Topic 'Re: CCTS Annual Report' in forum 'Canadian Broadband' - dslreports.com

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Tue, 11 Dec 2012 20:32:45 EDT

anon posted : I've had Acanac for over a year, and their system is fairly stable, and the speed is good. However, don't bother trying to call their customer support - it's virtually non-existent. Also the referral program is worthless, I have referred a friend who signed up, and they gave me a run-a-round because he signed up with Cable and my service is DSL. So I never got the free month.

My one year is almost up, and you would expect they would offer me the same deal they offer new customers to keep me, but are offering me the service at full-price. I hate it when providers do this "only for new customers" it's bullshit!

Bottom line is this; their customer service is crap; their technical support is virtual non-existent, their referral program is bull, and their retention strategy is not appealing (to me). At the end of the day, although their prices are low, there's a lot left to be wished for...

I'm currently looking at other options and start and ebox are starting to look quite appealing.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Fri, 30 Nov 2012 15:55:47 EDT

anon posted : i user acanac and i would recommend them also.
over teksavvy any day .
having had both. acanac has just been far more stable in my experience and far more interested in providing me a valuable service
rather then, paying employees large $ to be there to help with issues on in bell/rogers/cogeco's control and timeframe anyway.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Fri, 30 Nov 2012 03:07:04 EDT

LostTheGame posted :

said by carcajou:

but that they forbid simultaneous litigation to take your case shows they also protect companies.

The CCTS is a mediator; plain and simple. litigation can set precedence; CCTS decisions cannot.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Fri, 23 Nov 2012 07:10:25 EDT

anon posted :

said by diskace:

Just for sake of argument do you know any industry where you can complaint to an independent body about a service and the merchant get slapped by a fee after your complaint (doesn't matter if it was a valid one or not) ?

I think all 3rd party ombudsman entities are like this.

Off the top of my head the only one I can think of that actually charges people is the Régie de l’énergie (Quebec Energy board). They charge 30$ for you to even make a complaint. If your complaint is accepted they refund the 30$ (and before you file a complaint with them, you have to show written proof from your energy company that you tried to resolve the issue).

Do you have the resources to put an ombudsman in place? Basically you are paying for the use of an ombudsman (with guidance/board-directors from various entities like PIAC).

And as gone stated, the industry itself (Bell, Rogers, Telus et al) made this situation by how they tried, and still do, try to gouge people and provide the very bare minimum, if any, in quality service, billing and dispute resolution. Not to mention the failure of the CWTA (the wireless astroturf sock-puppet association).

Since we know Acanac & teksavvy's stats (shown here: »Re: CCTS Annual Report) let's use them as an example with the pricing you gave up above.

Acanac: 78 complaints
Reg fee: 500$
78*$70= $5,460
Basic Total: $5960 + their time for 78 complaints + any good will resolution + awards

Teksavvy: 32 complaints
Reg fee: 500$
32*$70= $2,240
Basic Total: $2,740 + their time for 32 complaints + any good will resolution + awards

In the grand scheme of things, that isn't a lot in a year. Is it worth it to you to even hire someone? It would cost you more to hire/pay someone for 5-hrs a week for a year, as in teksavvys case.

In addition, from a quality, managerial, and service point of view, any good company would use the stats generated from this ombudsman service to attack the area's in their companies weakness that lead to these ombudsman complaints in order to:
A) Better protect themselves
B) Better serve the beloved customer
C) Complete the Quality Cycle
D) Make their policies clearer.
E) Evaluate the costs of acceptable loss and risk
F) Educate employee's.

This separates the champs from the chumps.

Just saying for sake of argument...

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 23:11:22 EDT

Gone posted : I didn't say it was perfect, I am merely saying that the industry that your business operates in isn't exactly known for outstanding customer service. Something like the CCTS was the only logical result.

My business is considered "construction industry" by the CRA. As a result, I have a slew of additional forms that need to be filed and regulations I need to follow that other businesses don't. When your industry gets a certain reputation, it doesn't matter how upstanding your own business may be, you still get lumped in with everyone else. All you can do is operate your business in an upstanding way and ensure that you follow all the regulations you need to.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 23:01:21 EDT

diskace posted : I agree with you. The CCTS governance have the responsibility to modify the process. Right now it's no big deal because it's not yet popular.

Just for sake of argument do you know any industry where you can complaint to an independent body about a service and the merchant get slapped by a fee after your complaint (doesn't matter if it was a valid one or not) ?

Just thinking how this would apply to the retail industry or in a brick and mortar business.
--
Electronic Box Inc. - Jean-Philippe B��que
Ebox forum »ELECTRONICBOX

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:50:23 EDT

Gone posted : Like I said, if things get out of control it should be on the CCTS to provide a modified intake process and/or modify their fee schedule.

Punishing customers for dismissed claims is not the answer, though.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:47:16 EDT

diskace posted : I don't agree with this model and i believe it may eventually be a failure. Mark my words. Cost will go up insanely in 3-5 years when public awareness raise and 200k complaints will be lodged for random stuff. People abuse just like corporation abuse and i can't see a happy ending to all of this unless the losing party is imposed a fee and/or that CCTS do not accept random complaints about stuff isp don't even have control over such as DMC fees or 'up to x Mbp/s).

I have looked at the CCTS annual report and it seems a lot of complaints are about client who don't understand the technology (speed advertised as up to 6 Mbits for example). Billing related complaints can be more tricky but basic stuff should be denied otherwise CCTS will be kind of the police that write 55$ parking tickets. Another tax for canadians.
--
Electronic Box Inc. - Jean-Philippe B��que
Ebox forum »ELECTRONICBOX

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:30:26 EDT

Gone posted : I assumed membership and participation were one in the same.

Don't get me wrong, I know what it's like to run a business and all the work involved. I just think that this is one of those things that you have no choice but to suck up as a cost of doing business in your particular industry. It's not your fault, it's the incumbents.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:20:24 EDT

diskace posted :

said by Gone:

While you may run a tight ship, you'll forgive me for saying that I have no sympathy for any company that pays for membership in the CCTS.

We try to :)

You are forced to pay the participation package fee once you get your first complaint.

I am not sure there is a difference between membership and participation.
--
Electronic Box Inc. - Jean-Philippe B��que
Ebox forum »ELECTRONICBOX

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:09:33 EDT

Gone posted : But the CCTS isn't a court. It's more akin to an ombudsman for the industry. Under no circumstances should anyone be held responsible for costs associated with taking an issue to an ombudsman.

I would take this further to say that if there are an inordinately high number of complaints it is up to the CCTS to create a better intake and investigation process that is more cost effective to the membership.

And let's be frank - if the industry policed themselves in a more effective way instead of being so well-known for customer dissatisfaction that the government was forced to step in to temper the situation, no one would have found themselves in this sort of situation to begin with. While you may run a tight ship, you'll forgive me for saying that I have no sympathy for any company that pays for membership in the CCTS.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:01:57 EDT

diskace posted :

said by Gone:

Just like credit card merchant, the fees paid to the CCTS are a cost of doing business. The customer should under no circumstances be on the hook to pay those fees directly.

Well i somewhat agree and somewhat disagree. While i agree a customer should not fear to lodge a valid complaint you can clearly see where abuse of this complaint forum will take. Raise of cost for the greater majority.

In court, the party that lose generally have to pay some of the fees involved. That makes sense to me. So you don't go to court unless you evaluate your case with a certain level of seriousness.

The CCTS received 12k complaints up from 2k 2 years ago. The complaint growth is exponential and it's only the beginning. I fear that as soon as a consumer is not happy he will threaten to lodge a complaint.

It's the same problem that merchant face with charge back. The merchant is screwed.
--
Electronic Box Inc. - Jean-Philippe B��que
Ebox forum »ELECTRONICBOX

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 20:05:27 EDT

Gone posted :

said by diskace:

However, if it turns out the service provider is right, the investigation fee should be paid by the opening party. That would be fair and some consumers that are wrong would think about it twice before jumping the gun.

Absolutely not. The last thing we want to do is to create an environment that causes people to be afraid of lodging a complaint for fear of having to pay costs, even if they are 100% right from the get-go. One only needs to look at the Bell repair fees that get passed on to customers and the fact that people are outright afraid to call wholesale ISPs for repair issues due to the mere possibility of that $95 fee being charged. That is not the kind of environment the federal government and the CRTC intended when they created the CCTS.

