One Touch Switching

We have an interesting one today!

I have been reporting on the progress of One Touch Switching, and some of the many issues. To be clear, we are all working in the industry to make it work.

We are live on the "ramp up", and that has mostly gone well. We have some live switches going though. But there are also issues.

We have an interesting situation where, if, for example, we had a peering problem with some telco, or, well any problem with calls or internet or anything, with another telco, we would, reasonably, explain in a status post that there was an issue, who it was with, and what we, and they, are doing to resolve it. We are very used to that.

There is no point in saying "packets to *someone*, but we can't say who, are not routing correctly", or "calls to *someone*, but we can't say who, are not working right now". That would be utter nonsense.

However, I got a "slap on the wrist" for reporting on our status that one, or more, telcos was not handling match requests at present, were working on it (this is all a trial, really), and will be fixed soon. This is because I named them and explained publicly the problems they have.

So I am at a loss.

Do I remove them from the list of CPs on the ordering system? If I do I will be making it very public who they are by them not being on the list?

Do I say nothing, and leave customers, as one did today, trying over and over again to get a match request to work? But if I do not remove from the list, anyone trying a switch from them will see the problem - if I am not allowed to say there is a problem with them, do I have to somehow FAKE the system to pretend there is not a problem??!

I really cannot see the issue with saying what the issues are with the HUGE CAVEAT that this is ramp-up/trial. So once again a policy from TOTSCO that makes no sense.

But, I'll follow the rules. So sorry, some CPs are not working on the ramp up One Touch Switching, but you'll have to guess which they are. Good luck.

Selling via Amazon

The phase "necessary evil" comes to mind, sadly. I'd like to just sell direct, but in practice selling via Amazon does in fact work. It is somewhat depressing that this is the case, but we are a tad stuck with it.

One thing we sell is the "Faikin" board, which is a controller for Daikin aircon. It works well and sells literally hundreds! Listed here.

Until recently I was able to edit the listing as needed, and the latest boards looks slightly different (mainly the colour of the board), so I went to edit the listing and upload new images. Simples! Or so you would think. But I get this!

So what he hell? I am not trying to edit the "brand", indeed I cannot edit the brand, it is "locked".

Now, brands in Amazon are hard work. It look a long time to get "AJK" on the "brand registry", even though I have the UK registered trademark on this (here). It was seriously hard work, and the product listing was made with brand "AJK". In fact I had to make a new listing having sold a few initially under grand "Generic" as Amazon policy is you cannot change the brand on a listing, which is damn annoying in itself.

But did you notice?

Yes, the brand is now "greenoak"!

Given Amazon policy is you cannot change brand, how the hell is it "greenoak".

So now, to show you how Amazon work, the unedited ticket on this (long, and boring)... OK not all, as it seems they truncate it on their help pages, which is a pain. But you get a flavour for dealing with Amazon...

Hello from Amazon Brand Registry Support,

We understand that you would like to update brand name for ASIN: B0D56W182P to "AJK".

Please be informed that, we cannot proceed with your request as it is against Amazon policies and guidelines. Brand name change requests beyond the minor fixes are considered rebranding and we are not authorized to make this change for your ASIN.

Kindly do understand that multiple sellers can list/sell the same ASIN: B0D56W182P. if you make a brand update on this ASIN, it is possible that you may be reported by another seller due to a listing policy violation, which could have a negative impact on your account health.

Brand differences and packaging differences after a product is rebranded may cause customer orders to be returned and may affect your performance metrics. To avoid this unexpected result, we are not allowed to change the Amazon Product Code (ASIN) brand name.

Therefore, we are unable to update your Brand name, it would be better to create a new ASIN instead of updating the brand name of the existing ASIN.

For more information, go to "Amazon Brand Name Policy": https://sellercentral.amazon.co.uk/help/hub/reference/G2N3GKE5SGSHWYRZ

If the intended brand is not part of Amazon Brand Registry, we recommend that you complete registration via "Enroll a new brand" link on the Brand Registry landing page: https://brandregistry.amazon.co.uk/

To help us continually improve, we ask that you take a moment to complete our survey below to tell us about your experience with this specific interaction.

Were you satisfied with the support provided?

Thank you!

To view your case details, please click https://sellercentral-europe.amazon.com/gp/case-dashboard/view-case.html/ref=sc_cd_lobby_vc?caseID=10120297812

Please note: This e-mail was sent from an address that cannot accept incoming e-mail. If you require additional support, please contact us at https://sellercentral-europe.amazon.com/gp/contact-us/contact-amazon-form.html

Thank you for selling with Amazon.


Hello from Amazon Brand Registry Support, We understand that you would like to update brand name for ASIN: B0D56W182P to "AJK". Firstly, we are unable to process this brand name change request because the brand account and/or the account for the user you wish to add have an unhealthy status. We require all relevant accounts across all marketplaces to have a healthy status to add a role to a brand. Secondly, we cannot make the suggested brand change to ASIN B0D56W182P due to the following reason: - Requests to update an ASIN brand name attribute from "Generic" are not supported. - In this case brand name change from "Generic" to an abusive brand is also considered as re-branding. As informed earlier that, if you choose to rebrand a product you must create a new ASIN rather than update an existing ASIN. This is true even if the product does not change materially after the brand update. Rebranding and packaging differences on products can cause customer order returns and can potentially hurt your metrics. To prevent this unwanted outcome, we don’t allow the brand name to be changed for an ASIN. For more information, go to "Amazon Brand Name Policy": https://sellercentral.amazon.com/help/hub/reference/G2N3GKE5SGSHWYRZ Register products to your brand: https://sellercentral.amazon.com/help/hub/reference/G6DU75NSM86VXKZC If the intended brand is not part of Amazon Brand Registry, we recommend that you complete registration via "Enroll a new brand" link on the Brand Registry landing page: https://brandregistry.amazon.com/ To help us continually improve, we ask that you take a moment to complete our survey below to tell us about your experience with this specific interaction.


