Pre-NZRS Telecom Correspondence
A QUICK NOTE: This is the correspondence between myself and Telecom a year ago as I attempted to find out what I was eligible for in terms of services that Telecom owes me as a Telecom customer.
Essentially, the question is: why am I not given what I pay $39.95 a month for...no access to telecommunications.
At 12:35 18/06/2003 +1200, Nicola Crequer wrote:
Dear Peter Fogarty
Thank you for your request regarding a breakdown of your Homeline Charges for account ********** (09 372****).
On this account you simply have Homeline standard monthly rental of $39.30, plus wire maintenance of $2.24.
Wiring maintenance is an optional service which covers the cost of parts and labour for the repair of faults caused by normal wear and tear in the wiring at your premises , providing the wiring has been installed to Telecom specifications .
In regards to your enquiry about a fax directory , I believe there may be one of these printed. You would need to contact Telecom Directories Ltd regarding this , on either phone 0800 808845, or if you would prefer you can fax them on 0800 225022
They will be happy to help.
Kind Regards
Nicola Crequer
For National Manager, Customer Services
0800 10 80 10 ext 32553
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Wednesday, 18 June 2003 15:30
To: Customer Service
Subject: Re: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Dear Nicola Crequer,
Thank you for your response.
I will send a fax to the number you have given me and get a directory sent through.
As regards the breakdown of the bill, I was wondering exactly what services I am entitled access to through the standard Homeline charge?
For example, free calls to 111, directory listings, directory service?
Best,
Peter
At 09:14 20/06/2003 +1200, Nicola Crequer wrote:
Dear Peter,
Thank you for your request regarding what calling services are included in your standard homeline (other than the homeline itself).
HomeLine Standard includes unlimited local calling.
As far as 111 calls go, you receive all genuine 111 calls for free. Plus one false 111 call for free per month , and are then charged $6 per false call thereafter.
All directory assisted calls , or operator assisted calls are chargeable.
I hope this information helps
Kind Regards
Nic Crequer
Service Co-ordinator
Customer Correspondence Group
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Friday, 20 June 2003 12:58
To: Customer Correspondence
Subject: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Hi Nic,
Thank you for that description. How much would the unlimited local calling service cost?
I do not have access to this.
Best,
Peter
At 15:55 24/06/2003 +1200, Nicola Crequer wrote:
Hi Peter
As advised , free unlimited local calling is part & parcel of all standard homelines. You only pay local calling charges on special plans such as Homeline Economy.
Homeline standard monthly rental is only $39.30 per month, and this is what 09 372**** is on.
I hope this makes sense
Kind Regards
Nic Crequer
Service Co-ordinator
Customer Correspondence Group
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Thursday, 26 June 2003 16:54
To: Customer_Correspondence
Subject: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Hi Nic,
I guess I should tell you where all of this was going. As you may be aware,under section 44 of the Human Rights Act in New Zealand it is illegal to discriminate on the grounds of disability in the provision of goods and services. This means if a customer purchases goods or services and is disadvantaged in a way that is unfair to their status, there may be a ground for discrimination.
I was attempting to establish the "cost" of access to free, unlimited local calling, as opposed to a connection to the network. Perhaps I should have asked how much the cost of maintaining a connection to the network is, as opposed to my focus on unlimited local calling (for which is what most people are happy to pay the monthly fees.)
You may also be aware that the new Telecommunications Act requires Telcos to provide a relay service for the hard of hearing and deaf, so they may access the "free, unlimited, local" service for which they pay $40 a month, and for which I pay the same amount, but because of Telecom's policy of not "operating a charity," I have no access.
I use the phoneline primarily for the internet, as do a large number of New Zealanders, so I am "happy" to pay Telecom's rates for that privilege.
My inquiry was to try and establish the "cost" of the access to free, unlimited local telephony contained in the monthly fee.
Best,
Peter
At 08:20 27/06/2003 +1200, Nicola Crequer wrote:
Hi Peter
Thank you for clarifying your query.
