TELECOM CONSUMERS CAN SUE THEIR SERVICE PROVIDERS FOR POOR NETWORK

Since Wednesday, February 28, 2023, Nigerian telecom Consumers subscribed to the MTN network in Nigeria have been experiencing difficulty in making calls and using internet services. MTN is the largest telecom service Provider in Nigeria, with about 92.71m subscribers as of March last year.

The telecom operator (MTN), however, has attributed the network disruption to multiple fiber cuts and assured that its engineers are diligently working to restore normal services.

This occurrence coincides with the deadline set by the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) for telecom operators to block all lines not linked with the National Identification Number (NIN). Consequently, numerous subscribers experiencing difficulties in making or receiving calls are left speculating whether their lines have been barred by the network operator. MTN consumers have also reported several losses following their inability to communicate and do business.

First of all, It is important to know that the relationship between a telecom consumer and a service provider is contractual, and the terms are those outlined in the sim-pack given to the consumer. It therefore follows that where such a contract is breached by either party, the aggrieved party has a right of redress.

Secondly, the rights available to a consumer do not only arise from the contract between the telecom operator and the consumer. It also arises from laws guiding telecommunication in Nigeria and general consumer protection laws.

Legally speaking, A telecom consumer in Nigeria has many rights under the Law. These rights include - the right to information, the right to quality services, the right to fair charges and accurate billing, and the right to privacy and protection of personal information.

The right that concerns us in this instance is the right to quality services. A telecom service provider is obligated to provide quality services to consumers at all times. Such services must meet the minimum standard set by the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC)

Based on the above, MTN Consumers can find reprieve in the Law; Following the famed legal maxim, Ubi jus ibi remedium, where there is a wrong, there must be a remedy,

The right to quality service is protected under Part VII of the Nigerian Communications Act (NCA), specifically sections 104 to 106.

To ensure proper implementation of optimum quality of services, the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) released the Quality of Services Regulations 2013 (QSR). These regulations aim to safeguard consumers against unfair practices, covering areas such as tariffs, charges, availability, and quality of communication services, as well as equipment and facilities. The primary objectives include maintaining high service quality levels, and assisting customers in making informed choices of services and service providers.

Service providers must meet minimum quality standards specified and published by the Commission via the QSR. The Commission also holds the authority to direct compensation to subscribers for poor service quality and impose fines on non-compliant service providers.

Despite the existence of the QSR and fines by the NCC, the country continues to face challenges with poor telecommunications services. Issues such as sudden call audio loss, high call attempt failure rates, delayed text message delivery, and difficulties in obtaining assistance from customer care are widespread.

However, the Courts have also played a crucial role in consumer protection.

In the case of MTN Nigeria Ltd v. Amadi (2012) LPELR-21276(CA), Amadi’s MTN line was unilaterally blocked by MTN. He was thus restricted from calling or receiving calls from his family and clients. He was also forced to pay extra money to public phone vendors and had to discuss clients’ private matters in the open. The court awarded him 1 million naira in damages.

In MTN Nig Ltd v. Chinedu (2018) LPELR-44621(CA), the Respondent's MTN line was unlawfully disconnected by the Appellant and sold to another subscriber. This led to a financial loss of ?390,800 for the Respondent, as the new subscriber stole the said sum from the Respondent’s account via MTN Mobile Banking. The trial court awarded ?1.5 Million in damages.

MTN appealed to the Court of Appeal and the Court affirmed the award. The Court further emphasized the importance of deterring such actions thus:

“Indeed, that amount of general damages awarded against the Appellant would serve as a deterrent to it. I would have awarded more if I were the learned trial judge. It is an establishment which is expected to be on its toes at all times to render its services to the public based on trust and good services. Failure to fulfil this duty would attract disastrous consequences to its customers, as it did to the Respondent…...In these days of use of mobile phones as prime means of communication, disruption of lines and/or lack of use of them due to the negligence of another can cause untold hardship and loss of trade and customers.”

?

It is thus clear from the above that Telecom consumers have a right of access to the Courts. All the Consumer needs to do is to prove to the Court that the prolonged poor network was caused by the negligence of MTN and show that he or she suffered damages as a result.

Have you learned something… Please repost and share to educate your friends.