I have no idea what you mean by the brand being "unhealthy" - please elaborate - other products are still brand AJK. We are selling hundreds a month, what is "unhealthy"?


I am NOT rebranding the product!

The product always was, and remains AJK.

This is not a change from Generic!

You can see that so why say that?

he packaging and brand HAS NOT CHANGED since the product was first listed.

It was listed as AJK, and is still branded as such.

All of your arguments about brand changes make sense so WHY HAVE YOU CHANGED THE BRAND? CHANGE IT BACK! YOU (AMAZON) HAVE CHANGED THE BRAND TO greenoak FOR SOME REASON, CHANGE IT BACK!

The brand AJK is part of the brand registry.

PLEASE TRANSFER THIS TICKET TO SOMEONE THAT CAN READ!

Hello from Amazon Brand Registry Support, Thank you for reaching out regarding the brand name update request for ASIN from "Generic" to "AJK." Upon reviewing the case thoroughly, it appears that the ASIN is currently listed as a non-branded product, hence the brand name being displayed as "Generic." I would like to inform you that requests to update the brand name attribute from "Generic" are not supported due to potential violations of listing policies, specifically regarding the use of a brand's Intellectual Property in generic product listings. In such cases, we advise sellers to create a new ASIN for the product with the desired brand name rather than attempting to update an existing ASIN. This ensures compliance with our policies and maintains the integrity of the Amazon marketplace. We highly appreciate your understanding and co-operation in this regard. Have a nice day. To help us continually improve, we ask that you take a moment to complete our survey below to tell us about your experience with this specific interaction. Were you satisfied with the support provided?


PLEASE ESCALATE THIS CASE TO SOMEONE THAT CAN READ!

The brand is not "Generic"

The brand is listed as "greenoak"

The words "Generic" and "greenoak" are not the same.

The listing was created with the brand: AJK

The product has, as you can see from images, the "AJK" registered trademark logo.

The product has always been brand: AJK

YOU (AMAZON) HAVE CHANGED THE BRAND FROM AJK TO greenoak

CHANGE IT BACK!


Hello from Amazon Brand Registry Support, Thank you for contacting us. I am Aleena, and I am glad to assist you. I went through the details of this case and understand that you are concerned about updating the Brand name to the ASIN: B0D56W182P. Please be informed that we are de-escalating your case and addressing your concern in detail. We cannot proceed with your request of updating the Brand name as if you choose to rebrand a product, you must create a new ASIN rather than update an existing ASIN. This is true even if the product does not change materially after the brand update. Rebranding and packaging differences on products can cause customer order returns and can potentially hurt your metrics. To prevent this unwanted outcome, we don’t allow the brand name to be changed for an ASIN. For more information, go to “Amazon Brand Name Policy”: https://sellercentral.amazon.co.uk/help/hub/reference/G2N3GKE5SGSHWYRZ If the intended brand is not part of Amazon Brand Registry, we recommend that you complete registration via “Enrol a new brand” link on the Brand Registry landing page: https://brandregistry.amazon.co.uk/ To help us continually improve, we ask that you take a moment to complete our survey below to tell us about your experience with this specific interaction.

AGAIN ESCALATE TO SOMEONE THAT CAN READ REALLY PLEASE THIS IS GETTING SILLY!!!!

PLEASE ESCALATE TO SOMEONE THAT CAN READ

You say I am not the registered brand owner for the grand greenoak.

You are correct. That is not the point!

This product is branded AJK - look at the image 

This product listing was created with brand AJK

I am the registered owner for the brand AJK

You say it is Amazon policy that the brand cannot be changed on a product

 SO HOW DID THE BRAND GET CHANGED FROM AJK TO greenoak ?

Just change the brand back to AJK

As per Amazon policy IT SHOULD NOT HAVE CHANGED TO greenoak. I am unable to edit the listing because of this.

Hello from Amazon Brand Registry Support,

My name is Deblina. As per your mail, I understand your concern regarding updating the brand name of ASIN: B0C2ZYXNYQ. Please know that I was unable to approve your requested change since we have not received sufficient proof that supports this request. - Manufacturer's or Publisher's (for books) website link clearly showing the suggested changes, along with visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.), if available. - Manufacturer's catalog (Product User Manual), either scanned image of the physical catalog or PDF version showing the suggested changes, along with visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.), if available. - High-resolution product pictures, clearly showing the suggested changes, along with a visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.). - A high-resolution photo of the item in its original packaging showing the product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.) code and the attribute or attributes that you need to change We request you to take this extra step and provide us with all the information needed so that, we can ensure that you get the correct resolution for your query. Once we will receive the details, we will investigate further and will get back to you.

Please confirm...

1. Was B0C2ZYXNYQ created with brand: AJK ?

2. Does the main product image for B0C2ZYXNYQ include the registered trademark "AJK" logo on it?

3. Has the brand been recently changed to "greenoak", against Amazon policy saying brand cannnot be changed?

4. Will you change the brand BACK to AJK please?

For your information.

As per UK registered trademark UK00003740137, I, Adrian Kennard, am listed the trademark holder for AJK. https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00003740137

As per GS1, EAN 5060634238151, is registered to Andrews & Arnold Ltd.

As per Companies House, I Adrian Kennard am the director of Andrews & Arnold Ltd https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/03342760/officers

From this you can tell I have full authority to say that this item is brand: AJK, as it was originally created in the listing.

Hello from Amazon Selling Partner Support,

As we requested previously, in order to address your concerns, we will need some additional information.

Please respond to this message to provide the details requested below:

- Manufacturer's or Publisher's (for books) website link clearly showing the suggested changes, along with visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.), if available.

- Manufacturer's catalog (Product User Manual), either scanned image of the physical catalog or PDF version showing the suggested changes, along with visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.), if available. 

- High-resolution product pictures, clearly showing the suggested changes, along with a visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.).

