ANACOM determines reduction of CTT prices due to non-compliance with two quality of service indicators


In 2017 CTT failed to meet two universal postal service quality indicators, and ANACOM determined that they will have to reduce the prices in force in 2018 by 0.085 percentage points. It follows that, given that the price update implemented by CTT for this year had been 4.5%, the weighted average change in the prices of the basket of correspondence, parcel and (books, newspapers, periodicals and) editorial mail services cannot exceed 4.415% in 2018.

This reduction in prices results from the application of the compensation mechanism, which operates when the universal postal service quality indicators are not met. It is further provided in the law that price reduction will benefit all users of those services.

The two universal postal service quality indicators that CTT did not meet in 2017 were:

  • Transit time for priority mail on the Mainland;
  • Transit time for intra-community cross-border mail.

In the case of the indicator ''Transit time for priority mail on the Mainland'' it is established that at least 93.5% of the priority mail exchanged between any points in the Mainland must be delivered on the business day following that when it is deposited at a CTT point of mail reception, even though the goal is for this to happen in 94.5% of cases. However, CTT was only able to deliver 91.4% of the mail within this time limit, thus violating both the minimum and the objective, that is, about 2 million priority letters took more than 1 working day to be delivered.

As regards the indicator ''Transit time for intra-community cross-border mail'', it is expected that at least 85% of the intra-Community cross-border mail traffic sent to and from Portugal in the first-class international mail mode will be delivered up to 3 working days after its deposit at a mail point of receipt, and the stated objective is for this to happen in 88% of cases. Only 82.6% of this mail was delivered within that time limit, i.e. 4.5 million cross-border mail letters were delivered late.

Note that, in accordance with the applicable rules, where the value of any quality of service indicator falls below its acceptable minimum value in a given year, the deduction to be applied corresponds to the product of the relative importance of that indicator and the applicable maximum deduction (deduction of 1 percentage point from the maximum allowable price variation for the basket composed of correspondence services, editorial mail and postal parcels that make up the universal service).

Thus, since the relative importance of those two quality of service indicators corresponds to 8.5%, the deduction to be applied is 0.085 percentage points.

The reduction of CTT prices resulting from the application of the 0.085 percentage point deduction will be applied for at least three months and is expected to come into force by 1 October 2018.

ANACOM's draft decision has now been submitted to a prior hearing of CTT for 15 working days.

This is the second year in a row that CTT has failed to meet all 11 universal postal service quality indicators they are obliged to respect. In fact, in 2016, the universal postal service concessionaire had not met the minimum value set for the indicator of ''Non-priority mail not delivered within 15 working days''. ANACOM therefore determined to apply the compensation mechanism to the company that led to the deduction of 0.03 percentage points from the weighted average change in the prices of the basket of correspondence, postal parcel and editorial mail services. It should be noted that in 2017, this indicator was again met by CTT.

Lastly, it should be noted that ANACOM has already adopted this year a draft decision on the new quality of service indicators that CTT will have to meet in 2018-2020. The reformulation of the system of indicators, which in the meantime has been under public consultation and prior hearing, is considered essential to secure a higher level of quality of the universal postal service, without jeopardising the sustainability and economic and financial viability of its provision.


Consult: