Jersey consumers remain trapped paying high prices.

News release - 2nd May 2007
Local mobile users and businesses remain trapped on high tariffs because the Jersey Competition Regulatory Authority (JCRA) has failed to enforce the Direction on Jersey Telecom (JT) to introduce Mobile Number Portability (MNP).
Mobile number portability is the ability for phone users to keep their existing number if they choose to move to a better value provider. Jersey Telecom has repeatedly ignored directions from the JCRA to introduce MNP in the best interests of local consumers and businesses.    
The JCRA announced yesterday that it is not willing to take legal action at this stage and will instead seek an alternative route, requiring a second period of consultation. 
Marketing director for Sure mobile and Cable & Wireless in the Channel Islands and Isle of Man, Mark Briers, said:
‘We welcome the new deadline to introduce MNP by the end of 2007 but as this is the JCRA’s second attempt to enforce a deadline on JT, we believe consumers should be given some assurances.’
‘We’ve exhausted all avenues in trying to implement MNP and we share customers’ exasperation.’
It was in October 2006 when the JCRA began enforcement proceedings on Jersey Telecom after the company failed to meet its legal obligations and implement MNP by 1 January 2007 or, at the very latest, by 31 March 2007. Announcing the enforcement proceedings, JCRA director, Bill Brown, stated:
“We are surprised and disappointed by JT’s conscious decision to breach its legal obligations by withdrawing from the MNP process. We expect businesses to take their legal obligations seriously. In spite of initial concerns which JT had expressed before the Direction was issued, JT did not seek to challenge the Direction and indeed publicly welcomed it. Since the Direction was adopted in June, JT has been working with the other Operators and the JCRA over the last four months to put MNP in place in accordance with the Direction. Its decision to breach the Direction at this stage, when the work has already confirmed that MNP can be implemented at a reasonable cost (and a fraction of the cost which JT had previously estimated), is therefore particularly surprising.”
 
Despite the JCRA concluding that cost was not the issue that Jersey Telecom had made it out to be, and confirming that there is huge demand for MNP, the anti-competitive stance taken by the former monopoly has only resulted in further delay and disadvantage for consumers. Sure mobile is concerned as to why enforcement proceedings against Jersey Telecom have not been implemented.
 
In its October statement, the JCRA went on to state:
“The JCRA’s primary duty under the Telecoms Law is to ensure that all reasonable demands by telecoms users are satisfied. Our evidence indicates that there is a strong demand for MNP from Jersey consumers and businesses and we believe that this demand is reasonable. Unfortunately it appears that JT‘s conduct will delay (if not prevent) MNP from being available to Jersey mobile users. We therefore feel that we have no option but to protect their interests (as we are required to do under the Telecoms Law) by taking this enforcement action.”
Despite this statement, the JCRA has so far been unable to make Jersey Telecom face up to its legal obligations and to meet the interests of consumers. On the balance of evidence so far, there can be little confidence among Jersey consumers and businesses that Jersey Telecom will now comply.
Mr. Briers said:
“Our response to the JCRA’s consultation will state in the strongest possible terms that the continued delay is bad for consumers, bad for business and sends out the wrong signals to other companies trying to compete in Jersey.”

“If Jersey is committed to competition then it is essential that regulation removes any anti-competitive behaviour by Jersey Telecom and creates a level playing field for all operators in a timely manner and in a more robust way than is currently being followed,” he added.