Compliance with CRTC Wireless Code (data overage cap)

Need Help?

That's what we're here for! The goal of the Rogers Community is to help you find answers on everything Rogers. Can't find what you're looking for? Just ask!
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
I've Been Here Awhile
Posts: 3

Re: Compliance with CRTC Wireless Code (data overage cap)

Well, there is good news and bad news. The good news is that Rogers contacted me and removed the entire data overage charge. The bad news is that they don't agree with me that they are doing things wrong. I accepted the response from Rogers as resolution of my issue but am going to reply to the CCTS that while my specific issue is resolved, they still should be evaluating Rogers policy on how they count the $50 when it comes to Share Everything plans. I'll post back here if anything comes of that.

Resident Expert
Resident Expert
Posts: 13,942

Re: Compliance with CRTC Wireless Code (data overage cap)

Glad they got something at least semi resolved for you.

I do find it interesting.. (sort of been following your posting).

While i beleive on a shared everything plan, you can track seperately how much EACH seperate user does use..
Its not like each user has their 'own' limit.. each gets 1/3 on a 3 person group.

The overage doesnt take place, till after the COMBINED usage goes over.  Doesnt matter theh spread, 1mb, 1mb and the rest on the 3rd.

So to me, I do agree.. that there should only be ONE overage fee.

I'm a Senior Advisor
Posts: 2,153

Re: Compliance with CRTC Wireless Code (data overage cap)

Glad to hear that you got your own billing issue interpreted with assistance from CRTC to reflect your interpretation of the rules around overages.


I am disappointed that Rogers is disputing it.


I am pleased that the CRTC is continuing to review it.


It basically makes sense to me that since the share everything data is applied to the account where one master holder is held responsible for the account, that when there is an overage over the total for the account by $50.00, that the CRTC rules would apply to the account, which would mean that it applies to all phones from that point forward since the account has met the reporting limit and max.  To suggest that it applies to each phone individually is playing with semantics and violating the principle that the CRTC is trying to protect the overage for the account, not the breakdown in individuals.


Anybody that runs into this one, I would suggest that you escalate it upwards rapidly, unless they agree to this CRTC interepation, not just a reversal or compensation.  Get them to agree that the rule applies as you interpret it and that you will be dealt with that way in the future.  If they do not agree, escalate quickly.  do not spend any time in discussion, the moment they don't agree, then escalate all the way to CCTC and CRTC.


For every one person who has got caught on this one, there are probably 100's others that just accepted, and until CRTC firmly defines it in our favour, not Rogers, we run the chance that we will get hit this way.


There are protections in place, we need to become knowledgeable of them.  Some would suggest that the terms we accepted that when Rogers applies their interpretation of CRTC restrictions, that we have to accept it, but we have the right to dispute it and push up through to the CRTC, and even small claims court in Ontario, but not all provinces.  Each has different rules, such as Quebec, BC I believe and maybe one other province.  They conviently do make it clear what applies to Quebec because Quebec requires it, but for other provinces, they say it is this way, unless local laws override the agreement.


An additional CRTC item that people may want to pursue is inability to access myrogers, which means that you can't access usage, and Rogers is in violation everytime this happens.  They have to provide tools for monitoring under CRTC rules, and suggesting that we use our phone measurement tools is not providing tools to us.  If their systems are down, they are in violation during that time, and if you get an overage during that time, you could probably dispute it, using tghe escalation process, quoting the CRTC rules.  Yes the alternative of using our devices tools is an alternative, but not a replacement for the requirement that Rogers provides easy to use tools.  My interpretation only, but if it happens to me, I certainly would get CRTC involved quickly, documenting exactly the period of time that the system was down and my correspondence of such.


Also consider looking at their requirements for a permanent paper copy of a contract or plan change (you have to waive your right to paper version - the electronic version does replace the requirement unless you explicitly give permission to waive that responsibility, and your rights around cancelling if you disagree - I leave for others to get knowledgeable on the rulings and rules of the CRTC, and rulings of CCTC, as well as to be fully knowledgeable on all components of the contract which the CRTC explicitly expresses which areas must be clearly and explicitly stated for clarity to the customer.


Be an informed consumer and know your rights.  If we all went forward with everything that we have been wronged on in relation to the contract and CRTC, they would begin to treat us fairly, because the costs and public embarrasement would reach a point where they could not ignore these issues.  Although, they have gone 5 months with Navigtr, so they will go a long time if we let them.  If the thousands of Navigtr users passed on their concerns, maybe we would get faster action.





I've Been Here Awhile
Posts: 3

Re: Compliance with CRTC Wireless Code (data overage cap)

I have an update to my issue (it was incorrectly combined with the first issue by the admin). I talked to the CCTS today. Unfortunately their scope is limited to resolving my specific complaint as opposed to being able to address a wider incorrect application of a rule. Since Rogers did refund my money, my issue is complete as far as the CCTS is concerned. I will still try to find another resource to go straight to the CRTC since they are the right ones to actually enforce something on a larger scale but I am pretty sure they will just tell me to go talk to the CCTS. The one good piece of news is that the person from the CCTS 100% agrees that the $50 notify and cap process applies at the account level and should not be multiplied by the number of lines on a shared plan. So I know I'm in the right but Rogers doesn't agree with me or with the CCTS. That's about as far as I expect this can go unless more complaints are filed and the CRTC finds a trend that they wish to pursue but I'll post back here if I learn more.


Bottom line was that it was a good experience. The CCTS is helpful and is a great route to go if you don't get satisfaction from Rogers. I was also assured that even though Rogers paid me the amount of my claim, the CRTC still sees it as a valid complaint that they will see in their data. It's not just a complaint that was closed with no problems.