- A high-resolution photo of the item in its original packaging showing the product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.) code and the attribute or attributes that you need to change

We request you to take this extra step and provide us with all the information needed so that, we can ensure that you get the correct resolution for your query.

Once we will receive the details, we will investigate further and will get back to you. 

----

WAS THIS PRODUCT LISTING CREATED WITH BRAND: AJK

YES OR NO?

Hello from Amazon Selling Partner Support,

We are currently unable to provide you with an accurate response directly. We need to try and submit a system review to you. At the same time, we need you to provide one of the following valid forms of documentation before processing your request:

- A link to the manufacturer's or publisher's (for book products) website that clearly shows the proposed changes and visible product codes, such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc., if any. This is the only valid form of proof for requests relating to product images.
- High-resolution product images that clearly show proposed changes and visible product codes such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.
- A high-resolution photograph of the unopened product, showing the product ID such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc., and one or more attributes that need to be changed.

Note that for requests relating to product images, the only acceptable form of evidence is the manufacturer's or publisher's (for book products) website URL.

If your product is a GTIN exempt product, please provide an image showing the model/part number, etc., or a URL to the manufacturer's website.

Have a nice day!
----


It is, after all, a very very simple question.

Was the product listing (B0C2ZYXNYQ) created as brand: AJK

Yes or no?

Let me know when you can provide an accurate response.

----

Hello from Amazon Brand Registry Support,

I went through the details of this case and understand that you want to update the brand name for ASIN - B0C2ZYXNYQ and whether the product listing (B0C2ZYXNYQ) created as brand: AJK

I am happy to help you with this.

Please note that we are unable to answer this question. Either way, before processing your request, we require you to provide one of the following valid forms of documentation:

- A link to the manufacturer's or publisher's (for book products) website that clearly shows the proposed changes and visible product codes, such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc., if any. This is the only valid form of proof for requests relating to product images.
- High-resolution product images that clearly show proposed changes and visible product codes such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.
- A high-resolution photograph of the unopened product, showing the product ID such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc., and one or more attributes that need to be changed.

Note that for requests relating to product images, the only acceptable form of evidence is the manufacturer's or publisher's (for book products) website URL.

If your product is a GTIN exempt product, please provide an image showing the model/part number, etc., or a URL to the manufacturer's website.

We look forward to hearing from you. 
----
Please pass this to someone that CAN answer the question then?

Was the product listing (B0C2ZYXNYQ) created as brand: AJK

It is not a hard question.

I'll wait for you to find someone that can answer it.

---

尊敬的卖家/供应商：您好！在处理您的请求之前，我们需要您提供以下任一有效形式的文件：

- 制造商或出版商（针对图书类商品）网站的链接，能够清楚显示建议的更改内容以及可见的 UPC、EAN、ISBN 等商品编码（如果有）。这是与商品图片相关的请求的唯一有效证明形式。
- 能够清楚地显示建议的更改内容以及可见的 UPC、EAN、ISBN 等商品编码的高分辨率商品图片。
- 未拆封商品的高分辨率照片，能够显示 UPC、EAN、ISBN 等商品编码以及需要更改的一个或多个属性。

请注意，对于与商品图片相关的请求，唯一可接受的证据形式是制造商或出版商（针对图书类商品）网站 URL。

如果您的商品是 GTIN 豁免商品，请提供显示型号/部件编号等的图片或制造商网站 URL。

期待您的回复。 
---
Was the product listing (B0C2ZYXNYQ) created as brand: AJK

It is not a hard question.

I'll wait for you to find someone that can answer it.
----
尊敬的卖家/供应商：您好！在处理您的请求之前，我们需要您提供以下任一有效形式的文件：

- 制造商或出版商（针对图书类商品）网站的链接，能够清楚显示建议的更改内容以及可见的 UPC、EAN、ISBN 等商品编码（如果有）。这是与商品图片相关的请求的唯一有效证明形式。
- 能够清楚地显示建议的更改内容以及可见的 UPC、EAN、ISBN 等商品编码的高分辨率商品图片。
- 未拆封商品的高分辨率照片，能够显示 UPC、EAN、ISBN 等商品编码以及需要更改的一个或多个属性。

请注意，对于与商品图片相关的请求，唯一可接受的证据形式是制造商或出版商（针对图书类商品）网站 URL。

如果您的商品是 GTIN 豁免商品，请提供显示型号/部件编号等的图片或制造商网站 URL。

期待您的回复。 
FFS?
ello from Amazon Selling Partner Support,

SInce you haven~t provided the proof requested , the following would be the alternative procedure to request a Brand change to B0C2ZYXNYQ.

I'm happy to provide information regarding your claim of listing policy violation.

If you believe a listing policy violation has occurred, submit your concern with supporting information on the Account health dashboard:

https://sellercentral.amazon.com/abuse-submission/index.html

Our investigation team will review the information and take action if there is any violation of our listing policies or intellectual property policies.

If you believe a listing is infringing your intellectual property such as authenticity, trademark, copyright, or patent rights, submit your concern through the Brand Registry or Report infringement page:

https://www.amazon.com/report/infringement

Our investigation team will review the information and take action if there is any violation of our listing policies.

For more information regarding Amazon’s policies related to listings, go to these resources:

"Product detail page rules":

https://sellercentral.amazon.com/help/hub/reference/G200390640

Watch this video on "Report an intellectual property violation":

https://sellercentral.amazon.com/learn/courses?moduleId=2d6fb681-c6c8-4ffb-a1dc-632ef1de5ed2&ref_=su-spsblurbs-report_listing_violation&modLanguage

Good day.

To help us continually improve, we ask that you take a moment to complete our survey below to tell us about your experience with this specific interaction.
---

Was the product listing (B0C2ZYXNYQ) created as brand: AJK

JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!!!!

WHY ARE YOU INCAPABALE OFD ANSWERING THE QUESTION?

TRANSFER THIS CASE TO SOMEONE THAT CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION NOW!!!

