Mobile, fixed-line and Internet service providers are at odds with the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority (URCA) over its proposed recommendations for quality of service (QoS) regulations and network performance metrics for electronic communications networks, chiefly because the companies consider existing consumer protection regulations (CPR) adequate.
However, URCA, throughout its draft document, constantly reminds service providers Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC) and Cable Bahamas that while its QoS regulations were drafted to be complementary to the existing CPR, the QoS regulations set out separate enforcements in certain cases.
Both BTC and Cable Bahamas disagreed that they should be fined by URCA separate from fines owed to customers for breaches in QoS. However, URCA reminded both entities that its parameters for breach of QoS extend past the individual customer, and relate to specific tranmission obligations the licensees have to the general public. URCA did, however, concede the need for consistency between its QoS parameters and the existing CPR.
"URCA reiterates that the CPR focuses on the quality and standard of service each customer receives from his or her particular service provider," URCA's document said.
"On the other hand, the proposed QoS regulations address QoS at the network level. Therefore, in the context of the proposed QoS regulations, it is URCA and not the customer that is directly involved in the resolution process.
"As such, and consistent with the relevant provisions of the Communications Act, URCA's intention has been to issue separate regulatory measures to address QoS for customers, and the minimum required service standards (MRSS) for electronic communications networks and services in The Bahamas.
"It is worth emphasizing that the CPR were specifically designed to provide customers with an individual remedy in respect of the QoS they receive from their service providers, and to ensure that customers are adequately compensated in the event of a breach of the relevant standards by a service provider.
"By contrast, the proposed QoS regulations are intended to regulate service quality at the network level. From URCA's perspective, effective QoS regulation at the network level ensures that service providers are better able to achieve the requisite QoS standard specified in the CPR. Indeed, URCA affirms its view that the additional QoS regulations and CPR are complementary documents and without the former, the CPR will not achieve the desired outcome for customers."
The document places most of its emphasis on mobile transmission given the size and vulnerability of that particular market and likely because of the number and frequency of complaints Bahamians my have had about the quality of service in the mobile sector.
URCA contended in the document, after both Cable Bahamas and BTC agreed that compensation for customers exists under the CPR, that the "CPR and QoS regulations are separate regulatory measures with separate and distinct enforcement mechanisms".
"In deciding on a penalty for breach of the QoS regulations, URCA will determine the penalty that would be proportionate to the impact or the potential impact of the breach," the draft said.
URCA also fought down the companies' position on the acceptable downtime for their internet services over a one-year period. URCA, while suggesting that an acceptable level is no more than nine hours of unscheduled downtime per year, representing a 99.9 percent successful transmission rate, would allow for the companies to fall to an 80 percent successful transmission rate, "which is in line with the standard obtained in benchmark countries".

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian