Home page

Text size

E-mail this page

SOMBA K'E/YELLOWKNIFE
A decision in a class-action lawsuit against Bell Mobility for charging Northern customers for 911 service that is unavailable here will give the plaintiffs access to some company e-mails and other documents related to emergency access service fees.

Samuel Marr, lawyer for James and Samuel Anderson, said he is pleased with judge R.S. Veale's ruling and expects the documents could be helpful to the case.

"We had a good hearing and the judge fully considered our arguments and some of them were successful and some of them weren't but we are satisfied with the outcome and we're looking forward to the trial," Marr said.

The $6-million case against Bell was launched in 2007 by the Andersons - James is Samuel's father - and is set to go to trial on March 4 in Yellowknife.

Damages are being sought from the phone company to make up for the 75 cent monthly 911 service fee charged to customers in NWT, Nunavut and the Yukon, where the service isn't available.

Any residents of the NWT or the Yukon are a part of the class action if they entered into a cellphone agreement with Bell Mobility before April 13, 2010 and were charged 911 emergency access fees even though there is no 911 live operator in the area. Residents can opt out of the class action if they choose. According to Marr, there are about 20,000 people included in the class action and fewer than 50 people have chosen to opt out of the case at this point.

Whitehorse customers are excluded from the case because 911 service is available in that city.

Veale ruled last Wednesday that Bell must answer four of eight requests presented by Marr. This means Bell must:

- provide e-mails and documents from a Bell representative that relate to the case

- turn over e-mails and documents from a former Bell employee that pertain to the case

- disclose any documents relating to the discussion of 911 fees, produced during the purchase of NorthwesTel Mobility Inc.

- produce any documents about 911 service or 911 fees that were provided to Bell's customer service agents.

Veale rejected Marr's requests for logged complaints and materials provided to Bell phone distributors. His reasoning was that some questions were not relevant or the material being requested contained subjective information.

Still, Marr said he respects the judge's decision.

"The fact that these questions aren't answered, I don't think that any of them were really crucial and I don't think it's going to affect the strength of the case," he said. "We remain confident that we will be successful at the trial but ultimately as in everything else in life it will be up to the court to decide."

We welcome your opinions. Click here to e-mail a letter to the editor.