«Information on maintenance services made available by the provider and obligations undertaken by the latter, as well as contact details, namely telephone numbers and email of customer services for reporting faults (including costs related to calls to indicated numbers made from the various fixed and mobile networks) and business hours, must be published and disclosed.
It is recommended that information on the minimum level of quality provided to customers in terms of fault repair time be published and disclosed. Providers may measure parameter c) in the annex hereto for this purpose.»
PT and APRITEL refer that this information is very variable and its provision on a service-by-service basis, given the volume of information to be processed and published, is deemed to be unfeasible. They add that the fault repair time may depend on factors that are external to the provider (v.g. rescheduling at the request of clients). PT thus believes that ANACOM's recommendation should be amended to establish that providers should indicate 80 and 95 percentile values provided for in the QSR for the US. APRITEL, sharing the view that an average time should be indicated instead of the time for 100% of clients, does not indicate which percentile should be weighted.
ANACOM's position
Taking into account that only a recommendation is at issue relatively to the fault repair time, companies are not bound to publish this information with a specific format.
The assessment of complaints received at ANACOM show that situations of delay in the provision of technical assistance for services are very significant, which points to the fact that this is an important indicator in shaping the will to contract.
Notwithstanding the factors that may constrain this level of quality, it is suggested that to calculate this information, the annex to this determination is followed.
