Complaint summary
The copper network was being replaced with fibre in the Customer’s area. The Customer wanted their homephone Provider to list them as a Vulnerable Customer and provide them with an alternate means of contacting 111 in the event of an emergency during a power cut. The Provider offered vulnerable customers a mobile phone as an alternative means. The Customer wanted a backup battery pack and did not believe a mobile phone was a viable alternative.
The Provider, a retail service provider, do not believe this complaint falls under TDR jurisdiction as the copper network shutdown is outside of their control. They also claim the Customer has refused to engage with the Provider or otherwise acted in bad faith in relation to attempting to resolve the matter with the Provider and attempting to resolve the Complaint. The Provider also believed the Customer had multiple connection options, not just fibre. They believed the complaint should be considered frivolous or vexatious or trivial.
Jurisdiction decision
This complaint was deemed within jurisdiction as it was about customer service and communication. TDR did not agree that it was frivolous, trivial or vexatious. The Customer Complaints Code notes that “a Scheme Member must exercise caution not to dismiss complaints as frivolous or vexatious without due consideration and, where appropriate, escalation.” The procedure is outlined in the Code. Here, the customer simply did not agree with the Provider’s assessment of the complaint. TDR does not believe it is the intent of the code to put such disagreements into the frivolous, trivial or vexatious category. Nor does it appear that the Customer refused to engage with the Provider. Again, there would seem to be communication issues and the parties appeared to be talking at cross purposes. Mediation/Adjudication is considered helpful in these circumstances.