The CRTC has told Bell to stop selling locked cellphones after determining the company violated the national Wireless Code.
In a letter dated November 28, 2025, the regulator said Bell and its flanker brand Virgin Plus began selling devices locked for up to 60 days, a move Bell said was necessary due to rising crime at retail stores.
The Commission disagreed, saying Bell had not shown that locking devices was effective or that it had explored other options that comply with the Wireless Code. Under existing rules, service providers must supply devices unlocked “at or before the time of sale,” writes Marc Morin, Secretary General and Executive Vice-President at the CRTC, in the letter addressed to Philippe Gauvin, Assistant General Counsel, Bell Canada.
Bell argued that the Code does not specify the exact moment unlocking must occur, but the CRTC said both the Code and its related policy clearly require unlocked devices at the point of sale.
The CRTC ordered Bell to immediately stop selling locked phones, unlock any devices still restricted because of this practice at no charge, and notify affected customers. The regulator also denied Bell’s request for temporary approval of locked-device sales as well as its request to revisit the Code.
Bell must now report to the CRTC by January 9, 2026, detailing how many locked phones it sold since April 22, how many customers requested unlocking, how long it took to unlock each device, and how many complaints were filed about the issue.
The Commission noted Bell only informed the regulator days before putting the policy in place and said companies seeking relief from obligations should engage the CRTC earlier.
Starting in December 2017, the CRTC banned locked cellphones and unlocking fees for existing phones. Criminals know if unlocked iPhones are sitting idle in inventory, smash and grabs become easier and easier.
Update: A Bell spokesperson told iPhone in Canada the following statement in an email: “We’re carefully reviewing the CRTC’s letter to determine our next steps and will respond to the CRTC by their deadline of January 9. Our priority remains protecting our employees and customers from rising criminal activity and fraud targeting wireless devices.”
Want to see more of our stories on Google?
P.S. Want to keep this site truly independent? Support us by buying us a beer, treating us to a coffee, or shopping through Amazon here. Links in this post are affiliate links, so we earn a tiny commission at no charge to you. Thanks for supporting independent Canadian media!
Bell gonna Bell
Telus is doing the exact same 60 day lock, hope they get hit next
Alongside their sister brand, Koodo.
Omg big companies always trueing to get ahead while screwing the people.
I'm against carrier locked phones, and I'm not affiliated with any carrier, but a temporary lock does make rational sense for these expensive $1000+ phones.
First is the smash and grab. Having the phone carrier locked discourages theft. It's less attractive to a common thief if the phone is just going to be blacklisted while locked on the network.
The other is identity fraud. Basically the same thing here as above. The goal is to make a quick buck, they want to offload the product as soon as possible. Harder to get rid of a locked/blacklisted phone.
The timeline also makes sense. Shortly after the first bill (plus some buffer) you're going to know if it was a fraud activation or not when the payment doesn't come in.
But even so, they still need to go through the proper channels like the CRTC for approval before implementing it.
It sounds like an excuse to me. There are ways to blacklist devices without carrier locking for 60 days.
Or… hear me out: unlock the phone at time of purchase. That way you're not having it sit in the store or whatever unlocked, which would have the desired effect. Once it's sold it's no longer bell issue as it is handed to a customer. If it is being shipped to customer then you can easily have customer call in or come to store at any point to unlock the phone. There's literally no need for the 60 day lock. What does locking it for an extra 60 days do that unlocking it when it's handed over to a customer doesn't? Why 60, why not 30, or 10, or 1? What's special about 60 days?
all of this is just a dumb excuse. Bestbuy has unlocked phones in their stores all the time. In cast majority of places like Europe devices are sold unlocked with no issues. Sometimes carriers do stuff like sell the device then provide a link where they can unlock the device at any time, again that'll have the effect of deterring theft from stores but letting ppl unlock phone from day 1 easily
Bell also illegally sends door to door sales people, and only hires foreigners.