Just like credit card merchant, the fees paid to the CCTS are a cost of doing business. The customer should under no circumstances be on the hook to pay those fees directly.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 19:57:30 EDT

anon posted :

said by diskace:

[
FYI the annual fee is 500-25 000$ + 70-350$ per complaints.

Thanks for putting some numbers to it diskace.

Are you able to add more detail to this?

For example:
How much does it cost for each stage the complaint gets to?

If your annul cost is based on the total customers you have? Or based on the previous years total filed complaints?

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Thu, 22 Nov 2012 19:42:10 EDT

diskace posted :

said by resa1983:

I would assume how much the company pays is dependent on how far the complaint got in the process.. Ie A full on decision (end of the line) would cost a company more, than if they were to settle the complaint at say just the investigation phase. More time & effort put into it by CCTS, more money to compensate CCTS for that time. Would also be a good way to get companies to negotiate sooner in the process.

Exactly.

However, if it turns out the service provider is right, the investigation fee should be paid by the opening party. That would be fair and some consumers that are wrong would think about it twice before jumping the gun.

It is not fair we have to pay the bill for complaints about stuff customers is wrong about.

FYI the annual fee is 500-25 000$ + 70-350$ per complaints.
--
Electronic Box Inc. - Jean-Philippe B��que
Ebox forum »ELECTRONICBOX

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Mon, 05 Nov 2012 16:44:34 EDT

anon posted : The ISP Summit is going on. Some tidbits:

In regards to filed complaints with the CCTS:
"43% of complaints get no response by service provider"

So almost half of the complaints we see in the reports above are due to the ISP just ignoring people who have been ripped off.

Interesting, but no one should be surprised.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Tue, 30 Oct 2012 20:42:36 EDT

kim posted : Going forward let's try to stay with the original topic of the CCTS Annual Report.
--
Fluent in 3 languages: English, Sarcasm and Sexual Innuendo.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:58:01 EDT

carcajou posted :

said by hm :

said by carcajou:

1. But it is a PRIVATE organization owned by the telecoms.

2. I was a client of a member. But I preferred to keep my litigation options open rather than go for arbitration.

BTW, why would you file in court and then go to the CCTS? Why would you even bother with them?

I fully agree that my own complaint about MONEY could only be brought either in front of the CCTS OR the Court.

But really, I saw TWO separate things here. I had a claim but it s a minor thing in the big picture. I wanted an organism to look at the general business practices of my ISP and judge if they are justified and/or legitimate in this country in 2012.

I had asked a charge back to my credit card issuer and I knew very well that my bank had no choice: either they would collect from Acanac or the bank would compensate me themselves. So should that be enough to tranquilize me ? You might just as well ask me why I m here ranting when I actually got my refund already.

The CCTS was not interested in hearing my point of view from the Consumers rights perspective, When I told them my bank would compensate me anyway, it was the end of it for them.

So I moved on to the OPC ( Office de Protection du Consommateur ) and I intend to keep that complaint going even if I was paid. In Quebec, we have the most advanced set of Laws for Consumers rights in Canada ( you ll often see in the telecoms contracts that there are clauses just for Quebec residents ). So I now want to know if that agency ( the OPC ) will look at Acanac s business practices and if they will actually do something about it even if my own money is back in my pocket.

Acanac already received a formal " Avis " from that provincial govt agency in november 2011. Let s see if they get a second one. Their file there is getting thicker every month. But such formal notice is probably the most they ll do with a company operating from another jurisdiction. They have the power to prosecute, but that power probably stops at the demarcation line with Ontario.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Tue, 30 Oct 2012 09:46:17 EDT

resa1983 posted : I would assume how much the company pays is dependent on how far the complaint got in the process.. Ie A full on decision (end of the line) would cost a company more, than if they were to settle the complaint at say just the investigation phase. More time & effort put into it by CCTS, more money to compensate CCTS for that time. Would also be a good way to get companies to negotiate sooner in the process.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Tue, 30 Oct 2012 06:54:35 EDT

anon posted :

said by carcajou:

1. But it is a PRIVATE organization owned by the telecoms.

2. I was a client of a member. But I preferred to keep my litigation options open rather than go for arbitration.

1. Seems the consumers groups have an issue with the CCTS as well. See:
»www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/archive/2011/2011-341.htm
and
»www.crtc.gc.ca/PartVII/eng/2011/···4330.htm

Seems the CCTS defines anything as being a consumer group. Even a group with vested interests in telecom.

