WISPAU makes submission to ACMA on the draft TCP Standard

WISPAU has lodged a submission with the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) on its draft Telecommunications (Consumer Protections) Industry Standard 2026.

The Standard will replace the industry-written Telecommunications Consumer Protections (TCP) Code, which the ACMA found deficient, and will be directly enforceable on every telecommunications provider in Australia.

WISPAU supports strong, enforceable consumer protections. Telecommunications services are essential, and customers deserve clear information, fair treatment and help when they’re struggling. Our concern is proportionality: whether rules designed around the largest mobile and handset retailers can work for small regional providers, and whether they deliver better outcomes for the customers those providers serve.

Why the WISP model matters

WISPAU members build and operate their own fixed wireless networks in metro, regional, rural and remote areas. A typical member has a few hundred to a few thousand services and a team of one to ten people. The owner is often also the network engineer, installer, accountant and complaints handler.
Three features of our members’ businesses shape how the draft would apply:

• Most services are month-to-month and billed in advance, so little or no credit is extended.
• Customer equipment is a roof-mounted antenna that needs a technician and a site visit to install or recover, often hours from the provider’s base.
• Many customers have no other terrestrial broadband option. The alternatives are satellite, or mobile where there’s coverage.

What we support

Much of the draft reflects what small providers already do. We support in principle:

• a human-operated contact channel (our members answer their own phones)
• clear, plain-language communication
• limits on demanding evidence of vulnerability
• a published policy for managing deceased customers’ accounts
• simple cancellation within two business days
• disconnection as a last resort, with financial hardship help offered first

Key points in our submission

• Bring back a small-provider tier. The draft treats a provider with 200 services the same as one with 29,000. The 2019 Code scaled its duties for small suppliers; the draft doesn’t. A single-person business would have to write its own assessed training, sit the assessment, document a quarterly monitoring program of itself and report on mis-selling to the ACMA each quarter. We’ve asked for defined provider tiers with scaled duties, and for the ACMA to publish templates small providers can adopt.
• Exempt service-only plans from mandatory credit checks. The draft would require a paid external credit check for many new residential connections over $300, including service-only plans where installation or a router is charged to the first bill. The consultation paper says credit assessments should apply to goods, not service-only contracts. We’ve asked the ACMA to align the draft with that, and to set any threshold at no less than $1,000, excluding installation, connection and required equipment.
•  Let customers make an informed choice. If a credit assessment suggests a product may be unaffordable, the draft would prohibit the sale. For a rural customer, that can mean refusing the only local terrestrial service. We’ve asked that providers warn the customer, offer alternatives and hardship support, and then let the customer decide.
• A shorter disconnection sequence for prepaid services. The draft requires three notices over at least 20 business days before disconnection. For services sold as paid in advance, that means a month of unpaid supply. We’ve proposed two notices over 10 business days for month-to-month services paid in advance.
• Narrow the definition of mis-selling. As drafted, a procedural slip, such as not recording a customer’s acknowledgment that they received a Critical Information Summary, counts as mis-selling and must be reported. We’ve asked that the definition focus on conduct that causes, or is likely to cause, harm to the customer.
• Make vulnerability remedies workable. We support remedies for customers whose decision-making was impaired at the time of sale. We’ve asked for clear tests, and for refunds to reflect equipment returned in good working order, installation costs and the cost of recovering a roof-mounted antenna.
• Give small providers time to implement. Many obligations depend on billing and CRM platforms that members don’t control. We’ve asked for 12 months from commencement for small providers, starting once undefined terms such as “affordability indicators” are settled.

Built for regional realities

The submission also explains how parts of the draft play out outside the cities:

• Restoring services. Restoring a service within two business days isn’t always possible when a technician must drive several hours to reinstall equipment.
• Disaster protections. Protection during natural disasters is tied to the customer’s billing address. For many rural customers that’s a PO Box in town, not the property that’s flooded or cut off. We’ve asked for the service address to be used.
• Site surveys. Fixed wireless is often sold before a site survey confirms line of sight. A failed survey shouldn’t be treated as mis-selling when the customer was told the sale depended on it.
• Voice and emergency calls. The draft assumes a suspended service still carries emergency calls. Many fixed wireless services are data-only, and the provider can’t keep another company’s VoIP service working.

What happens next

The ACMA will consider submissions before finalising the Standard.

WISPAU has offered to take part in further targeted consultation and supports a co-design process that includes small providers.

Thank you to the members who shared their experience and examples for this submission.

You can read the full WISPAU submission here and the ACMA’s consultation paper here.