JUST SAY, YES, OR NO!!!


You changed the brand from AJK to greenoak, so YOU show me the proof that was provided to make that change?

- A link to the manufacturer's or publisher's (for book products) website that clearly shows the proposed changes and visible product codes, such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc., if any. This is the only valid form of proof for requests relating to product images.
- High-resolution product images that clearly show proposed changes and visible product codes such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.
- A high-resolution photograph of the unopened product, showing the product ID such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc., and one or more attributes that need to be changed.

---

Dear Selling Partner ,

My name is Ewelina, and I'll be your contact as we work towards resolving your issue. 

I just checked your ASIN B0C2ZYXNYQ and confirmed that the right brand AJK is already related to it.
Could you please double check and let me know?

---

It now shows KppeX as brand

And I could not edit the listing when listed as Greeoak, as it thinks I am trying to change brand back to AJK when in fact I cannot even edit that field.

Actually it has got worse, I now get "You need approval to list this product" when I try to edit *MY PRODUCT*!!!!

---

Dear Seller,

thank you for your answer.
I just updated the brand once to make sure the Detail Page and your Seller Central show the right brand. Please allow up to 24h for the changes to become live. 
Once the brand is correct in all the places, the "approval" message will be gone.
Please let me know in 24h if the changes are visible from your side. 

--



You are still listing *MY* product as someone else's brand (KppeX), see attached screenshot.

You are still refusing to let me edit *MY* product listing, see attached screenshot.

Please provide evidence for change of brand of *MY* product from AJK to greenoak.
Please provide evidence for change of brand of *MY* product from greenoak to KppoX

Such as

- A link to the manufacturer's or publisher's (for book products) website that clearly shows the proposed changes and visible product codes, such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc., if any. This is the only valid form of proof for requests relating to product images.
- High-resolution product images that clearly show proposed changes and visible product codes such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.
- A high-resolution photograph of the unopened product, showing the product ID such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc., and one or more attributes that need to be changed.

If you have no evidence, as manufacturer, I cannot appove or accept either of these brand changes, and so the brand needs to revert to AJK.

If someone else is selling *my* products under another brand, with my trademarked brand logo, I have to seriously consider legal action for trademark infingement.

In light of this please provide full details of the contact details for the legal representative for Greenoak and KppeX.

Thank you

--

Hello from Amazon.co.uk,

My name is Andrea from Amazon Selling Partner Support and I am reaching out to you regarding your request to update the brand name for Asin  B0C2ZYXNYQ to "AJK".

We do not see the proof provided for the changes requested. Before we can process your request, we need you to provide one of these valid forms of documentation:

- Manufacturer's or Publisher's (for books) website URL clearly showing the suggested changes, along with visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.), if available.
- Manufacturer's catalog (Product User Manual), either scanned image of the physical catalog or PDF version showing the suggested changes, along with visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.), if available. 
- High-resolution product pictures, clearly showing the suggested changes, along with a visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.).
- A high-resolution photo of the item in its original packaging showing the product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.) code and the attribute or attributes that you need to change

Could you also specify if you registered the brand "AJK" on Amazon Brand Registry?

-- 

You changed the brand, not me.

Please provide evidence for change of brand of *MY* product from AJK to greenoak.
Please provide evidence for change of brand of *MY* product from greenoak to KppoX

Such as

- A link to the manufacturer's or publisher's (for book products) website that clearly shows the proposed changes and visible product codes, such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc., if any. This is the only valid form of proof for requests relating to product images.
- High-resolution product images that clearly show proposed changes and visible product codes such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.
- A high-resolution photograph of the unopened product, showing the product ID such as UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc., and one or more attributes that need to be changed.

If you have no evidence, as manufacturer, I cannot appove or accept either of these brand changes, and so the brand needs to revert to AJK.

--

Hello from Amazon.co.uk,

This is Andrea from Amazon Selling Partner Support and I am reaching out to you regarding your request to update the brand name for Asin  B0C2ZYXNYQ to "AJK".

Please note that we cannot proceed  for the changes requested if you do not provide the required proof.

Before we can process your request, we need you to provide one of these valid forms of documentation:

- Manufacturer's or Publisher's (for books) website URL clearly showing the suggested changes, along with visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.), if available.
- Manufacturer's catalog (Product User Manual), either scanned image of the physical catalog or PDF version showing the suggested changes, along with visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.), if available. 
- High-resolution product pictures, clearly showing the suggested changes, along with a visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.).
- A high-resolution photo of the item in its original packaging showing the product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.) code and the attribute or attributes that you need to change

Could you also specify if you registered the brand "AJK" on Amazon Brand Registry?

-- 

You are still misssng the points

You (Amazon) changed the brand!

I CANNOT ACCEPT THAT BRAND CHANGE WITHOUT PROOF FROM AMAZON.

Please provide a copy of the proof you used to change the brand from AJK to KppeX, such as.

- Manufacturer's or Publisher's (for books) website URL clearly showing the suggested changes, along with visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.), if available.
- Manufacturer's catalog (Product User Manual), either scanned image of the physical catalog or PDF version showing the suggested changes, along with visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.), if available. 
- High-resolution product pictures, clearly showing the suggested changes, along with a visible product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.).
- A high-resolution photo of the item in its original packaging showing the product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.) code and the attribute or attributes that you need to change

If you have no proof, revert the brand back to AJK.

--

Hello from Amazon.co.uk,

This is Andrea from Amazon Selling Partner Support.

I understand your frustration, but please note that the proof is required from our internal department, in charge of brand stamping.

If no proof is provided they are not going to update the brand and I have no other way to help you.

Please provide the required images showing the brand name and the product identifier (UPC, EAN, ISBN, etc.).

If you do not cooperate you will only delay the resolution of the issue.

---


13:34
05/09/2024


But *YOU* changed the brand, not me!

