(Adds more comments in last four paragraphs)
MOSCOW, Jul 17 (PRIME) -- The Federal Antimonopoly Service has warned Russia’s four leading mobile operators – MTS, MegaFon, VimpelCom, and T2 RTK Holding – that they have set and maintain different tariffs in home and other regions, the watchdog said on Monday in a statement.
The operators offer subscribers four categories of tariff plans. The most expensive plans do not force clients to pay extra when traveling outside the home regions if the stipulated volume of service is not overconsumed. In the medium-price package, a certain volume of services is active only in the home region, other tariffs charge payments for used options, and the fourth category includes special options that are paid for additionally.
“The more expensive is a tariff plan, the less is the difference in tariffs for mobile connection in the home region and outside it. After a study of price offers and conditions of technical organization of connection provision, the Federal Antimonopoly Service revealed that these activities are explained neither economically nor technologically,” the authority said.
The four operators should revise their tariffs during 14 days from the receipt of the warning and eliminate the unreasonable differences in prices. The companies should also notify their subscribers 10 days before the changes take effect.
Yelena Zayeva, director of the antitrust service’s connection and IT regulation department, said that the four operators could not only be fined, but also ordered to transfer a groundlessly earned income to the federal budget in penalties, if the companies keep internetwork and national roaming in the country.
The service’s warning concerns internetwork roaming. “On national (roaming), we’ll make a decision (on issuing a warning) by the end of this week,” she said.
If the operators do not mend breaches, an antimonopoly case could be opened against them, which will take three months or more to consider. In case of found violations, the antimonopoly service will draw a warrant to eliminate them.
“If the Federal Antimonopoly Service opens a case, and (the service’s) commission decides upon a fact of violating the antimonopoly law, it’s an administrative responsibility case. You know that the antimonopoly authority has another tool, which is a transfer of a groundlessly received income to the federal budget. We have the right to trigger this measure,” Zayeva said.
End
|
|
