Information provided for in A) and b) shall be published and disclosed to interested parties, in writing and free of charge, at all providers' stores and points of sales of service providers and at their websites, if any.
Providers' stores shall mean fixed or permanent premises where service providers pursue their activity and where a direct contact with the public is established, namely through direct customer services intended for the offer of products and services or for development of customer relations.
With regard to the manner how information is disclosed to interested parties, service providers must:
- Allow the online consultation of Service Provision Conditions, by accessing the provider's website at its own store, or
- Allow the consultation at its own store of a written medium with clear and comprehensive information on Service Provision Conditions, including elements which must be disclosed pursuant to this determination.
Additionally, this information must be made available to interested parties in a physical medium, at their request, and it is accepted that such information may be printed at the location by accessing the provider's website or websites.
The provision of Service Provision Conditions must be indicated at providers' stores by means of a sign which must be placed in a visible manner and which shall bear easily legible print, the following text being recommended: «To consult information on conditions of provision and use of electronic communications services provided at this store please consult the website (...) or contact (...) [indicate place; ex: "information desk y", "customer service", etc.]»
Service providers must also make sure that at points of sale which are not their own stores, there is a clear indication on the contact details for obtaining information on the respective service provision conditions. In the case of door-to-door contract proposals or of the resort to remote use techniques, the provision of information provided for in points A and B, or of contact details for obtaining it, must also be guaranteed.
Information to be made available at providers' websites must be accessed through a hyperlink entitled: "Service Provision Conditions".
This hyperlink must appear on the home page or in the first page of each service commercial offer. The hyperlink position must be distinctly visible and identifiable, and it must be accessed without using the navigation bar of the page. In any case, full access to information by any interested party, regardless of its special needs or the equipment used, must be ensured.
The referred hyperlink must give access to a list of items on which, pursuant to this determination, the provider must make information available. Each of these items must be directly hyperlinked to the page where the corresponding information is available. In the alternative, this information may be presented in the same page where items are listed.
Items in this determination which do not apply to the offer shall bear the indication "not applicable".
Both the hyperlink text and the information content to which it gives access, or even an intermediate index, must be made available in a text format. Basic accessibility rules must also be ensured, such as font size and text/background contrast. It is not allowed to make information exclusively available in formats and supports like image, flash or video.
The information content of each item must be supplemented with the corresponding date of publication and last update.
Providers of publicly available electronic communications services must notify ANACOM of the (URL) page from which the item index which must be disclosed may be reached (or accessed). Any subsequent change to the identification of that page must be communicated at least five days ahead.
By notifying ANACOM of the (URL) page which allows access to information made available to the public on conditions of provision and use of publicly available telephone networks and services, undertakings fulfil paragraph 3 of article 47 of ECL, being thus exempted from submitting to this Authority any further information for this purpose.
To ensure that information on conditions of provision and use of the service made available by service providers is within reach of all interested parties, including citizens with special needs, it is recommended that the respective websites are accessible, specifically by meeting the "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines", in their most recent version. These guidelines include several recommendations that aim to make Internet content accessible to everyone, regardless of specific needs or limitations, either physical or resulting from the equipment used. These guidelines are available at the official website of the World Wide Web Consortium, which may be accessed from the link http://www.w3.org/http://www.w3.org/http://www.w3.org/.
Where contracting the service entails the purchase of a kit/package in shopping areas, the outer surface of the package must be clearly marked with the following information:
- Identification of the service provider;
- General description of the service, indicating the main features;
- Indication of the loyalty period, if any;
- Indication of the contact details for obtaining information on coverage, tariffs and other conditions of provision and use of the service, including, the website of the provider, if any (in this case, the respective (URL) page of access to the "Service Provision Conditions" hyperlink must also be indicated).
Information made available to the public and users pursuant to this determination must be updated whenever there is a change in the conditions provided.»