If, as you say, proof is required to change the brand then:

        GIVE ME THE PROOF

If you have no proof, as manufacturer I cannot accept the change of brand from AJK, and it needs to changed back.

--- 

Finally some progress.

https://www.me.uk/2024090514002500000.wav

---

Hello from Amazon.co.uk,

This is Andrea from Amazon Selling Partner Support and I am reaching out to you regarding your request to update the brand name for Asin  B0C2ZYXNYQ.

Thank you for taking my call earlier.

I confirm you that I contacted our internal team and asked them to change  the brand name back to  to "AJK".

I will be back to you with a response in due course. 

-- 

Finally fixed, for now.

TOTSCO (One Touch Switching) Live

We're live for One Touch Switching, well, with a dozen (well, 13) other CPs, for on-ramp testing. Live use of OTS. This is public knowledge as we are listed by other CPs as available for OTS.

Updated:

There are, of course, issues being worked out, and daily calls to resolve them - and we are all working to try and ensure everything is sorted by the launch date (12th Sep).

I'd love to explain more, but at the risk of invoking the Streisand effect, I have now been told I cannot go in to any details on progress, even without naming the CPs that are having issues. Sorry.

Obviously customers can see the issues if using our order page to try and progress an order, and seeing the errors. It is just that I am not able to tell you about it.

Power on the line

Who ensures you can call 999 in a power cut?

This blog does not have all the answers, it has a lot of questions, opinion, and some history. I am trying to address the issue and explain some of the technical, financial, and regulatory challenges. It is not simple, and some will undoubtably have a different opinion. I hope it helps address the very understandable knee jerk responses though.

I also have personal views on 999 service moving to the 21st century, but this blog covers just power for 999 calls.

A bit of history

Telephones have been around well over 100 years now. Surprisingly the basic working of the old fashioned analogue phone still works today, but that is changing.

They way an analogue phone works happens to need a small amount of power. There needs to be a voltage (no power really) to detect you lift the receiver. There needs to be enough power to allow the microphone and earpiece to work. There needs to be a bit more power to make a bell ring. This was done using batteries at the telephone exchange.

This meant a telephone would work without the home having power. Indeed, mains power was less common and less reliable over a century ago when phones started. It is also worth remembering that consumer electronics did not exist either - these days we see DC USB power on wall sockets and are used to a small switch mode power supply working some electronic gadget - the idea of a telephone handset being powered from you home is not daft. But a century ago the very power supply itself would be complicated, to say the least, and the phone handset had no electronics anyway - it would not make any sense for a telephone handset to be power from your home mains electricity. So they were line powered, simple as that.

The telephone handset was also part of the service, even wired in, for a very long time.

Catch up to today

Today, analogue telephone lines do the same. Yes we have DTMF now, and the handset itself has electronics that do that, but a simple handset is powered by the line still. Of course we have also moved to the telephone being the customer's responsibility and not part of the service itself, something you can choose, and plug in.

It is an issue for the telcos as the electronics in a handset could expect more power than the original telephone lines were every designed to deliver and there are current limits defined as a result.

But also we have a lot more complex telephones now, even simple cordless phones, DECT base stations. phone with answering machine, PABX, and so on. These work using local mains power, and in some cases DO NOT work when no local mains power. In a lot of cases there are special work arounds - a phone system in an office will typically have at least one old school phone, and maybe a relay that switches that directly to the line when power fails. But not all consumer equipment has any means to work in a power failure.

But also, mains power is way more reliable in almost all places.

However, if you have a simple old school telephone handset somewhere in the house, you can still use it during a power cut - yay!

20th Century

For a long time it was expected that ISDN was the future. Indeed, in some countries it really did take off, and a basic ISDN2 telephone could plug in to a socket and work. My understanding is that ISDN2 was design to power a basic ISDN telephone.

I am not sure if BT did power ISDN2 sockets - I have a feeling they did not. They did a consumer ISDN2 (Home Highway) which did have an analogue phone fallback, which was good. But for anyone using ISDN2, an actual ISDN2 handset was unheard of - people used and ISDN2 card in a computer (mainly for data) or a small ISDN2 PABX which needed power to work.

ISDN30 is a large scale service, and that definitely did not power a handset. It was often using fibre. It did not have power fail working, even though 999 should work just as much for such cases as a home phone line.

Somehow BT were legally able to provide a proper telephone service on a line in such cases with no power fail backup! (Do correct me if I have that wrong).

21st Century

The problem is that times are changing, the old school telephone service (landlines) are going away. These days telephony is an over the top service, working over IP, VoIP, that is Internet Protocol. This changes things.

So how does this work in a power cut and who is responsible for it?

Broadband/Internet

A broadband/internet service never had any requirement to be 24/7 100% reliable, or to work in a power failure. OFCOM are pushing more and more for this, and even talking of power failure requirements (for at risk customers, at least). This is a change, and has a cost.

The internet itself is a large interconnected network - an ISP cannot guarantee that even Google works 24/7, that is down to Google, and even they had an outage the other day. An ISP cannot guarantee they have connectivity to some VoIP telephone service provider 100% of the time, as a lot of that connectivity is outside the ISPs control, as is the operation of the VoIP provider themselves. Yes, an ISP may also be a VoIP provider, but there is not reason to make more onerous obligations in such a case, especially as such a company could simply split its operations in two if that was the case, so assume they are separate.

The elephant in the room here is actually where and what a broadband/internet service is - it is provided at the Network Termination Point. For DSL this is the master socket. It is a clear demarkation for where service is provider.

If OFCOM insist that an ISP has to have a broadband service that works during a power failure (even if only for an hour), that is the point at which it has to work. That is no different to the landline provider providing service at the master socket.

The problem is, unlike a landline, having a service working at a master socket is not a lot of help to a consumer in a power cut. Unlike a landline telephone service, broadband service never provided power (for a router). It provides connectivity - the ability to DSL sync on the line using a modem. You need a modem, and that needs power.

