Investigation Finding Report

After analyzing the information and evidence from both parties, we determined that the service provider reasonably performed its obligations towards the customer and found no error in its handling of the issues brought forth.

Issue 1: The customer’s complaint is that they experienced intermittent service delivery issues.

• The customer’s complaint is that for the past couple of years they have noticed dropped calls, static and poor audio with their three wireless business lines. They further claim that, in May or June 2024, they brought the issue to the service provider’s attention, but it did not conduct any troubleshooting; rather, it informed the customer that the issues were the result of residing close to the border.
• The Terms of Service for the wireless service agreements entered into on August 26, 2023, state that the service provider does not guarantee or warrant the performance, availability or coverage of its services.
• We reviewed the contract for business wireless services, which indicate that the customer agreed to receive three lines, one being billed at a monthly rate of $110.00, and the other two being billed at a monthly rate of $90.00.
• Although we acknowledge that the service provider cannot guarantee service, we do expect that a service provider will follow its usual troubleshooting policies and procedures when a customer brings issues to its attention.
• We reviewed the service provider’s troubleshooting policies relating to degraded call clarity and dropped calls, which outlines the steps its representatives should follow when troubleshooting:
  • Confirm area coverage
  • Diagnose issue with customer
  • Confirm, internally, if any related issues exist
  • Diagnose cellular data speeds
  • Confirm if any network blockages exist
  • Diagnose issue location
  • Test SIM card
  • Perform a resend to switch
  • Escalate the issue and suggest Wi-Fi calling
• We reviewed account and technical notes on file dating from June 2024 to present, which indicate the following:
  • The customer first reported the issue on June 26, 2024, and a resend to switch was performed.
  • August 8, 2024 – The service provider suspected that the issue was related to poor indoor coverage; however, it ensured that voice over LTE (VoLTE) was enabled on the customer’s device.
  • August 20, 2024 – The customer was advised to upgrade their SIM card.
  • August 26, 2024 – Further troubleshooting was performed, and the service provider was unable to detect any errors in its network.
  • September 4, 2024 – The customer reported the issue again; however, the service
    provider could not detect any issues. The customer’s concerns were escalated.
  • December 20, 2024 – A technician visited the area where the customer had been experiencing issues; however, they could not replicate them. The technician noted that the area in question is a metal building, where coverage issues would occur internally. The technician recommended an in-building solution, such as Wi-Fi calling.
  • December 22, 2024 – The customer was informed of the service provider’s policy, but the customer requested that the issue be escalated again.
  • December 23, 2024 – The service provider requested that the customer document examples of the issue, which were not shared with the service provider until January 20, 2025.
  • January 22, 2025 – The service provider determined that the issues could be related to the customer residing near a border; however, no errors were detected within its network. Additionally, the customer was advised to use Wi-Fi calling.
  • Following the filing of the complaint with us, the customer was advised on February 12, 2025, that they would not be subject to any penalties should they wish to pursue services elsewhere.
• A review of the coverage map indicates that the customer is situated in a highly covered area. Although the customer is not located in an area of concern but rather near the border, it is important to note that the customer is on a month-to-month plan and is able to cancel their service without penalty should they want to explore their options with other service providers.
• While we acknowledge that usage is not an indicator of service delivery issues, we contend that it would be unreasonable for a customer to not have been able to make use of said service. As such, we reviewed invoices dated May 2024 to February 2025, which confirm that the customer was able to make reasonable use of their wireless services.
• In light of the above analysis, we find that the service provider met its obligations pertaining to the customer’s claim. The service provider does not guarantee uninterrupted service, was diligent in troubleshooting, and the customer is free to seek services elsewhere, without penalty, should they be dissatisfied with the level of quality.