So yeah, the CCTS is like an industry astroturf group (just like the CWTA) and nothing more. Who gets to nominate/vote in consumer representatives from real consumer groups to the board of directors is loaded and total bullsh*t.

2. You don't lose your right to go to court. Matter of fact you can tell the CCTS to stuff it is you don't like what they come back with. Nothing is binding on you.

But it makes sense that you shouldn't have a file open in court, the CCTS and whatever else at the same time. It's not like you can pick and chose the best decision.

Why would you need to file in court and then go to the CCTS?

The CCTS is ok for people to scared of court, or too intimidated by the whole process and learning how to file in small claims. Does the CRTC serve justice? No. Not at all, as you pointed out. That is what the courts are for.

BTW, why would you file in court and then go to the CCTS? Why would you even bother with them?

---
Anyhow, my question still remains open for any of the so-called indi's here to answer (or anyone else who knows for sure):

The CCTS states the number of complaints dictates how much a company must pay the CCTS.

Does anyone know how they work that out? Or how much a company pays per complaint?

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Tue, 30 Oct 2012 06:54:17 EDT

anon posted :

said by Guspaz:

All ISPs with revenue over $10 million are required to participate.

That changed.

All telecom providers must join within 3 (or is it 5) days upon notice that the CCTS received a complaint against them. Think that changed a little over a year ago.

Here, I looked into it and found it:
Providers not currently participating in CCTS have to
join within five days of being advised by CCTS that we have
received a complaint from one of their customers.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Tue, 30 Oct 2012 01:10:08 EDT

carcajou posted :

said by hm :

said by carcajou:

I also found out by experience that the CCTS will accept your complaint only if they are the only organism that is mandated by you to get a financial settlement for you. If you tell them you are also using other means, they decline your case because they are an arbitration scheme. You cannot at the same time use litigation like Small Claims Court.

Which makes sense.

Yes it makes sense in a way. But it means in practice that they will simply examine if the ISP fulfilled his obligations as per the contract/TOS between you and the ISP and the CCTS will decide if you should get refunded.
But they dont pass judgment on the ISP s general business practices for example.
Or if you are entitled to a charge back from your credit card issuer, they are suddenly not interested in the case also even if those business practices are scandalous. You ll get an automatic refund from your bank...then it s not their problem.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:24:18 EDT

carcajou posted : Ok I ll make myself clearer using the CCTS own documentation.

1) I said that the CCTS is not part of the CRTC and are not a government agency as appears here in their FAQ.

( Beginning of quote from the CCTS FAQ )

5. Are you a government department?

No, we are a private, not-for-profit corporation incorporated under federal legislation. We receive no taxpayer money – and we do not seek any.

6. So how are your operations funded?

The CRTC, Canada’s telecom regulator, ordered all providers to participate in CCTS and to provide its funding. Industry funding is typical for “ombudsman” type organizations like ours, both in Canada and around the world.( End of quote )

So, yes the telecoms were " ordered " to create it, but they still CREATED it and entirely FUND IT whether you like it or not ( and whether THEY liked it or not ). I fully admit the word " created " was a bad choice of words. Replace it with " were forced to create ". But it is a PRIVATE organization owned by the telecoms.

Now, I never said they were not impartial because of that.
You also misread me regarding the reason they declined to take my complaint. I was a client of a member. But I preferred to keep my litigation options open rather than go for arbitration.

The moment you say you gave a mandate to another organism to collect your money, they decline taking your complaint.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:19:58 EDT

anon posted :

said by carcajou:

Employers who have many accidents at work also pay more to the Workers Compensation Board. It s the same principle.

I also found out by experience that the CCTS will accept your complaint only if they are the only organism that is mandated by you to get a financial settlement for you. If you tell them you are also using other means, they decline your case because they are an arbitration scheme. You cannot at the same time use litigation like Small Claims Court.

Which makes sense.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:01:56 EDT

Guspaz posted : You're lying. The CCTS was not created by the telecom companies. They pay a contribution to run it because they're required by the CRTC to do so.