Interestingly, BT are talking of battery backup for optical network termination points (ONTs), where the network termination point is an Ethernet socket. That could be useful to a customer if they have a laptop with an Ethernet port and a PPPoE stack. That would allow them internet access in a power cut. But that is an edge case. In almost all cases the consumer has a modem/router/switch/access point, and they have to power that to make it work. Just as they would have to power a DECT base station if they had one plugged in to a landline master socket.

From a regulatory point of view the whole concept of a network termination point is important, it defines where the service is provide and who is responsible each side. The ISP is simply not responsible for what is plugged in.

From a technical point of view the ISP could not sensibly power arbitrary customer equipment. Here, for my laptop to work, I have a router, and modem, and large PoE switch, and 6 access points. Powering all of those for an hour is a big undersaking, but not doing that means I don't have internet at all. I don't have a system to fall back to just a modem and one access point, but powering even one AP is a lot.

Should companies making and selling network routers, switches, and access points, have to ensure battery back up, just because they could be used to carry VoIP traffic for a 999 calls?

So yes, I suspect a service still working at the network termination point, and hence powered ONT, might happen. It happens for DSL lines, we think (BT have batteries in street cabinets, but not sure if all, or for how long). But it will be not help for 999 calls.

VoIP provider

The other side of the coin is a telephone service provider using VoIP.

The very nature of the service is that it is oIP, i.e. over IP. It depends on working internet access.

Does it make sense to expect the VoIP provider to somehow make it work when no internet access, well no, it does not.

Does it make sense for the VoIP provider to provide battery backup? Well, for what? If the provider rented a SIP handset, maybe they could power that for you, but that does not help in a power cut if nobody is powering your modem, router, and network switch, all of which are very much out of the scope of the VoIP provider. And if they are not renting a SIP handset, or providing as part of the service, even that handset is out of scope.

I VoIP provider should ensure their equipment has power backup and redundancy to allow 999 calls, but that is actually pretty easy in a data centre. Data centres have lots of power backup and redundancies.

The key issue here is that making the broadband work at home is down to a lot of equipment for which the consumer is totally responsible, and not the broadband provider, and not the VoIP provider.

Should companies making/selling SIP handset have to ensure battery backup? And would it help? Maybe if modem and switch manufactures had to do the same. But none of that sounds sensible.

Landline replacement

There is a middle ground here, a landline replacement service. This is something we see, and likely to be something BT has to do as the incumbent operator with a Universal Service Obligation.

Being a replacement it IS REASONABLE for the customer to expect it to work like the service it replaces. This means a provide providing not just internet access to a network termination point, but modem and router with an old school analogue telephone socket. The termination point for that overall service is the analogue phone socket on the router, and so it is reasonable to expect that to work in a power cut, with an old school analogue phone. So likely that will have battery backup as an option.

So, at least for now, due to jet more legacy it is likely BT will still provide this, at least for at risk customers.

Should someone else do this anyway

The big issue at hand is power cut. Would it not simply be sensible to regulate that power companies have to do something.

They already have a priority service register and already roll out generators to vulnerable users (e.g. those with powered medical equipment at home). I'm on the register as I have insulin in the fridge, which was one of the criteria - I also (now) have Tesla batteries so won't need a generator for even a very long power cut.

Having to provide a small USP enough to cover a broadband modem, and router, and SIP ATA to work a handset, is not a big step, and not a huge cost if only for at risk customers.

It makes a lot more sense that insisting telcos provide power. Just like it makes sense that power companies are not expected to provide telephony.

Maybe this is the real way forward here?

Cool feature on VoLTE

Our SIP2SIM SIMs run through ONSIM/Tango, and uses VoLTE normally. OK a lot of acronyms, I know.

The key point is we feed the call to the mobile network using SIP.

SIP allows the calling number to be set with a number (well, technically anything in the local part of the sip address) and a name.

Eg. I could have From: "Adrian" <sip:401@whatever>

On my SIP phone on my desk it shows both Adrian and 401, which is great. It has options to show one or the other or both.

I use this feature in our call routing, so, for example, if someone calls my 02000 number, I prefix the name part with a 2, and then the calling number. Similarly if someone calls my 0800 number I prefix it with 080. That way, even if all I can see is the name part, I get to see the calling number and a prefix indicating which of my numbers was originally called. In hindsight I may make the 0800 just have 8 as 080 then 0 looks even more confusing at first.

For example, this call:

As you see, the name part is 0800759...

What I have noticed is that the name part gets all the way to my mobile (iPhone).

I know this because of the missed call list.

Sadly when the call comes in, the main phone screen only shows the CLI, not the name part, which is a shame. Though on my Mac (which also shows the incoming call) it shows both.

It would be nice to have an option to show name, or both.

P.S. I cannot tinker with the actual CLI due to OFCOM rules - it has to be a plausible number. The fact the name gets through gives some hope of handling better local / internal CLI using Name field.

Broadband slamming

With One Touch Switching (OTS) only a month away, it seems a good time to talk about how it changes broadband slamming.

Summary: I believe slamming, and particularly malicious slamming, will be a lot easier.

I believe the details are correct, but will update if necessary.

What is slamming and why does it happen?

Slamming is simply changing provider on a service without the customer's permission. It dates back to US phone systems and long distance carriers being changed to get the new provider the business. For broadband, in the UK, it is changing the communications provider (CP) on a service without permission, and we see it for a few possible reasons:-

1. Traditional slamming: Basically a CP getting business. Surprisingly we do see this, mainly with door to door salesmen.
2. Mistake: This is where someone orders a service but gets their address wrong, which is easier than you might realise. We have one example of a customer who has had someone try to migrate his line four times!
3. IT consultant: Changing a clients broadband to his preferred supplier (maybe to get a kick back).
4. Accounts department: Thinking it is like gas/electric and just changing to a cheaper supplier without asking IT (not actually slamming but same problems).
5. Fraud: mainly for telephone to allow calls to be made and received on someone else's number.
6. Malicious slamming: Changing provider to cause a victim problems. 

