofcom intended to conclude the review in July. He added that a separate industry workshop was being planned. Andy Martin suggested that any changes to the numbering regime would be a long way off. Steve said that this would not necessarily be the case.

Gareth Davies added that Ofcom welcomed alternative suggestions & views around the numbering policy.

Agenda Item (5) – Review of remaining outstanding actions

Action #T/1: Mike Barford to establish an NTS FG working group with the aim of resolving the NGNP issue:

Mike Barford was unable to attend the meeting, however he had previously confirmed that this issue was now less significant as a result of NCCN 651 and the introduction of the updated INCA/CLI charging methodology.

Andrew Wileman suggested that interested parties debate the issue via a conference call in order to establish if there was any desire to progress it. Andrew requested that CPs confirm their interest to him by Friday 24th March. A conference call would be convened thereafter, with the outcome reported back to the NTS Focus Group. (Previous action point closed).

New Action Z/3: Andrew Wileman to arrange a conference call to discuss the porting differential issue.

Action #Y/1: Attendees to feed back initial comments on the BT 0870 charging proposal to Mark Amoss. See agenda item 3 above - action ongoing.

Action #Y/2: Attendees wishing to be involved in an NTS FG working group to address the porting differential issue to confirm their interest to the Chair. Andrew Wileman confirmed that he had received two expressions of interest. Action ongoing (See #T/1) - Responses required by 24th March 2006.

Action #Y/3: BT to confirm if it believes there should be a review of the PRS Bad Debt Surcharge level, and if so to what time frame/frequency.

Rob Day said that BT was not prepared to commit to a formal review of the PRS Bad Debt surcharge, but would be happy to discuss the matter with any CPs that could demonstrate material changes in bad debt levels. Nancy Saunders asked what the trigger for such discussion would be. Rob said that any time a CP believed that something had happened in the market to warrant a change in the surcharge, they should contact BT.

Nancy Saunders said that she would prefer a regular review. Andrew Wileman agreed and suggested that reviews take place to an agreed frequency. Colin Annette said that BT felt that there still needed to be a trigger for review. Andy Martin said that the surcharge should perhaps be revisited annually as situations can change quickly (for example the recent proliferation of 'rogue dialler' activity). Dave Simpson suggested that an annual review of the surcharge could coincide with the 1st April NCC updates. BT agreed to consider the issue further. Action point to remain ongoing.

Action #W1: All FG members to consider if the rates in the CPL should be applied only from the date the letter was signed, not the effective date on the letter (as is current practice):

Will Goodall requested that this action point be revisited as he was unsure what conclusion had been reached. The consensus from the previous meeting appeared to be that the existing arrangements should prevail (i.e. rates in the CPL should be applied from the effective date on the letter). Rob Day confirmed that BT had received no further input on the matter.

Will said that retrospective billing adjustments created operational complexities. This was a particular concern when the amounts involved were immaterial. Kath Embleton said that BT's preference was to perpetuate the existing arrangements. Colin Annette added that retrospection was a resource overhead for BT but was financially material.

Will asked if it would be possible for CPs & BT to agree by mutual consent not to carry out retrospective adjustment. Colin Annette said that BT would consider this, on a bilateral basis, where amounts were not material.

Attendees agreed that the action point could be closed. Colin Annette confirmed, for the avoidance of doubt, that the default situation would see rates being applied from the original date of the pricing letter, but that retrospection could be waived by mutual consent in instances where amounts were immaterial. Colin said that CPs should pursue the matter with their commercial managers if they believed that certain instances of retrospection would require disproportionate resource for the amounts involved.

Agenda item (6) – Any Other Business

Updates to BT SIA Schedules 313 & 314

Marcus Rudkin said that Band-X was disappointed at BT's handling of the implementation of amendments to the above Schedules. He said that it added further confusion/complexity to AIT issues. Nancy Saunders said that some CPS had submitted a complaint to BT. Andrew Wileman added that BT had since provided further amendments to the text which were intended to address some of the industry concerns.

Marcus said that he believed that such activity should be progressed via the AIT sub-group that was initiated as a result of previous BT Standard Contract Reviews. Colin Annette agreed to confirm the date/arrangements for the next meeting of this group.

New Action Z/4: Colin Annette to confirm the date/arrangements for the next meeting of the SCR AIT sub-group.

Date of Next Meeting:

Tuesday 11th April 2006– 2.00pm, Ofcom – Riverside House, London

Post meeting note: Please be aware that the May 2006 NTSFG has been moved to Wednesday 24th May, due to a conflict of meeting rooms at Ofcom.

Summary of New and Outstanding Actions:

# Y/1:	Attendees to feed back initial comments on the BT 0870 charging proposal to Mark Amoss. Ongoing.
# Y/2:	Attendees wishing to be involved in an NTS FG working group to address the porting differential issue to confirm their interest to the Chair. Ongoing - Responses required by 24th March 2006.
# Y/3:	BT to confirm if it believes there should be a review of the PRS Bad Debt Surcharge level, and if so to what time frame/frequency. Ongoing.
# Z/1:	Gareth Davies to confirm if it would be possible for NTSFG attendees to receive an advance copy of any press release relating to the publication of the 'NTS: A Way Forward' statement.
# Z/2:	BT to provide written details of its proposal for call termination payments under the prospective new NTS regime (by 17th March 2006).
# Z/3:	Andrew Wileman to arrange a conference call to discuss the porting differential issue.
# Z/4:	Colin Annette to confirm the date/arrangements for the next meeting of the SCR AIT sub-group.