Billing Software For Internet Service Providers

[Eri Pfaff]

Apartmentscondominiums, and office buildings are homes and workplaces for millions of Americans. To promote competition and consumer choice, the FCC regulates access to telecommunications, cable, and broadband services in these "multiple tenant environments," or MTEs for short. These rules regulate the kinds of agreements service providers may enter into with landlords and prohibit certain anti-competitive arrangements. Additional rules recently went into effect that place new obligations and restrictions on service providers in MTEs.

The FCC defines MTEs as commercial or residential premises such as apartment buildings, condominium buildings, shopping malls, or cooperatives that are occupied by multiple entities. MTEs also encompass centrally managed residential real estate developments, such as gated communities, mobile home parks, or garden apartments.

FCC rules only apply to certain service providers and not to landlords, so a landlord may refuse to allow other service providers to offer service to tenants. While a service provider may not enter into an agreement that grants exclusive access to an MTE property, a landlord may still choose the providers it allows into the building, even if that means only one company provides service.

Not necessarily. The FCC does not currently prohibit what are known as bulk billing arrangements. Under such an arrangement, a company agrees to provide service to every tenant of a building, who are then billed a prorated share of the total cost. Under these arrangements, tenants may be billed by either the landlord or the service provider.

FCC rules do prohibit service providers from entering into bulk billing contracts with landlords that grant the service provider the exclusive right to access and serve a building. These types of contracts harm competition by stopping additional providers from serving tenants in a building, and limit consumer choice.

Service providers are prohibited from entering into contracts with landlords that grant the service provider the exclusive right to access and serve a building. These types of contracts can harm competition by stopping additional providers from serving tenants in a building, and limit consumer choice.

An exclusive marketing arrangement is a contract that permits only the service provider to advertise its services in a building. These types of arrangements can mislead tenants about the availability of service from other companies. To help tenants, the FCC requires conspicuous and easy-to-understand disclosures on service-provider created written marketing material for tenants of a building when an exclusive marketing arrangement is in place.

In general, service providers must either: remove the wiring; abandon but not disable or prevent access to the wiring; or make the wiring available for purchase by the tenant, landlord, or an another service provider.

The FCC continues to monitor competition in multi-tenant environments. We encourage individuals to share their experiences via the FCC docket on MTEs, GN 17-142. Comments can be submitted to FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS). Instructions for filing can be found on the ECFS website.

Bulk internet agreements typically involve the purchase by a property owner of internet connectivity services for an entire rental community that is delivered to residents of the community at a reduced cost per unit, compared to what those residents would pay if they were subscribing directly to those internet services. Costs for this service are typically rolled into rent or charged as a separate technology or amenity fee, both of which are transparent and disclosed throughout the leasing process. While bulk internet delivery has grown in popularity across all rental property types, it has been historically very effective in getting broadband service to low-income, affordable, senior, student and veteran populations because of its ease of access and pro-consumer pricing benefits.

As rental housing properties have worked to improve sustainability and resiliency, they have utilized a growing array of internet enabled smart technologies to do so. Leak detection devices, EV charging stations and energy and water monitoring technologies are just a few of the smart building technologies that are only possible with a an always-on internet connection. Here too, bulk internet or managed Wi-Fi solutions are the only real way to ensure this level of connectivity to support such operations. Simply put, rental housing communities will not be able to implement many sustainability measures and technologies at the scale that we need without bulk internet or managed Wi-Fi as a backbone.

For ISPs, especially for smaller, independent providers that enable competition in the connectivity space, bulk agreements ensure a steady revenue stream because the owner of the rental community is contractually obligated to pay the bulk fee for service throughout the community. This model offers smaller ISPs three benefits:

At their core, bulk billing arrangements are pro-consumer and pro-renter and help support property operations like climate resilience and our shared, long-term goals of improving housing affordability.

Congress has effectively endorsed bulk billing. In 1992, Congress adopted 47 U.S.C. 543(d), which requires cable operators to maintain a uniform rate structure throughout a geographic area. Such a requirement could be read to prohibit bulk billing, however, so in 1996 the statute was amended to include the following language:

A ban or restriction on bulk agreements would be harmful to rental housing residents and could further exacerbate housing affordability challenges. Regulation of bulk agreements could disrupt broadband services to thousands of communities and potentially millions of broadband users. Significant regulation would almost certainly increase the price of broadband service for most of those residents and communities, by cutting or eliminating existing negotiated discounts. A ban on bulk arrangements would also jeopardize many of the new and innovative technological amenities available to residents of bulk communities.

A managed Wi-Fi model also supplies additional bandwidth to address other technological needs at a property. As part of many managed Wi-Fi contracts, a service provider will establish various wireless networks at a property to handle not only resident usage, but also guest usage and home automation purposes. Property owners can then add cutting-edge technological amenities at these properties for residents to use. These types of home automation amenities include, but are not limited to, Wi-Fi-connected smart door locks, smart thermostats, leak detection sensors and automated and voice-activated lights and climate activated blinds or shades. Such automation can contribute to resilient and sustainable design by allowing greater efficiency in energy use and other property management functions.

While managed Wi-Fi models are popular, they are also more costly and almost always require some substantial on-site construction work at existing properties. A traditional bulk-to-the-unit model is a better fit for many properties for cost and operational reasons.

Many providers are now working on ways to bridge the gaps between the traditional model and the managed Wi-Fi model. Some providers are working on new bulk technologies that would provide some of the connectivity benefits of a managed Wi-Fi model at existing properties without the costs and operational difficulties associated with a full managed Wi-Fi build-out.

Visit the website Visit acpbenefit.org for more information. File a complaint If you have billing or service issues with your internet company involving the ACP, you can file a complaint with the FCC. The FCC will serve your complaint to the internet company.

The Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) is a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) program to help low-income households pay for internet service and connected devices like a laptop or tablet. Due to a lack of ongoing funding, the ACP will stop accepting new applications and enrollments on Feb. 7, 2024.

Without additional funding from Congress, the allotted $14.2 billion to fund the ACP is projected to run out in April 2024 (this date is an estimate and may change). As a result, the FCC has begun taking steps to wind down the ACP, which means:

USAC's Lifeline Program is a federal program that offers a monthly benefit of up to $9.25 towards phone or internet services for eligible subscribers (up to $34.25 for those living on Tribal lands). A consumer can qualify for the Lifeline benefit if their income is 135% or less than the federal poverty guidelines, or if they participate in SNAP, Medicaid, or other federal programs.

There are over 100 broadband service providers serving Colorado. Use the Colorado Broadband Map to locate service providers in your area. Contact the service providers directly to confirm their service offerings.

If you find inaccurate data listed in the Colorado Broadband Map, such as speeds listed that are not available when you contact the company, use the Report Inaccurate Data form to let us know. We will use this information to investigate data discrepancies and work with the broadband providers to improve data accuracy.

If you answered yes to these questions, you may need to upgrade your service. Use this bandwidth calculator to estimate your household bandwidth needs. Keep in mind that upload speeds are important too, especially if you are using two-way video conferencing apps like Zoom, Microsoft Teams, or Google Meet.

The Colorado Broadband Office has no authority to regulate broadband service and the Colorado Public Utility Commission's authority to require local phone companies to provide advanced telecommunications services or internet services is limited by statute, thus making these services, products, and providers exempt from regulation. This means there is no official complaint process for broadband services in Colorado.

3a8082e126