Existing safeguards

Slamming to a new technology is not that helpful - it means a new service installed, but they can't cease the old service - so you end up with two services, and can tell the new provider to piss off if it was not you that ordered it.

For the same technology, and in this case I mean a BT circuit, it can be migrated from one CP to another CP. This is where the problems lie, but there are safeguards:

• 14 day lead time.
• BT tells existing CP.
• Existing CP has to tell customer (OFCOM rules).
• Customer can cancel by telling existing CP (who tells BT).

This works well, and there are even anti slamming services to automatically cancel a migrate (useful for that customer that has had it tried 4 times already!).

New safeguards

One Touch Switching changing things, but is not without safeguards:

• The old CP has to match, which means address and surname and possibly more details like account number. However, an exact correct address and correct surname are good enough.
• The old CP tells the customer on match, and when it starts. 

But there are other changes:

• No 14 day delay, it could be next day even, so customer has to on the ball.
• Customer can only cancel by talking to new CP. But if not them, the customer will not know account, login, password, email, or even first name used, so may have a challenge getting new CP to even talk to them.

So yes, there are some safeguards, and the most benefit I can see is handling the mistake type slamming, as the surname match should solve wrong addresses in most cases. It is also possible for a customer to tell their CP they have a new surname, which then needs to match, though can mean an engineer asking for Mr Antislamming when there is a fault :-) 

But it is worse!

One Touch Switching only applies to consumer switching. For business, a simple BT circuit migrate happens as before. But that is OK, surely? That is how it has always worked.

Well, no...

• BT are removing the 14 day lead time, so customer has to be on the ball.
• There may be little, or no, advance notice any more (not entirely clear).
• It will no longer be possible for the old CP to cancel the order.

It is not even clear if the old CP will know who the new CP is. If slamming, the customer might not know until they get a letter in the post asking for money.

No, worse than that!

You might be thinking that, at least, consumers are protected by some safeguards (One Touch Switching)?

Well,  no...

BT don't know if the end customer is a consumer, and neither does a new CP. You can order a business service on a circuit, and migrate it next day with no One Touch Switching, even if the victim is a consumer. They will just have broken internet (no idea of new router login). So consumers are not protected at all from malicious slamming - the slammer only needs the address, not even surname, as no match is done on a business order.

No, worse even than that!

Yep, it is worse. If the victim had an old fashioned landline still, broadband migration will kill the phone line. And whilst getting the broadband back may be possible, and maybe even quick, the landline won't come back. The victim has to sort a right to port on the ceased number, finding a suitable provider, and getting suitable VoIP equipment all set up.

Example

DON'T DO THIS, IT IS ILLEGAL IN MANY WAYS!

Imagine you have an annoying neighbour. If you know address and surname you can do a proper One Touch Switching migrate to a new service. It means lying to the new CP, obviously. Yes, if they are quick, they can contact new provider, and maybe get it stopped, but may be tricky if next day switching. This could kill their internet.

But you don't need to do One Touch Switching, just order a business service. Maybe from a business only provider that is not even part of One Touch Switching. You can lie to them, and provide real business details, so passing credit checks and so on, and give phoney bank details for direct debit. But the migrate could be next day, with no notice, and the victim not even knowing who the new CP is. And, as I say, losing a landline number in the process.

Now imagine it is not a neighbour, but a celebrity you don't like, or a politician. All you need is the address!

What about a restaurant that gave you bad service. Slam them, and suddenly no internet; no credit card machine; no online orders; no VoIP phones. Chaos, even if only for a day whilst they get it back.

And not so nice on the victim for costs - the old CP may be chasing early termination charges. Getting service back may also have a cost, and minimum term.

And not so nice on the CPs - who have a customer who (rightly) says it was not their fault, so won't be paying early termination charges, etc, and if the CP argues the customer goes to ADR (Alternate Dispute Resolution) which costs the CP as well.

Once again, DON'T DO THIS! I am not trying to incite anything, just giving some examples of the risks.

Trying out a service

I am posting this because there seems to be some confusion...

Consumer protection laws try to help consumers and help them avoid making silly mistakes. It is good. And one of the concerns is that, unlike a "real shop", buying on-line can be misleading, and confusing, and can even lead to regrettable impulse purchases which would not have happened in a "real shop".

So originally the Distance Selling Directive, and now The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013, provide some protections.

Goods

For goods the idea is to try and provide something of the same level of assurance as buying in a "real shop". In a shop you can see the item, pick it up, inspect it, maybe even have a demo from the salesman. Consider it carefully and make an informed choice.

So for on-line sales you get the chance to do the same - a 14 day trial period. If you don't like it, you can send back for a refund. You don't even have to pay postage. (yes, if faulty, or not as described, you can send back anyway, and have more protections, we are talking changing your mind here).

The regulations are not quite so absolute, you get postage covered, unless you opted for a more expensive than default postage, for example. Also, if the goods are diminished in value by handling other than, well, basically, what you might expect in a shop (not quite the wording, but you get the idea), then you have to cover that.

But the idea is simple, same deal as a "real shop".

Services

This is more difficult as you cannot "send back" a service for a refund.

So, once again, the regulations try to be fair to customer and the seller.

The 14 day cooling off period is a chance to CHANGE YOUR MIND only. To address the "impulse purchase" and "buyers regret", even the "Amazon whilst drunk" syndrome. And to do so before the service is provided.

It is not a chance to try out the service and then decide you don't like it. This is important. IT IS NOT A FREE TRIAL!

There are allowances for asking for the service quickly, i.e. within the 14 days, and still changing your mind. But if the service has started to be provided, you have to pay for what has been done. When fully performed, you lose the right to cancel at all. You don't get a free trial.

A lot of people seem to think the 14 days is a free trial, or at least a cheap trial, of a service. It is not.