APRITEL disagrees with the set of measures proposed in this section, and refers that they jeopardise the commercial freedom of electronic communications companies. APRITEL feels that the draft decision submitted to consultation has excessive and redundant requirements, such as the placing of signs at providers' stores, as this is the location where the consumer may obtain information on operators' provision conditions, and this seems to bring no advantage for the consumer who goes to a specific point of sales to get customer support.
PT restates that requirements imposed by ANACOM are not reasonable and stresses that imposing the placing of signs at providers' stores totally divests clients of the responsibility to search for information. PT further declares that it strongly disagrees with the obligation to provide customers with information in paper, as this obligation may entail significant burdens.
CTT consider that it should be up to each provider to decide the location where the information is made available, as it is the only entity who will be harmed if it fails to disclose properly the location where consumers may obtain further information. It also refers that in the case of CTT, compliance with this obligation will imply disproportionate additional costs, as this company has 900 premises throughout the country.
As regards the provision on a physical medium of information on the conditions of offer and user of services, FENACOOP considers that it should not depend on a request by the user, it should rather be provided regardless of any request. In line with this position, ACOP also takes the view that providing information in sections A and B in a physical medium should not depend on a previous request by the consumer, referring that such information should always be at the disposal of the consumer, who must not be prevented from accessing it.
ANACOM's position
Except for the example presented (placing of a sign at providers' stores) APRITEL fails to identify other requirements in the draft decision which are deemed to be excessive and redundant.
Specifically on the obligation to place a sign indicating the location where and the manner how information on offer conditions may be accessed, this Authority agrees that in fact it may be a redundant requirement taking into account that even if the user is not in the area where information at issue may be obtained, he shall be naturally sent to the right place. In the light of the arguments put forward, this obligation will be recast.
As regards the other measures provided for in this section, they are not deemed to jeopardise the commercial freedom of electronic communications companies.
Requirements provided for herein are aimed to ensure access to relevant contract information by users in general and consumers in particular, fulfilling legal provisions - of ECL, of Law number 23/96, of 26 July (Law of Essential Public Services) and of Law number 24/96, of 31 July (Consumer Protection Law). It is also under the law and in the exercise of a competence legally conferred (paragraph 2 of article 47) that ANACOM establishes requirements on the form of public disclosure of information, on terms deemed to be the most appropriate.
Contrary to arguments made by PT, the proposed measure does not encourage clients to divest of their responsibilities. Rules provided for here aim to guarantee that the right to access information is effectively ensured in a transparent manner. On the other hand, the setting of minimum standards will enable uniform action by providers as regards the provision of information, as the establishment of common procedures will contribute to facilitate access to information.
This Authority cannot accept suggestions put forward by ACOP and FENACOOP according to which the provision on a physical medium of information on the conditions of offer and use of services should not depend on any request. In fact, in ANACOM's opinion, the imposition on service providers of an obligation along these lines would imply an unfair, disproportionate and unjustified burden, as it would entail a significant investment in media to be provided to users, with no clear advantage, as users may not show interest in all the information.
The solution laid down on this matter in the draft decision submitted to consultation ensures the necessary balance and proportionality between the imposed requirement and the purpose it aims to achieve.
PT declares also that it disagrees with the requirement to disclose information at agency establishments, which frequently operate in limited spaces where it will be not easy to disclose massive amounts of information which can be easily obtained through other means.
APRITEL and PT share the view that shopping areas should not be considered the privileged channel for providing information.
All entities that addressed this matter were of the opinion that websites should be privileged as points of information. As regards the provision of information, Vodafone and PT take the view that customer services play a relevant role to fully inform clients. Consequently, they suggest that ANACOM, in its final decision, confers a central focus to the online provision of information on the conditions of provision and use of services, to the detriment of gathering extensive and complex documents. Interested parties may consult and print at their stores and at home the information deemed to be relevant for making their decision to contract.