Though I do understand your query , the 'cost' to have free local calling , is all part & parcel and inclusive of your standard homeline monthly rental of $39.30.
This rental is what you pay per month for your line, and includes connection to the network , plus network services such as local calling.
There is no defining price split as such (ie - it's not like half of the cost is towards local calls & half is line rental).
I hope this further clarifies your monthly rental.
There is another alternative- Homeline Economy , whereby you pay a cheaper monthly rental of $25.55 plus 20c per local call (up to 2 hours) , calls up to 4 hours are 40c , up to 6 hours are 60c etc .
However as you are most likely aware - whenever you connect to the internet, your phone is making a local call, hence this would become chargeable on the Homeline Economy plan (so would not be a money saver).
You are correct in that (even though we do a lot of sponsorship work throughout New Zealand) Telecom is a business and not a charity.
We also believe in not treating people differently due to a disability , which is why you are entitled to all the same services as other residential Telecom customers.
I hope this information helps. For future reference , and advice on hearing impaired phones/equipment, you may wish to contact your local Hearing Association.
Kind Regards
Nic Crequer
Service Co-ordinator
Customer Correspondence Group
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 13:33:08 +1200
From: Peter Fogarty
To: Customer_Correspondence
Subject: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Hi Nic,
Thank you for your further clarifications. However, I still find your company policy to be unacceptable with regard to the disability of deafness.
What you are telling me is exactly the same as a business refusing to provide a wheelchair ramp so that people with mobility disabilities can access their premises.
Let me give you two examples of the ways in which Telecom deprives me of an acceptable standard of living.
Firstly, I note that I have to file a tax return by next week. I need assistance to complete this tax return. The only way I can get this assistance is, guess how? An 0800 number! Last year I had to find out where the IRD offices were and then go there in person to get the form filled out properly. Can you guess how hard it is to find the offices as Telecom doesn't list their address, only a 0800 number? This is inconvenient and frustrating in the very least.
Running your own business becomes very close to impossible without access to voice telephony.
My second example is from yesterday, when I went into the city from Waiheke where I live, to do a job in Takapuna. Ordinarily I would expect there to be a taxi waiting in the taxi rank, and because it is impossible for Deaf in New Zealand to call a taxi to save their lives, not to mention calling the police, ambulances, or fire engines. I pray that I never have to have that need because if I do, I will not be able to, because of Telecom's policy of not making exceptions for the one disability that it oppresses.
So, what do I do? I walk around the Devonport CBD and try to find other taxi ranks. With no luck, I look for a business so I can ask a hearing person to call a taxi for me. I go to a hotel and what do you know, they order the most expensive taxi company in Auckland, even though I ask them to ring 5291000 for Discount cabs. An $8 fare became a $25 fare. I went without dinner that night. I could have used a relay service to pre-order the right taxi without depending on a stranger (who was making money for their business by ordering a taxi and therefore getting money for themselves) and therefore gotten to my work appointment on time and without penalty.
Why am I telling you this? Because in your response below, you say that "We also believe in not treating people differently due to a disability , which is why you are entitled to all the same services as other residential Telecom customers."
PRECISELY.
You do not provide me with the same services as all other residential customers, which by law (Telecommunications Service Order and Human Rights Act) you are required to provide all residential customers.
Your company is lucky that New Zealand does not allow class action suits.
Thank you for your time and kind regards.
Best,
Peter
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Friday, 4 July 2003 10:31
To: Customer_Correspondence
Subject: Fwd: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Dear Nic,
Look, I'm sorry about my rant yesterday, but the fact is, Telecom is obliged to provide access to local unlimited calling, to emergency numbers, to absolutely everyone, as part of the kiwi share agreement. The fact is, Telecom does not meet their obligations.
This is not a tired point to be making because it has been acknowledged last year and made a service order.
I know you're just a customer service manager and can't do anything about company policy.
It's just obscene that your company can have billions of dollars in profit but nitpick over their public service obligations where their service impacts on the Deaf while telecomms the world over have provided this service for decades.
