Lima, May 24. Telefónica Perú denounced Entel, Claro and Bitel for unfair competition in the sale and contracting of the public mobile service, which has caused the state telecommunications supervision agency to initiate sanctioning administrative proceedings against these companies, the company and the entity reported this Wednesday. public.
Telefónica, through a statement, explained that after the prohibition of the Deputy Technical Secretariat of the Collegiate Bodies of the Supervisory Body for Private Investment in Telecommunications (Osiptel) to carry out mobile chip sales, they adopted control actions to comply with the regulations .
“However, the other operators (Entel, Claro and Bitel) chose to break the ban and continued promoting street sales, with a negative impact on our sale of mobile lines and our mobile market share,” the company said.
Faced with this situation, Telefónica filed a complaint for unfair competition with the Osiptel Collegiate Body against the three operators for non-compliance with the regulation issued by the organization in relation to the outpatient sale of chips and the vendor’s identification requirement.
“Today, the administrative body of Osiptel (…) agreed with Movistar (Telefónica’s trademark) and has imposed a precautionary measure against mobile operators to curb the outpatient sale of mobile chips and force them to comply with the regulatory framework”, reads the information.
For its part, Osiptel also issued a statement in which it affirms that it has initiated “administrative sanction procedures against Claro, Entel and Bitel, for the alleged commission of acts of unfair competition, in the modality of infringement of the general clause established in article 6 of the Law for the Suppression of Unfair Competition”.
He explained that with respect to the alleged violations, the Associate Technical Secretary of the Osiptel Collegiate Bodies detected that the denounced companies had violated the general clause of the LRCD for developing commercial strategies contrary to business good faith.
Practices “that would have the purpose of distorting the conditions of competition in the mobile public services market, in order to obtain an illicit benefit.”
One of the strategies would be the development, implementation and use of mobile sales applications as facilitating elements for obtaining an illicit benefit, as they are intended to promote itinerant sales of their services or on public roads, which are prohibited. by current regulations.
Under this premise, “sufficient security mechanisms would be omitted, enabling their distributors and vendors to be fully authorized and encouraged to use them in sales and contracting of mobile services on public roads.”
Regarding the precautionary measures, they equally order the three companies that the mobile applications for the sale and contracting of their mobile service “can only continue to be used for those that are carried out through the home delivery marketing channel in which the personnel of the same company duly registered for said channel intervenes”.
And they are ordered to remove from the application stores or distribution or download platforms for mobile operating systems, any application or mobile computer program with which sales or contracting of the mobile public service can be made. EFE