Rogers Wireless wants to put all cellphone providers on the hook for ex-customers' unpaid bills.

In a filing with the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission on Monday, the company asked the regulator to order all wireless companies to be responsible for the unpaid balances owed by customers who switch providers.

That would mean that if a customer switches from Rogers to Bell with an unpaid bill of $200, for example, Bell would be responsible for paying that amount to Rogers.

The issue, Rogers said, is that since number portability — where customers can take their phone numbers with them when switching — came into effect in March 2007, unpaid balances at the company have risen.

Once the customer transfers his or her number to a new provider, their relationship with Rogers is over, which makes it difficult to collect any unpaid charges, the company said. This is having an increasingly big impact because of big subsidies given on expensive new smartphones, Rogers said.

"Customers porting out mid-contract with unpaid balances are costing Rogers, and most probably other wireless carriers as well, millions of dollars each year," the company said in its letter. "The task of collecting these unpaid balances is made much more difficult once a customer ports their number to a new carrier as the relationship has been terminated."

Stem loss of market share

Rogers said other methods of collecting unpaid bills, such as collection agencies, are not doing the job.

"Collections and risk management systems are in place to mitigate the impact, but ... the effectiveness of these measures is limited, especially in cases where the unpaid balance is significant," the company said.

Michael Janigan, executive director at the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, a consumer watchdog, said Rogers's move is a clear attempt to stem the loss of market share. New cellphone companies such as Wind Mobile, as well as improved offerings from traditional rivals Bell and Telus, are chipping away at market leader Rogers's subscriber base.

"This is the clear downside of long-term contracts for a supplier and now they want regulation to solve a problem brought about by market forces," he said.

The position taken by Rogers was not shared by all cellphone providers.

"Telus couldn't disagree more with Rogers on their proposal," said spokesman Jim Johannsson. "It's not consumer focused, it's not transparent, doesn't promote consumer choice and runs counter to everything we are striving for as an industry."

A spokeperson for Bell said the company is reviewing the proposal.

CRTC spokesman Denis Carmel said the regulator had received the request and is reviewing it. Interested parties will have 30 days to comment on it, after which Rogers will have 10 days to respond. The regulator typically makes rulings on such requests within four months after all comments have been filed.

Winds of change

The business model of the established North American wireless providers has so far typically revolved around signing customers up to long-term contracts in exchange for discounts on devices. Customers who opt out of those contracts early often face hundreds of dollars in early cancellation charges as a result.

Wind, which launched service in Toronto and Calgary in December, is taking a different tactic by selling phones at cost and without term contracts, which is a common practice in much of the rest of the world.

Search engine giant Google is also trying to change the North American model with the recent launch of its Nexus One in the United States. Customers who want the phone, which is not officially available in Canada yet but does work on Wind's network, can buy it directly from Google's U.S. website without a contract or a direct tie to a specific provider.