I am semi-employed precisely because of your company, even though I was a straight-A student and have three and a half university degrees to my credit.
Can you give me some ways of accessing emergency services should I ever need to? That is: How do I get hold of the police, an ambulance or an fire engine?
And by the way, the fax number to try get hold of a fax directory is always busy. Can't you simply post me a copy of the directory and add the cost to my bill?
Best,
Peter
At 15:06 16/07/2003 +1200, Linda Harrison wrote:
Dear Peter,
You were corresponding recently with Nic Crequer regarding a number of issues you have in relation to Telecom service.
Nic has asked me to respond to a few outstanding issues.
Firstly, you asked if there was another way to purchase a fax directory as you were having trouble getting through on the advertised fax number.
If you have still not been able to get through on this number, can I suggest you fax your request directly through to 09 525 5047. The person who receives faxes at this number will ensure your request is passed on to the appropriate area, along with a comment about the difficulty accessing the correct number.
Secondly, you asked about accessing emergency services. Deaf customers can contact emergency services via:
• TTY on 0800 16 16 16
• Fax on 0800 16 16 10
You also related to Nic two examples of difficulties that you attributed to Telecom.
The first of those related to needing assistance in filing a tax return. You criticised Telecom for the Inland Revenue Department not listing the street addresses for its offices in the Telephone Book. Telecom lists whatever details an organisation chooses (and pays) to list. Your issue in this case is with IRD - not Telecom. I note that IRD tells its website users that they can obtain assistance via telephone, email, post or by making an appointment (which has to be requested via phone).
Secondly, you discuss incurring a higher than necessary taxi charge because a company other than the one you requested was called – in spite of your instruction to call a specific company. I suggest your issue in that case is with the hotel placing the call on your behalf – not with Telecom.
I do agree that a relay service would have been one way you could have received greater assistance on both of these occasions.
In some of your earlier correspondence with Nic, you focussed on the cost of provision of local calls - which you say you are not able to take advantage of . You say that you primarily use your telephone connection for the internet and obviously also use fax services. These (can)both make use of the local calling service - depending on the ISP used and the fax number called.
Finally, you make mention of the Human Rights Act and the provision of a relay service. Whilst section 44 of the Act does talk about discrimination, it is important to view this in parallel with section 52 - Exception in relation to disability.
The Government announced in May last year its intention to establish a relay service, rather than exploring the possibility of requiring telcos to perform this function. It has also signalled its intention to establish a Telecommunications Service Obligation that would require telcos to pay for this service - but has not yet taken this step.
You state in your email of 26 June "that the new Telecommunications Act requires telcos to provide a relay service for the hard of hearing and the deaf..." This is not the case - the Act makes no mention of a relay service.
As an aside, you may be aware that Telecom has a service through which customers can use Directory Assistance via fax instead of by calling 018. The same charges are incurred as calling 018. I am attaching a form for using this service.
Regards,
Linda Harrison
Government & Community Relations Advisor
Telecom New Zealand Limited
Ph 0800 114 104
Mobile 027 444 0996
Fax 0800 266 222
email: linda.harrison@
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Thursday, 17 July 2003 16:56
To: Linda Harrison
Subject: RE: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Dear Linda,
Thank you for your clear and precise response. You have illustrated my misapprehension of the situation. I had thought that the Telecommunications Service Order was a binding order to set up a relay service. I was wrong, apparently.
Thank you for giving me these fax numbers. I will copy them to a place handy to my fax machine and hope that I will get an immediate reassurance that I have been listened to, and that services will respond immediately.
You are half-correct in your response to my two other examples of impediments in my access to your networks. My complaint is with the hotel, and with IRD, yes. But my complaint is also with you. You are not a dispassionate party to these incidents which occur DAILY as a result of your lack of provision of access to which I have every right.
You tell me that "In some of your earlier correspondence with Nic, you focussed on the cost of provision of local calls - which you say you are not able to take advantage of . You say that you primarily use your telephone connection for the internet and obviously also use fax services. These (can) both make use of the local calling service - depending on the ISP used and the fax number called."