As for only accepting complaints for companies who you're actually a customer of, that makes perfect sense, and could not be any other way. All ISPs with revenue over $10 million are required to participate.
--
Developer: Tomato/MLPPP, Linux/MLPPP, etc »fixppp.org

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:07:03 EDT

carcajou posted : Many people think the CCTS is an arm of the CRTC, but it is just a complaints resolution scheme created by the telecom companies themselves. They all pay a contribution to make it function and I think it s normal that a company that has many complaints would have to contribute more to its budget. After all, that company causes a certain expense to treat each complaint.

Employers who have many accidents at work also pay more to the Workers Compensation Board. It s the same principle.

I also found out by experience that the CCTS will accept your complaint only if they are the only organism that is mandated by you to get a financial settlement for you. If you tell them you are also using other means, they decline your case because they are an arbitration scheme. You cannot at the same time use litigation like Small Claims Court.

I have no reason to think they are not impartial at the CCTS, but that they forbid simultaneous litigation to take your case shows they also protect companies.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:31:21 EDT

anon posted : BTW, the CCTS states the number of complaints dictates how much a company must pay the CCTS.

Does anyone know how they work that out? Or how much a company pays per complaint?

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Mon, 29 Oct 2012 00:59:02 EDT

fiestaware posted : Yes yes yes - Acanac sucks™ - we all agree. Somehow Acanac thinks the ex~~cuses~~planations that didn't suffice 5 years ago, and didn't suffice 2 years ago, will satisfy today. Oh Paul, don't you know you can't have "growing pains" at your age?!

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sun, 28 Oct 2012 11:03:38 EDT

mlerner posted : And you should ask if either one if they're paying for their Acanac connection, or if they have a 'freebie' from the referrals. :)

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sun, 28 Oct 2012 10:17:53 EDT

dillyhammer posted :

said by Acanac Inc:

It's an ongoing process and one that I put allot of resources into. In the end it's a balance. It's also about perception. For example your comment above in regards to Acanac getting no referrals. It's the exact opposite. At this time a good portion of our orders are coming from referrals and not direct advertising.

FWIW, I know 2 people, one a neighbour, the other a friend's neighbour, that use Acanac. Both sing Acanac's praises up and down.

My neighbour thinks I'm nuts for not being with Acanac and tries to convert me damn near every time I see him. Seriously, the dude has Acanac rabies.

My friend's neighbour, when I suggested she consider trying TSI, went white as a sheet. She's been with Acanac forever. Not one problem. Ever. I don't think she likes me any more.

Acanac has it's fair share of fanboys.

Mike
--
Cogeco - The New UBB Devil -»[Burloak] Usage Based Billing Nightmare
Cogeco UBB, No Modem Required - »[Niagara] 40gb of "usage" while the modem is unplugged

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sun, 28 Oct 2012 09:24:46 EDT

TSI Marc posted : Most people don't know CCTS even exists yet.. And most don't have the propensity to file a complaint having never had anywhere to turn to before or just don't ever take the time...

In contrast, most of our users will know about these things and won't be afraid to use it if they feel necessary.

I'd say its fair to compare similar sized entities to one another and also against what they're trying to achieve...
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sun, 28 Oct 2012 06:27:10 EDT

anon posted :

said by Acanac Inc:

It's also relevant to the client base size.

Well... Let's look at it this way.

Videotron has over a million TV subs
Videotron has over a million internet subs
Videotron has over a million phone subs
Videotron has something like 0.5-million mobile/wireless subs

Total complaints: ~200 (keep in mind wireless is the bulk of the complaints).

Acanac for a single service: 78

I would call that significant, and very high considering client base size.

Cogeco has ~88.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 16:09:39 EDT

anon posted : Ebox has zero complaints. I don't even see their name on the list!

Just say'n.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:47:30 EDT

mlerner posted : The problem is and I admit a challenge for every industry is, no matter the cost you will sooner or later have to raise rates or risk your customer base as you keep growing. Teksavvy I think ran into almost exactly the same situation and could have ended up in a bad situation.

I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of business but I have seen those situations frequently and it's a tough spot.

Value propositions like offering referrals can also cause or increase problems if the customer specifically chooses to subscribe only because of that.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:42:50 EDT

Acanac Inc posted : I can tell you that we have one of the lowest attrition rates in the industry. (Year over year)

We target a certain type of client that on average is looking for the best bang for the buck.