A good example was a comment on a recent ispreview article, here:

"It’s good for the customers…. Why give us 14 days to cancel without even trying your service, i think the OTS 1 day service will allow customers to test the network and if its bad, they can leave within 14 days:)"

This very much highlights the problem as people really think the 14 day period is to "allow customers to test the network", which is very much is not.

Ongoing services

This is the grey area. A service that is "one year of broadband" cannot be fully performed within the 14 days, but at the same time the "provision" of that service can be. Saying "fully performed" makes no sense for an ongoing service, and arguably the ongoing part is not relevant to the regulations at all - it is "performing" the service, the service of "providing the ongoing service" that has been done, and as such stops the right to cancel. That is one view, anyway.

The problem is the regulations do not use wording clearly enough to say for sure, and (as far as I know) it is not tested in court.

This means some people think the 14 days ends up being a means to "try out" a new "ongoing service" and cancel within 14 days. This is clearly not the intention of the legislation and may not be what a judge sides with. But it is a risk for a seller, because of the bad wording.

OFCOM

What is worrying is that people see OFCOMs new rules on fast service migrations as specifically allowing cancellation within the 14 days, AFTER the service has been provided (well, provisioned), because it was quick and within the 14 day period. They see it as allowing someone to try the service and then change their mind.

Given that the supplier may have costs to install and even commitments to 12 month terms for underlying circuits, it makes no sense that they only get to charge the customer for a day or two of service. That is what some customers think is fair, somehow.

That is why it needs to be crystal clear, in law, and on sign up, what exactly the customer is getting.

• A 14 day chance to change your mind BEFORE service starts.
• An option to have service sooner, LOSING the right to change your mind once provisioned.

This is what the regulations do for any other service, so should be the same for an ongoing service like broadband. They may do, depending on how a judge reads it, but it should be clearer for suppliers and consumers what it means exactly.

The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013

Time to write to my MP...

I am hoping you can address a concern I have regarding these regulations. This letter should hopefully explain my concerns, and why I feel a small amendment to the regulations would be in order, particularly now.

Who am I?

I am the director of an Internet Service provider (Andrews & Arnold Ltd) providing internet and telephone services throughout the whole of the UK, and with most staff based in Berkshire, and several staff based in Wales.

Background

One of the key features of these regulations is a 14 day cooling off period for distance sales, for goods and services, to consumers. This is an important safeguard.

However, section 36 provides a facility for consumers that do not wish to wait 14 days for a service to be performed. It specifically allows a consumer to make an express request, in a durable medium, for a service to be performed within the 14 days, and waive their right to cancel within 14 days if the service is performed.

It then provides the protection that if the service is not performed yet, the consumer can still cancel within 14 days, only paying for the part of the service that has been performed, in proportion. However, once the service is performed, the right to cancel is lost.

This is a benefit to consumers that do not wish to be forced to wait 14 days for a service, and addresses the inherent nature that a service, unlike goods, cannot simple be sent back.

The problem

The problem is the wording of 36(2), and specifically the phrase “if the service has been fully performed”.

This makes perfect sense for a service like installing a dishwasher. I.e. if the installation has started, but not finished, the consumer can cancel, paying only proportionately for what has been done so far.

However, this wording does not fit well with a service such as broadband/internet. The problem is that such a service is installed and then ongoing, possibly even with a minimum term. The supplier has costs for arranging the installation, and may well have commitments with circuit providers for a minimum term.

If a customer cancelled after the installation was complete and the service is working, but within 14 days, the supplier has to charge in proportion. For a 12 month term, that is a fraction of the costs to the supplier. Indeed, with services on 12 month term it is common for a free installation to be offered, which is another cost for the supplier if cancelled within 14 days.

As such broadband service provision invariably has a 14 day cooling off period, denying the consumer the option to have an installation done sooner.

Why now?

Until now, for most broadband/internet installations, either a new circuit had to be installed (which takes time), or a migration is done with a carrier such as BT Wholesale. BT Wholesale have, to date, enforced a 14 day delay in migrations. So 14 day cooling off period is effectively enforced.

However, a new initiative by OFCOM has changed things. This takes effect 12th Sep 2024. As a result, BT Wholesale are dropping the 14 day minimum lead time on migrations. OFCOM are trying to encourage switching of broadband to be easy for consumers, indeed, the wording of the OFCOM general conditions means a provider has to provide a service as soon as technically possible if the customer expressly requests it, which may be within that 14 day cooling off period.

The fact OFCOM are, in effect, insisting operators allow customers to request services sooner creates a serious problem for providers. If nothing else, a free installation type service would not be sensible (again, to the detriment of the consumer). Even if a provider chose not to fully adhere to OFCOM GC, and insisting on a 14 day cooling off time, this effectively denies the consumer an option. But the wording of 36(2) of the regulations means an Internet provider will not be willing to offer quicker broadband switches without significant risk.

I stress that a consumer has to make an express request for a faster install, in a durable medium.

Suggested change

I would suggest the drafting of the regulations simply did not consider this type of service provision, and the current wording is an oversight.

I’d like to see working more along the lines of…

… if the service has been fully performed, or, for an ongoing service, the ongoing service has been made available, …

This could allow an ongoing service to commence within 14 days, losing the right to cancel, at that point, which is only fair given the costs for the supplier. I.e. supplier has done the work necessary now and so deserves to be paid.

How does this help your constituents?

The clash between OFCOMs new rules and the regulations is already causing concern for small Internet Providers like us, and leading to reduced choice for consumers, your constituents. We’d love to offer the full range of options, including cheap or free install on a 12 month term, along with service provided even next day when possible. But at this point, such options are a risk for small providers and ultimately will reduce consumer choice.

I feel having this option of faster broadband switching will benefit consumers, and would support OFCOMs aims of better and simpler broadband switching. It remains entirely optional for consumers, obviously. But being unable to cancel once the “ongoing” service “starts” seems fair, and seems to be what the regulations clearly intended as an option.

Is this something you can raise in parliament?