That is correct.
Indeed, that is ALL I can do with my use of local calling. I am limited to one phone number (I do not yet have a fax directory - something I must pay for - and because I am unemployed as a result of your company policy, I must go without) and I must ask you a further question.
Is your own use of the telephone limited to calling your own internet provider, if you have one?
Is your answer no? If so, why do I have limited, local access to your networks, when it is supposed to be unlimited local, for everyone in the public sector?
I wonder if I should take up my complaint with all the companies, all the businesses, all the services, as you suggest, since I cannot get in touch with them any other way, and email and postal is not satisfactory when there exists an immediate connection, that just simply is not there as a result of your company policies.
Thank you for clarifying that our government only has an intent to establish a relay service and has, in fact, not made a move to order telecomms to establish that service.
Again, I ask you. Is your use of the phone restricted to using your internet provider? Are you able to make any other kind of phone call? Why should I be unable to do so?
I am not familiar with section 52 of the Human Rights Act, with exception to disability. Are you able to copy me that clause? I presume you mean that this clause allows you to exclude the Deaf from your telecommunications networks.
Thank you for your considered response.
Best,
Peter
At 17:14 17/07/2003 +1200, Linda Harrison wrote:
Peter,
Thanks for your email.
You ask about section 52 of the Human Rights Act. I will fax you a copy of that section.
Telecom's position remains that it has no issue with the concept of a relay service. Our concerns relate to the way that service is set up and how it is paid for.
Regards,
Linda Harrison.
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Thursday, 17 July 2003 17:44
To: Linda Harrison
Subject: RE: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Dear Linda,
Thank you for your impeding fax on the relevant section of the Human Rights Act.
Will I expect any further responses to this email from you?
Best,
Peter
At 08:56 18/07/2003 +1200, Linda Harrison wrote:
Peter,
I was unable to get through on your fax last night. Seem to be having more success this morning.
I'm not sure what more you were asking of me - apart from the rhetorical question regarding regarding my telephone use.
If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to come back to me.
Regards,
Linda Harrison.
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:48:38 +1200
To: "Linda Harrison"
From: Peter Fogarty
Subject: RE: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Dear Linda,
Yes, thank you for sending through the relevant section of the Human Rights Act, section 52.
I can see that Telecom refuses to provide access to unlimited, local telephone calls for me, because "(i) That person's disability requires these facilities or services to be provided in a special manner; and (ii) The person who supplies the facilities or services cannot reasonably be expected to provide them in that special manner". The rest of the section provides that the services or facilities need not be provided if they are on terms more onerous than those on which they are provided to other people.
Oh. I see that this means that you are once again saying that you are not a charity.
I can see that I am making a completely unreasonable request for access to your networks. I can see that you are not to be reasonably expected to provide these services, despite your billions of dollars of income, your millions of dollars of profit.
What a shame.
You need not respond to my rhetorical questions in the previous email. I will just resign myself to my hopes that the government will establish an acceptable relay service so that I may be allowed to become a fully functional human being instead of being disabled by one company's oppressive, selfish policies.
It is a pity that the Government had not established a relay service prior to your company's privatisation of the telecommunications business, where I am sure I would have enjoyed a richer enjoyment of life, I would be able to run my own business and no longer be regarded as difficult to contact, difficult to communicate with, and be able to enjoy the privileges and benefits that telephone usage accrues.
Have you any information that you may be able to give me, as regards the government's intent to provide a relay service? That is, can you tell me what is happening? I have had no responses to my inquiries.
Best,
Peter
From: Peter Fogarty
To: Ruth Dyson (Minister of Disabilities)
Time: 18/07/2003 11:22am
Subject: Telecom correspondence re: Relay Service.
Dear Ruth,
As you will see from this correspondence, I am very frustrated with progress being made on the relay service.
I see now that you have only established intent to provide access to voice telephony and have in fact done very little to ensure that it will be running any time soon!