ANACOM's position
Arguments presented by PT against the obligation to disclose information at agency establishments do not justify the amendment of this requirement. The draft decision submitted to consultation requires a visible indication at those establishments of contact details for obtaining the information, which, contrary to PT's statements, is not massive. Relatively to the requirement provided for in this point of the draft decision submitted to consultation it should be referred that further to the transposition of amendments to Directive 2002/22/EC by Directive 2009/136/EC, the wording of paragraph 2 of article 47 of ECL provides that companies must publish and ensure the provision and easy access at their websites and points of sale of services of information, under the terms determined by ANACOM.
In the light of the above, and taking into account the characteristics of points of sale of services and the means and technologies currently available, it is necessary to adjust the requirements provided for in the draft decision submitted to consultation for disclosure of information at providers' stores and points of sale of services, so that through them an adequate information of interested parties on their offer and use is ensured. Therefore, the determination is amended to read:
«Undertakings providing public communications networks or publicly available electronic communications services must ensure that information on conditions of provision and use of communications services provided for in this determination are published and disclosed to interested parties, in writing and free of charge, at all providers' stores and points of sales of their services and Internet websites, if any.
Providers' stores shall mean fixed or permanent premises where service providers pursue their activity and where a direct contact with the public is established, namely through direct customer services intended for the offer of products and services or for development of customer relations.
With regard to the manner how information is disclosed to interested parties, service providers must ensure that, at their stores and at any points of sale, information is made available for consultation concerning the provision and use of services provided for in this determination through one of the following means:
- Online consultation of Service Provision Conditions, by accessing the provider's website; or in the alternative,
- Consultation of the same information made available in written form, with clear and comprehensive information on Service Provision Conditions, including elements which must be disclosed pursuant to this determination.
Service providers must also make sure that at all their stores the information referred to above is made available to interested parties in a physical medium, at their request, and it is accepted that such information may be printed at the location by accessing the provider's website or websites.
Service providers must also make sure that at points of sale which are not their own stores, there is a clear indication on the contact details for obtaining information on the respective service provision conditions. In the case of door-to-door contract proposals or of the resort to remote use techniques, the provision of information provided for in points A and B hereof, or of contact details for obtaining it, must also be guaranteed...».
APRITEL stresses further that the provision of information in brochures is a question which should not be raised, given the difficulty to update those media. PT and APRITEL add that the draft decision submitted to consultation hinders the free ability of operators to define the look and image of websites and the layout of information is strongly constrained with ANACOM's action, which according to PT is disproportionate and inadmissible. Moreover some of the requirements depend on the terminal equipment used by the client - for example, it points out that it is impossible for companies to ensue the non-existence of navigation bars.
PT believes that any indication on the part of ANACOM should be presented as a recommendation, operators being able then to identify the most appropriate means to disclose that information.
PT adds that many contract conditions are specific to clients' proved areas and do not need to be published in public areas of websites. In this company's view, this information is available for consultation by clients who show a real interest in obtaining that information.
ANACOM's position
Requirements imposed on this issue are minimum demands that do not jeopardise the free ability of operators to define the look and image of their websites. The standardisation established in the draft decision submitted to consultation does not hinder the identity of websites of each provider and facilitates the access and comparison of information on each provider's offers. All websites will show hyperlinks and all will have available information on provided services. Measures provided for herein do not imply any disproportionate and inadmissible intrusion, but the safeguard of the right to information which under the law must be adequate, transparent, comparable, up-to-date and easily accessible on websites (vd. paragraphs 1 and 2 of article 47 of ECL as amended by Law number 51/2011, of 13 September, which guarantees the transposition of Directive 2009/136/EC).
By establishing these requirements, ANACOM acts in the exercise of competences conferred by law, and in this case the objectives pursued justify the issue of a determination, which does not prevent providers from bringing their websites into compliance, with the established constrains.
Specifically as regards PT's comments on non-existence of navigation bars, it is clarified that this aims to guarantee an immediate visibility of links to the pages where information on service offers is made available, thus the link must be immediately visible, avoiding the use of the page's navigation bars. This is not about guaranteeing the non-existence of those bars, which in fact depend on the type of terminal equipment used, but of guaranteeing the immediate visibility of the hyperlink.