Let's assume we hired another 100 staff members while also increasing the rates and reducing the bandwidth allotments to cover the costs.

In my opinion this would be detrimental to the company. It's simply not our target market.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:36:42 EDT

mlerner posted :

said by Acanac Inc:

Sure although if you still have the referral program I can see why. »www.acanac.ca/Referral-Program.html

The problem with that is people will refer other people only to get the financial incentive i.e. free internet. What would be interesting is seeing the stats of referrals and if they stay longer than 6 months and that would tell the complete picture.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:31:45 EDT

Acanac Inc posted : It's an ongoing process and one that I put allot of resources into. In the end it's a balance. It's also about perception. For example your comment above in regards to Acanac getting no referrals. It's the exact opposite. At this time a good portion of our orders are coming from referrals and not direct advertising.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:27:49 EDT

anon posted : "Accepted" complaints, top 5:

Comwave: 191
Acanac Inc.: 78
ACN Canada: 68
Distributel + 3web: 42
TekSavvy: 32

Excluded Primus since they also do mobile, which the others do not. And which, per the CCTS, has the highest number of complaints. So we can't distinguish/compare them. The other resellers we can.

Not sure if I missed any in the top 5.

I didn't notice if they break down each company per service offered. They should.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:27:21 EDT

anon posted :

said by Gone:

Comwave and Primus are worse.

For what it's worth, Teksavvy is up there, too.

100% less than Acanac.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:27:06 EDT

anon posted : yeah.. I noticed Comwave. But aren't they in Bed with that pyramid scheme ACN? All of which owned (or major interest owned) by Donald Trump?

I seem to recall a Comwave ACN connection, but I could be completely wrong here. Just rings a Bell. Pretty sure there was some competition bureau investigation I recall reading (both American and Canadian) that named both. But, again, I could be wrong... old age you know ;)

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:25:11 EDT

mlerner posted :

said by Acanac Inc:

In the end the goal should be to always improve the service quality. The tough part is to strike the correct balance between growth and quality of service while still getting the best bang for the buck.

That's where you guys fall down. Whatever statements and promises you make, you really need to improve support and service quality because I know of no one that will ever recommend Acanac over other indies.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:22:24 EDT

Acanac Inc posted : It's also relevant to the client base size. If a company only has 1000 clients and 10 complaints it would be allot worse than another company with 100K clients and 100 complaints.

We also offer more than just one service.
We are currently offering DSL Internet, Cable Internet, Voip Phone service and soon TV service.

In the end the goal should be to always improve the service quality. The tough part is to strike the correct balance between growth and quality of service while still getting the best bang for the buck.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:22:16 EDT

resa1983 posted :

said by mlerner:

Interesting, Globalive has no complaints and Mobilicity has 45.

Check under Wind Mobile. 391 accepted complaints. 311 resolved. None which went past investigation phase.
--
Battle.net Tech Support MVP

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:19:08 EDT

TSI Marc posted : I'll get a list to see what those were all about and when they occurred... To be noted, our base isn't split between a number of companies either.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 15:18:41 EDT

mlerner posted : Interesting, Globalive has no complaints and Mobilicity has 45.

Ah, I see split names even though Globalive and Wind Mobile is basically the same thing.

Re: CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 14:46:06 EDT

Gone posted : Comwave and Primus are worse.

For what it's worth, Teksavvy is up there, too.

CCTS Annual Report

Sat, 27 Oct 2012 14:37:59 EDT

anon posted : Anyone find the time to look over the CCTS's annual report?

»www.ccts-cprst.ca/documents/annu···011-2012

Nothing that we haven't seen here in these forums, in terms of ISP complaints.

Did you check out the stats?

Acanac (in terms of resellers) is certainly near the top of the list. But, who here didn't really expect that? Be honest... :p
»www.ccts-cprst.ca/wp-content/upl···ider.pdf

Lots of funny and interesting tidbits in those reports.

Both Bell and Rogers top around 2000+ complaints, Videotron around 200+. But these providers do all services (TV, Telco, wireless and internet). That makes Acanac really look bad by comparison given the size of their complaints and only one service provided.