This initiative aims to combat monopolistic practices in internet service provision. Residents can now file complaints if they encounter difficulties connecting alternative internet service providers.
The Gosuslugi portal is now accepting complaints regarding internet service providers (ISPs) being denied access to multi-apartment buildings. The Ministry of Digital Development announced this new feature, marking it as another step in the fight against monopolistic ISPs.
Residents can find the complaint form on the Gosuslugi platform`s feedback section. It is specifically titled “Problems with Internet Provider Access to Multi-Apartment Buildings.” While the form states a review period of up to seven days, the Ministry of Digital Development itself indicates the process could take up to 30 days. Users can attach supporting documents, such as correspondence with the management company or responses from relevant agencies and organizations. Complaints will be processed and forwarded to the prosecutor`s office. Marianna, a resident of PIK`s “Novokhokhlovskaya, 15” residential complex, intends to file a complaint:
“Specifically, in our PIK residential complex, no one has been allowed in yet, but in our home chat, photos from another complex were shared, and there are rumors that MGTS is already laying fiber optics there, though it`s still unclear, many are doubtful. The home chat also shared the news that you can complain on Gosuslugi. I think I will also submit an application; it won`t hurt. And we will continue to monitor the situation because our provider is unpredictable, unfortunately. For some people, it works well, but there are big problems with payment, logging into the personal account, reaching customer service, and for many, it constantly disconnects.”
This whole issue began with Lovit, an ISP part of the PIK group. In the spring of this year, tens of thousands of subscribers in PIK`s residential complexes were without internet for several days due to a large-scale cyberattack. As Lovit was effectively a monopolistic provider, residents had no alternative. Many major developers operate under a “one residential complex – one provider” scheme, leading to similar complaints not only from PIK residents but also from those in “Samolet,” “Granel,” and “Donstroy” complexes.
Moreover, while management companies verbally express no objection to other providers, their access faces various difficulties, explains Mikhail Zadorozhny, a Business FM columnist.
Business FM Columnist
“I own an apartment in Moscow`s Samolet residential complex; almost three years have passed, and we still only have one provider, the one we got from the developer. Our whole family uses one mobile operator, and of course, we would like internet from that same operator. I call the operator, and they say: `There is no technical possibility to provide internet in your building.` I go to the Samolet management company, and they say: `Please, we are open to cooperation; if you want, invite other providers.` So, we invite them, but they don`t come. And in unofficial conversations, we are told that, well, the building project itself is designed in such a way that there`s nowhere to lay cables for other providers; the cable channel is only designed for one provider. So, we still live with the same provider. We don`t have any particular complaints about them, but we would still like to have a choice.”
In reality, according to regulations, all modern residential complexes are equipped with spacious cable ducts. One such duct can accommodate at least four to five cables, precisely to ensure access for various providers, notes Eldar Murtazin, leading analyst at Mobile Research Group.
Leading Analyst at Mobile Research Group
“I`ll give a simple example: a multi-apartment building in New Moscow, one provider, the cost of unlimited internet for an apartment, 100 Mbps, is 4,000 rubles. This is five to six times higher than similar services available on the market. Technically, any modern building today has all the necessary communications to accommodate three providers. Indeed, a provider must comply with technical requirements, lay cables through existing communications, not damage common property, and so on. This is indeed determined by the management company. But operators are ready to comply with these conditions. The problem is that they are simply not allowed into these buildings under fabricated pretexts.”
Earlier, the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) joined the fight against monopolistic providers. According to the service`s assessment, the developer PIK indeed prevented competing providers from entering its residential complexes.
The mass complaints from Lovit provider`s clients served as the impetus for these checks. Subsequently, the Ministry of Digital Development expressed support for FAS and is now discussing the introduction of fines for management companies. Concurrently, it is analyzing the practical application of a law passed last year regarding provider access to multi-apartment buildings. The Ministry of Digital Development acknowledges that the law is not fully effective, and problems persist.
Rupert Blackwood 
Clement Ashworth