V. Alexander & Cable and Wireless(Flow)



  1. Complaint

Mr. Vincent Alexander of Richmond Hill filed a complaint form 1 against Flow on November 15, 2022, claiming that approximately thirty-three (33) years prior, he had applied for and got a telephone line (#784-456XXXX) from Cable and Wireless. He paid a $150.00 XCD deposit with his application, and Cable and Wireless assured him he would receive his money back with interest if he ever decided to stop using the services.


Mr. Alexander went on to say that he recently received a call from someone claiming to represent Cable and Wireless telling him that they were moving his land line connection from the old Cable and Wireless platform to their new Flow Cable Platform and that they needed his approval to do so. He then informed the individual that he was not interested in a new transfer. He was immediately informed that his services would be terminated if he did not agree to the transfer because the old platform would shortly be shut down and no longer be in use.

Mr. Alexander listed his grievances with Flow which are:

(1) No letter or correspondence was issued to him completely describing the transfer and what implications it had on him as a customer.

(2) He received no information on the deposit that the company had taken from him and that he had paid in good faith on the assumption that it would be returned to him with interest should he decide to terminate the services in the future.

Mr. Alexander indicated further that he would like to have his deposit returned to him with interest and to retain the number 784456XXXX as his own so he can port with another company to have it operating again.

On December 20, 2022, Mr. Alexander filed a complaint form 2 to the NTRC requesting Commission to review documents and make a decision.

2. Decision of the Tribunal

The tribunal made the decision to have Cable and Wireless do the below;

  1. If Flow accepts Mr. Alexander proposal for the call forwarding feature with the service where he can continue using his fixed line number without paying the landline rental fee, then Mr. Alexander would be okay with this.
  2. However, if Flow does not accept the proposal, then they will need to refund Mr. Alexander his $150 deposit with compound interest rate of 3% for the 33 years that he has had the service, which will be equivalent to $265.23. As well as $200.00 compensation fee for his inconvenience relating to filing the complaint and attending the tribunal hearing.
  3. If the refund option is chosen by Flow, they will issue the refund to Mr. Alexander within seven (7) working days of receiving the decision from the tribunal, failure to make the payment within this period will result in a penalty of $10 per day added daily thereafter.