Scroll down to the very bottom of any Public Mobile forum page. Near the bottom right corner is a Privacy & Legal link.
It provides links to Service Terms. This is your contract with Public Mobile, you have already "agreed" and "accepted" these terms if you are a Public Mobile subscriber. (Indeed, you have already "agreed" and "accepted" that PM can change these terms at any time with 30-days notice, and that you already "agree" or "accept" these changed terms, lol, but that's another matter entirely.)
It provides links to the CRTC and the CCTS.
The CRTC Wireless Code defines rights for wireless consumers and regulations for wireless operators. The Wireless Code is a complex multifaceted legal-technical-business document spread all over the CRTC websites, but they offer a simplified "plain-language" version for consumer reference.
The CCTS provides ancillary services, including arbitration of customer complaints, this is the regulatory authority for policing and enforcing the Wireless Code. This is where consumers can complain.
The "proper" procedure is for the consumer to communicate with the operator (Public Mobile), to attempt to negotiate dispute resolution, and to communicate that they will file a complaint for CCTS arbitration if no resolution is possible. This channel allows consumers to challenge or defy the operator, even impose demands and scream for justice and decree ultimatums - but the CCTS will dismiss any claims which bypass their procedure or which aren't (in their legal opinion) "reasonably" relevant to the Service Terms or Wireless Code. To my knowledge there is no appeal process, but I'm sure one could always take the CCTS itself to court if so inclined.
The recent PM-Koodo promo scandal was addressed by the CCTS here. They specifically note that en masse online complaints (through social media, etc) generated an unusually large volume of complaints but they circumvented "proper" procedures - they would normally be dismissed by the CTSS because they were not filled in correctly, they would normally be rejected by the carrier because no two-way opportunity for resolution was ever offered by the customers, etc. While the CCTS doesn't explicitly say it, they strongly imply that consumers will lose their "voice" in future online complaint campaigns of this sort. It's a lot of extra work for them, they have to follow up every complaint even though PM already backed down so there's no longer any "dispute" for them to arbitrate, it's their job but it doesn't mean they're going to take kindly to mass media clicking making their job harder in the future.
...already answered the moderator that nothing helped?
