Smart asks NTC to dismiss PT&T claims on interconnection fees

Leading wireless service provider Smart Communications has asked the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) to dismiss claims by debt-ridden Philippine Telegraph & Telephone Corp. (PT&T) that the former has been overcharging the latter in terms of interconnection fees.

PT&T, owned by the Santiago family and a company which is under debt restructuring, has contested before the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) the computation of interconnection fees charged on it by Smart in 1996 and is seeking a refund.

According to lawyer Roy Ibay, industry relations manager for the Smart wholesale business group, Smart has never overcharged PT&T on its outbound calls to the former nor underpaid on the inbound access charges to PT&T "as Smart has been consistent in applying computations based on the commercial terms and conditions mutually agreed upon by both parties."

Ibay pointed out that it is erroneous for PT&T to bring in the NTC at this juncture and call for a non-discriminatory application of rates as the Smart-PT&T-Capwire tripartite agreement does not fall under this case.

According to Smart, in May 2003, PT&T acknowledged its obligation and agreed to pay Smart the amount of P11.1 million in very clear installment terms over a definite period of time. "In April 2005, PT&T deliberately stopped its installment payments and contrary to PT&T’s claim, it is Smart who is the aggrieved party in this transaction and rightfully has the option to file a simple collection case against PT&T.

As such, PT&T’s case should not merit any scant attention from a specialized quasi-judicial body such as the NTC but instead be treated as a collection dispute that should be properly ventilated in the regular courts," Ibay said.

He disclosed that official records reflect that PT&T initially owed Smart a total of P72.38 million for the period of October 1996 to December 1998 as opposed to PT&T’s claims of P48.54 million.

In 1999, as a consideration to the financial condition of PT&T, Smart said it agreed to accept PT&T’s request that the latter’s records (P48.54 million) be used on the condition that PT&T would be able to pay until May 2001.

"However, PT&T’s payments until March 2001 amounted to only P13.8 million. Smart would have reverted to its original billing figures based on the conditions of the agreement but still gave PT&T another chance to settle," Ibay added.

In 2003, through a tripartite offsetting agreement among Smart/ Pilipino Telephone Inc. and PT&T/ Capwire, PT&T’s outstanding account was reduced to P11.11 million. Settlement rates per minute would also be revised once the balance reaches certain milestone amounts.

As an additional effort to extend assistance to PT&T, Smart said it even continued sending outbound traffic through PT&T‚s sister firm, Capwire, although there were other lower-priced routes available at that time.

A restructured payment schedule of P150,000 a month was agreed upon with PT&T starting January 2004. However, after settling only P2.25 million, PT&T again stopped its payments to SMART starting April 2005. Despite that, PT&T’s inbound share was even increased to P2 per minute in April 2005, Ibay stressed.

He said Smart has been giving PT&T a lot of leeway so they would be able to settle their outstanding accounts. "We reiterate that Smart has never deviated from the agreed commercial terms and conditions with PT&T and that intervention from the NTC is unnecessary," he emphasized.

To date, PT&T still owes Smart P2.245 million for the transactions until August 2005, the PLDT wireless subsidiary revealed.