May I have some information as to what is happening with the delivery of a relay service?
Best,
Peter
Essentially, the question is: why am I not given what I pay $39.95 a month for...no access to telecommunications.
At 12:35 18/06/2003 +1200, Nicola Crequer wrote:
Dear Peter Fogarty
Thank you for your request regarding a breakdown of your Homeline Charges for account ********** (09 372****).
On this account you simply have Homeline standard monthly rental of $39.30, plus wire maintenance of $2.24.
Wiring maintenance is an optional service which covers the cost of parts and labour for the repair of faults caused by normal wear and tear in the wiring at your premises , providing the wiring has been installed to Telecom specifications .
In regards to your enquiry about a fax directory , I believe there may be one of these printed. You would need to contact Telecom Directories Ltd regarding this , on either phone 0800 808845, or if you would prefer you can fax them on 0800 225022
They will be happy to help.
Kind Regards
Nicola Crequer
For National Manager, Customer Services
0800 10 80 10 ext 32553
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Wednesday, 18 June 2003 15:30
To: Customer Service
Subject: Re: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Dear Nicola Crequer,
Thank you for your response.
I will send a fax to the number you have given me and get a directory sent through.
As regards the breakdown of the bill, I was wondering exactly what services I am entitled access to through the standard Homeline charge?
For example, free calls to 111, directory listings, directory service?
Best,
Peter
At 09:14 20/06/2003 +1200, Nicola Crequer wrote:
Dear Peter,
Thank you for your request regarding what calling services are included in your standard homeline (other than the homeline itself).
HomeLine Standard includes unlimited local calling.
As far as 111 calls go, you receive all genuine 111 calls for free. Plus one false 111 call for free per month , and are then charged $6 per false call thereafter.
All directory assisted calls , or operator assisted calls are chargeable.
I hope this information helps
Kind Regards
Nic Crequer
Service Co-ordinator
Customer Correspondence Group
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Friday, 20 June 2003 12:58
To: Customer Correspondence
Subject: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Hi Nic,
Thank you for that description. How much would the unlimited local calling service cost?
I do not have access to this.
Best,
Peter
At 15:55 24/06/2003 +1200, Nicola Crequer wrote:
Hi Peter
As advised , free unlimited local calling is part & parcel of all standard homelines. You only pay local calling charges on special plans such as Homeline Economy.
Homeline standard monthly rental is only $39.30 per month, and this is what 09 372**** is on.
I hope this makes sense
Kind Regards
Nic Crequer
Service Co-ordinator
Customer Correspondence Group
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Thursday, 26 June 2003 16:54
To: Customer_Correspondence
Subject: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Hi Nic,
I guess I should tell you where all of this was going. As you may be aware,under section 44 of the Human Rights Act in New Zealand it is illegal to discriminate on the grounds of disability in the provision of goods and services. This means if a customer purchases goods or services and is disadvantaged in a way that is unfair to their status, there may be a ground for discrimination.
I was attempting to establish the "cost" of access to free, unlimited local calling, as opposed to a connection to the network. Perhaps I should have asked how much the cost of maintaining a connection to the network is, as opposed to my focus on unlimited local calling (for which is what most people are happy to pay the monthly fees.)
You may also be aware that the new Telecommunications Act requires Telcos to provide a relay service for the hard of hearing and deaf, so they may access the "free, unlimited, local" service for which they pay $40 a month, and for which I pay the same amount, but because of Telecom's policy of not "operating a charity," I have no access.
I use the phoneline primarily for the internet, as do a large number of New Zealanders, so I am "happy" to pay Telecom's rates for that privilege.
My inquiry was to try and establish the "cost" of the access to free, unlimited local telephony contained in the monthly fee.
Best,
Peter
At 08:20 27/06/2003 +1200, Nicola Crequer wrote:
Hi Peter
Thank you for clarifying your query.
Though I do understand your query , the 'cost' to have free local calling , is all part & parcel and inclusive of your standard homeline monthly rental of $39.30.
This rental is what you pay per month for your line, and includes connection to the network , plus network services such as local calling.