This Authority rejects also PT's view according to which many contract conditions that are specific to clients' private areas do not need to be published in public areas of websites. As this concerns standard conditions, this information must be easily accessible even if it applies only to customers with specific characteristics. Otherwise, PT would infringe the obligation to ensure the disclosure of transparent, comparable and easily accessible information.
CTT consider that as regards "items" covered by the draft decision which must be disclosed at providers' websites, provision should be made for the possibility of providers inserting the indication "Not applicable" where items do not apply to their offers.
ANACOM's position
This possibility has already been provided for in the draft decision submitted to consultation.
PT refers further that it is impossible to ensure the communication to ANACOM, five days ahead, of the URL page where the information is provided, as this URL is only known after the information has been provided. PT intends this obligation to apply only to information updates.
ANACOM's position
The determination submitted to consultation provides for the obligation to notify ANACOM of the (URL) page from which the item index which must be disclosed may be reached or accessed, without imposing a prior notification.
The prior notification requirement concerns only the subsequent changes to the designation that identifies that page. In this case, companies must ensure the communication of the page's designation to ANACOM at least five days ahead. As far as this obligation is concerned, PT presents no reservations.
As regards the information to be provided in the offer of kit packages, PT considers it to be difficult to implement, as loyalty periods may depend on the service or promotional campaign and not only on the equipment sold.
This information may only be guaranteed by means of the website of providers.
CTT consider that it is excessive to require kits/packages with which its services are marketed to indicate that in the «website of the provider, if any (in this case, the respective (URL) page of access to the "Service Provision Conditions" hyperlink must also be indicated)», as in the scope of this draft decision it is already required that the home page or in the first page of each service commercial offer includes a hyperlink designated "Service Provision Conditions". CTT consider that it is not reasonable to include in a small package a very large amount of information.
ANACOM's position
The version approved in April 2006 of the determination on the object and form of public disclosure of conditions of provision and use of electronic communication services already provided for a set of requirements that applied to information to be made available where the contracting of a service entailed the purchase of a package.
The additional requirements set out in the draft decision submitted to consultation - indication of a loyalty period, if any, indication of the contact details for obtaining information on service coverage and requirement to update information made available to the public - are intended, first and foremost, to ensure that end-users have access to information that enables an informed decision to enter into a contract, reducing the degree of conflicts that is associated to the unawareness of contract conditions.
CTT's comments on the requirement that kits/packages with which its services are marketed must indicate the website of the provider, if any, are deemed not to be justified. Contrary to what this company declared, this information is not very large, and its inclusion is fully justified to ensure that interested parties are able to know the address where information on the service they wish to contract may be obtained without opening or damaging the packages.
Considering all the difficulties that may arise with the layout in the exterior of the package of all the information provided for in the draft decision submitted to consultation, and that, both as a result of article 47 of ECL and of article 5 of Decree-Law number 6/2010, of 1 June, communications operators must inform the user in written form, prior to the conclusion of the contract, about the equipment's characteristics, providing also information on the price and any unlocking conditions, that obligation is recast to read as follows:
«Where contracting the service entails the purchase of a kit/package in shopping areas, the outer surface of the package must be clearly marked with the following information:
- Identification of the service provider;
- General description of the service, indicating the main features;
- Indication of the contact details for obtaining information on the minimum contractual period, if any, coverage, tariffs and provider, if any (in this case, the respective (URL) page of access to the "Service Provision Conditions" hyperlink other conditions of provision and use of the service, including, the website of the must also be indicated».
Relatively to the implementation of amendments, APRITEL, GRUPO PT and Vodafone consider that they cannot be implemented within the 60 days provided for in the draft decision submitted to consultation. According to PT, at least 120 days are required.
ANACOM's position
Considering the amendments which must be ensured as a result of the determination, the final decision will provide for a 120-day deadline to allow undertakings concerned by this determination to ensure its full implementation.
