This consultation started on 13th February 2009 and ends on 27th February 2009.

1.1 This dispute concerns the termination rate payable by T-Mobile (UK) Ltd ( T-Mobile) to Mapesbury Communications Ltd (MCom) for calls originated on T-Mobile’s network and terminated on MCom’s network. These payments are known as mobile termination rates (MTR).

1.2 On 10 October 2008, we received a joint submission outlining a dispute between T-Mobile and MCom about the MTR charged to T-Mobile for the termination of calls on the MCom network. The joint submission requested that Ofcom handle, consider and determine the MTR payable by T-Mobile for the termination of calls on the MCom network.

1.3 MCom is currently building areas of contiguous GSM mobile phone coverage with a view to providing a mobile service in certain urban areas of the UK which have a high proportion of ethnic community residents. T-Mobile’s main business activities include public mobile communications network operation and the provision of mobile network communications to the public.

1.4 MCom and T-Mobile do not interconnect directly. Each party has entered into a Standard Interconnection Agreement with BT under which BT provides transit services between the operators. In this respect, where a call originates on T-Mobile’s network and is terminated on MCom’s network, BT purchases termination from MCom and charges T-Mobile an amount equal to the MCom MTR plus an additional transit charge. The current MTR for the termination of calls on MCom’s network agreed between MCom and BT is equal to 7.24 pence per minute (ppm).

1.5 Our powers and duties to resolve certain disputes are set out at sections 185-191 of the Communications Act 2003 (“the 2003 Act”). In accordance with Section 186(4) of the 2003 Act, on 21 November 2008 we decided that it was appropriate to resolve this dispute, informed the parties to the dispute of our decision and published a Competition Bulletin entry setting out the scope of the dispute[(-1-)].

1.6 In resolving this dispute, we have considered our general statutory duties and Community obligations under section 3 and 4 of the 2003 Act. In the context of this dispute, we have had particular regard to our primary duty under section 3(1)(b) of the 2003 Act to further the interests of consumers in relevant markets, where appropriate, by promoting competition.

1.7 We considered the 6 principles of pricing and cost recovery established by Ofcom as an appropriate basis for the framework to set a MTR which is reasonable as between the parties and satisfies our general statutory duties and Community obligations. We decided that it was appropriate to directly link MCom’s MTR to a regulated rate. We considered which rate would be appropriate in this matter and decided, in the interests of cost minimisation, that it should be the lowest.

1.8 In summary, based on the submissions of the parties and the evidence gathered in this dispute, for the reasons set out in this draft determination and explanatory statement, our provisional conclusion is that:

The following documents relating to this consultation are available: Dispute between Mapesbury Communications and T-Mobile about mobile termination rates Dispute between Mapesbury Communications and T-Mobile about mobile termination rates How to respond Responses

http://www.tellthemwhatyouthink.org/consultation/con-2009-dispute-between-mapesbury-termination-rates