There is no defining price split as such (ie - it's not like half of the cost is towards local calls & half is line rental).
I hope this further clarifies your monthly rental.
There is another alternative- Homeline Economy , whereby you pay a cheaper monthly rental of $25.55 plus 20c per local call (up to 2 hours) , calls up to 4 hours are 40c , up to 6 hours are 60c etc .
However as you are most likely aware - whenever you connect to the internet, your phone is making a local call, hence this would become chargeable on the Homeline Economy plan (so would not be a money saver).
You are correct in that (even though we do a lot of sponsorship work throughout New Zealand) Telecom is a business and not a charity.
We also believe in not treating people differently due to a disability , which is why you are entitled to all the same services as other residential Telecom customers.
I hope this information helps. For future reference , and advice on hearing impaired phones/equipment, you may wish to contact your local Hearing Association.
Kind Regards
Nic Crequer
Service Co-ordinator
Customer Correspondence Group
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 13:33:08 +1200
From: Peter Fogarty
To: Customer_Correspondence
Subject: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Hi Nic,
Thank you for your further clarifications. However, I still find your company policy to be unacceptable with regard to the disability of deafness.
What you are telling me is exactly the same as a business refusing to provide a wheelchair ramp so that people with mobility disabilities can access their premises.
Let me give you two examples of the ways in which Telecom deprives me of an acceptable standard of living.
Firstly, I note that I have to file a tax return by next week. I need assistance to complete this tax return. The only way I can get this assistance is, guess how? An 0800 number! Last year I had to find out where the IRD offices were and then go there in person to get the form filled out properly. Can you guess how hard it is to find the offices as Telecom doesn't list their address, only a 0800 number? This is inconvenient and frustrating in the very least.
Running your own business becomes very close to impossible without access to voice telephony.
My second example is from yesterday, when I went into the city from Waiheke where I live, to do a job in Takapuna. Ordinarily I would expect there to be a taxi waiting in the taxi rank, and because it is impossible for Deaf in New Zealand to call a taxi to save their lives, not to mention calling the police, ambulances, or fire engines. I pray that I never have to have that need because if I do, I will not be able to, because of Telecom's policy of not making exceptions for the one disability that it oppresses.
So, what do I do? I walk around the Devonport CBD and try to find other taxi ranks. With no luck, I look for a business so I can ask a hearing person to call a taxi for me. I go to a hotel and what do you know, they order the most expensive taxi company in Auckland, even though I ask them to ring 5291000 for Discount cabs. An $8 fare became a $25 fare. I went without dinner that night. I could have used a relay service to pre-order the right taxi without depending on a stranger (who was making money for their business by ordering a taxi and therefore getting money for themselves) and therefore gotten to my work appointment on time and without penalty.
Why am I telling you this? Because in your response below, you say that "We also believe in not treating people differently due to a disability , which is why you are entitled to all the same services as other residential Telecom customers."
PRECISELY.
You do not provide me with the same services as all other residential customers, which by law (Telecommunications Service Order and Human Rights Act) you are required to provide all residential customers.
Your company is lucky that New Zealand does not allow class action suits.
Thank you for your time and kind regards.
Best,
Peter
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Friday, 4 July 2003 10:31
To: Customer_Correspondence
Subject: Fwd: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Dear Nic,
Look, I'm sorry about my rant yesterday, but the fact is, Telecom is obliged to provide access to local unlimited calling, to emergency numbers, to absolutely everyone, as part of the kiwi share agreement. The fact is, Telecom does not meet their obligations.
This is not a tired point to be making because it has been acknowledged last year and made a service order.
I know you're just a customer service manager and can't do anything about company policy.
It's just obscene that your company can have billions of dollars in profit but nitpick over their public service obligations where their service impacts on the Deaf while telecomms the world over have provided this service for decades.
I am semi-employed precisely because of your company, even though I was a straight-A student and have three and a half university degrees to my credit.
Can you give me some ways of accessing emergency services should I ever need to? That is: How do I get hold of the police, an ambulance or an fire engine?
And by the way, the fax number to try get hold of a fax directory is always busy. Can't you simply post me a copy of the directory and add the cost to my bill?
Best,
Peter
At 15:06 16/07/2003 +1200, Linda Harrison wrote:
Dear Peter,
You were corresponding recently with Nic Crequer regarding a number of issues you have in relation to Telecom service.
Nic has asked me to respond to a few outstanding issues.
Firstly, you asked if there was another way to purchase a fax directory as you were having trouble getting through on the advertised fax number.
If you have still not been able to get through on this number, can I suggest you fax your request directly through to 09 525 5047. The person who receives faxes at this number will ensure your request is passed on to the appropriate area, along with a comment about the difficulty accessing the correct number.
Secondly, you asked about accessing emergency services. Deaf customers can contact emergency services via:
• TTY on 0800 16 16 16
• Fax on 0800 16 16 10
You also related to Nic two examples of difficulties that you attributed to Telecom.
The first of those related to needing assistance in filing a tax return. You criticised Telecom for the Inland Revenue Department not listing the street addresses for its offices in the Telephone Book. Telecom lists whatever details an organisation chooses (and pays) to list. Your issue in this case is with IRD - not Telecom. I note that IRD tells its website users that they can obtain assistance via telephone, email, post or by making an appointment (which has to be requested via phone).
Secondly, you discuss incurring a higher than necessary taxi charge because a company other than the one you requested was called – in spite of your instruction to call a specific company. I suggest your issue in that case is with the hotel placing the call on your behalf – not with Telecom.
I do agree that a relay service would have been one way you could have received greater assistance on both of these occasions.
In some of your earlier correspondence with Nic, you focussed on the cost of provision of local calls - which you say you are not able to take advantage of . You say that you primarily use your telephone connection for the internet and obviously also use fax services. These (can)both make use of the local calling service - depending on the ISP used and the fax number called.
Finally, you make mention of the Human Rights Act and the provision of a relay service. Whilst section 44 of the Act does talk about discrimination, it is important to view this in parallel with section 52 - Exception in relation to disability.
The Government announced in May last year its intention to establish a relay service, rather than exploring the possibility of requiring telcos to perform this function. It has also signalled its intention to establish a Telecommunications Service Obligation that would require telcos to pay for this service - but has not yet taken this step.
You state in your email of 26 June "that the new Telecommunications Act requires telcos to provide a relay service for the hard of hearing and the deaf..." This is not the case - the Act makes no mention of a relay service.
As an aside, you may be aware that Telecom has a service through which customers can use Directory Assistance via fax instead of by calling 018. The same charges are incurred as calling 018. I am attaching a form for using this service.
Regards,
Linda Harrison
Government & Community Relations Advisor
Telecom New Zealand Limited
Ph 0800 114 104
Mobile 027 444 0996
Fax 0800 266 222
email: linda.harrison@
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Thursday, 17 July 2003 16:56
To: Linda Harrison
Subject: RE: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Dear Linda,
Thank you for your clear and precise response. You have illustrated my misapprehension of the situation. I had thought that the Telecommunications Service Order was a binding order to set up a relay service. I was wrong, apparently.
Thank you for giving me these fax numbers. I will copy them to a place handy to my fax machine and hope that I will get an immediate reassurance that I have been listened to, and that services will respond immediately.
You are half-correct in your response to my two other examples of impediments in my access to your networks. My complaint is with the hotel, and with IRD, yes. But my complaint is also with you. You are not a dispassionate party to these incidents which occur DAILY as a result of your lack of provision of access to which I have every right.
You tell me that "In some of your earlier correspondence with Nic, you focussed on the cost of provision of local calls - which you say you are not able to take advantage of . You say that you primarily use your telephone connection for the internet and obviously also use fax services. These (can) both make use of the local calling service - depending on the ISP used and the fax number called."
That is correct.
Indeed, that is ALL I can do with my use of local calling. I am limited to one phone number (I do not yet have a fax directory - something I must pay for - and because I am unemployed as a result of your company policy, I must go without) and I must ask you a further question.
Is your own use of the telephone limited to calling your own internet provider, if you have one?
Is your answer no? If so, why do I have limited, local access to your networks, when it is supposed to be unlimited local, for everyone in the public sector?
I wonder if I should take up my complaint with all the companies, all the businesses, all the services, as you suggest, since I cannot get in touch with them any other way, and email and postal is not satisfactory when there exists an immediate connection, that just simply is not there as a result of your company policies.
Thank you for clarifying that our government only has an intent to establish a relay service and has, in fact, not made a move to order telecomms to establish that service.
Again, I ask you. Is your use of the phone restricted to using your internet provider? Are you able to make any other kind of phone call? Why should I be unable to do so?
I am not familiar with section 52 of the Human Rights Act, with exception to disability. Are you able to copy me that clause? I presume you mean that this clause allows you to exclude the Deaf from your telecommunications networks.
Thank you for your considered response.
Best,
Peter
At 17:14 17/07/2003 +1200, Linda Harrison wrote:
Peter,
Thanks for your email.
You ask about section 52 of the Human Rights Act. I will fax you a copy of that section.
Telecom's position remains that it has no issue with the concept of a relay service. Our concerns relate to the way that service is set up and how it is paid for.
Regards,
Linda Harrison.
From: Peter Fogarty
Sent: Thursday, 17 July 2003 17:44
To: Linda Harrison
Subject: RE: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Dear Linda,
Thank you for your impeding fax on the relevant section of the Human Rights Act.
Will I expect any further responses to this email from you?
Best,
Peter
At 08:56 18/07/2003 +1200, Linda Harrison wrote:
Peter,
I was unable to get through on your fax last night. Seem to be having more success this morning.
I'm not sure what more you were asking of me - apart from the rhetorical question regarding regarding my telephone use.
If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to come back to me.
Regards,
Linda Harrison.
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 10:48:38 +1200
To: "Linda Harrison"
From: Peter Fogarty
Subject: RE: RE: Telecom request 20030617-109664
Dear Linda,
Yes, thank you for sending through the relevant section of the Human Rights Act, section 52.
I can see that Telecom refuses to provide access to unlimited, local telephone calls for me, because "(i) That person's disability requires these facilities or services to be provided in a special manner; and (ii) The person who supplies the facilities or services cannot reasonably be expected to provide them in that special manner". The rest of the section provides that the services or facilities need not be provided if they are on terms more onerous than those on which they are provided to other people.
Oh. I see that this means that you are once again saying that you are not a charity.
I can see that I am making a completely unreasonable request for access to your networks. I can see that you are not to be reasonably expected to provide these services, despite your billions of dollars of income, your millions of dollars of profit.
What a shame.
You need not respond to my rhetorical questions in the previous email. I will just resign myself to my hopes that the government will establish an acceptable relay service so that I may be allowed to become a fully functional human being instead of being disabled by one company's oppressive, selfish policies.
It is a pity that the Government had not established a relay service prior to your company's privatisation of the telecommunications business, where I am sure I would have enjoyed a richer enjoyment of life, I would be able to run my own business and no longer be regarded as difficult to contact, difficult to communicate with, and be able to enjoy the privileges and benefits that telephone usage accrues.
Have you any information that you may be able to give me, as regards the government's intent to provide a relay service? That is, can you tell me what is happening? I have had no responses to my inquiries.
Best,
Peter
From: Peter Fogarty
To: Ruth Dyson (Minister of Disabilities)
Time: 18/07/2003 11:22am
Subject: Telecom correspondence re: Relay Service.
Dear Ruth,
As you will see from this correspondence, I am very frustrated with progress being made on the relay service.
I see now that you have only established intent to provide access to voice telephony and have in fact done very little to ensure that it will be running any time soon!
May I have some information as to what is happening with the delivery of a relay service?
Best,
Peter
posted by oga at
4:19 PM
