Co-operative Bank information from the website, haven't seen this mentioned elswhere, so thought I'd share it. Another candidate for the Hall of Shame?

' Changes to our telephone numbers

The Co-operative Bank is changing several of the telephone numbers which you may use to contact us from 0845 to 0844 numbers.

From a BT landline, calls to the new numbers will cost no more than 5 pence per minute at all times of the day so may minimise the potential cost to you when contacting us.

This change will take place in June 2012 and we will be phasing out the old numbers over the coming months. All of the new 0844 numbers below are available to use now.

The changes include our most used telephone number, for Customer Services (08457 212 212), which is becoming 08448 44 88 44.

What is changing?

The following banking numbers are changing:
What service do you require?      What was the old number?      What is the new 0844 number?
Personal bank account enquiries      08457 212 212      08448 44 88 44
Credit card enquiries, including lost or stolen cards      0845 600 6000      08448 758 755
Debt Management - Managed Accounts      0845 600 3550      0844 844 8899
Debt Management - Collections

     0845 600 1170      0844 844 8800
How much will it cost to call the new numbers?

Calls to 0844 cost no more than 5 pence per minute from BT landlines. Other network charges may vary. Calls from outside the UK or from mobiles may be considerably more. If you are unsure of your call charges we recommend contacting your phone provider before calling us. More information about call charges
What is not changing?

You will still receive the same friendly, efficient service that you are used to from our UK-based call centres.

All other 0845 and 0800 numbers will st* ay the same. '

---

~ Edited by Dave: Thread title amended

ellemcee wrote on Jun 16^th, 2012 at 2:06pm:

Co-operative Bank information from the website, haven't seen this mentioned elswhere, so thought I'd share it. Another candidate for the Hall of Shame

Thank you very much for mentioning this. Given the ethical stance of the Co-operative Group, this is a disgrace - not least because of the dishonesty and false information.

I must address two examples from the section - How much will you charge me for phone calls to you?.

- Rather than addressing the point made in the heading, the "Service Charge" levied by the Co-operative Bank is the same for all call service providers, it makes a highly selective reference to a particular (wrongly described) tariff.

- The call costs may be correct as at 1st May 2012, however the "Unlimited Weekend Plan" has no longer been BT's most popular plan for around 12 months.

- It is noted that the figures given do not apply to "calls from outside the UK, from mobile phones or from other providers", however it fails to advise that they do not apply to other, more popular plans from BT.

This move warrants extensive criticism and the information referred to above probably breaches ASA rules.

As a supporter, and member, of the Co-operative movement, I am keen to give it a chance to respond and address these issues before I proceed with a damning media release and a formal complaint to the ASA. I will be making contact on Monday, although I will not necessary share my further thoughts and plans for action in this public forum. I accept that other members may feel differently and may wish to proceed differently.

With regards to the Co-Op Bank. If you bank with them, I URGE you to give them the feedback the so rightly deserve - http://www.co-operativebank.co.uk/servlet/Satellite/1199261362041,CFSweb/Page/CFSCtplStandard?WT.svl=copy

This is clearly another money making exercise from either the Co Op Bank or their phone supplier. Yet again at the cost of their loyal customers!

:o

Edit: There appears to be two worthwhile areas to comment on... Suggestions and Ethics! (oh the irony)

It's shocking to see them claim that 0844 may be cheaper than 0845 when several providers allow 0845 in 'inclusive' minutes but no providers allow 0844 in inclusive minutes.

If it REALLY wanted to be "ethical" on all corners it should follow Metro Bank's example and have an 03 number. https://www.metrobankonline.co.uk/Supplementary-header-links/Contact-us-/

I've split this off from the Hall of Shame, so it has its own thread.

There is a report by someone who says that they work for Co-operative Insurance Services (CIS) that it too will be switching to 0844 numbers, from 0845 numbers.

So this is perhaps part of a wider strategy by the Co-operative.

There is a piece in the Guardian about this 'Cynical' Co-op hits customers with pricier phone calls.

This change affects customers of 'smile' too:

[edit]phone - You can call us too. Here's the numbers you'll need to know:

    call your new number 08448 44 88 44 if you’ve got any general enquiries (lines are open 24/7)
    call 0800 526 149 to activate your debit card
    call 08448 758 755 if your card is lost, stolen or you suspect card fraud
    call us from abroad on +44 8448 44 88 44 (Please dial carefully)
    Minicom/ Textphone users can call 0845 608 0019[/edit]

I have sent them a suitable comment.

Quote:

08448 44 88 44 08448 758 755

I always regard the misformatting of such numbers as a feeble attempt to hide the fact these are 0844 numbers and hence the true cost of calling them:
0844 844 8844
0844 875 8755
In both of these cases they've likely paid extra for a memorable number then failed to take full advantage of it.

catj wrote on Jun 24^th, 2012 at 6:38pm:

Quote: 08448 44 88 44 08448 758 755 I always regard the misformatting of such numbers as a feeble attempt to hide the fact these are 0844 numbers and hence the true cost of calling them: 0844 844 8844 0844 875 8755 In both of these cases they've likely paid extra for a memorable number then failed to take full advantage of it.

However the whole point of an easy to remember number is that it's easy to remember... which sadly in the way you have displayed it, it's not..

For Example.. National Rail Enquries: 0845 748 4950 is not as easy to remember as: 0845 7 48 49 50 or 08457 48 49 50.

There for 0844 8 44 88 44 is easier to remember than:
0844 844 8844.

Just a thought.

They are both 0844 "zero eight double four" numbers.

One is followed by 844 "eight double four" again, then 8844 "double eight double four".

The other is followed by 875 "eight seven five" then 8755 "eight seven double five".

How easy is that?

With a passing reference to my earlier posting, may I simply endorse the comment suggesting that members of the coop and users of the banking and insurance services take every opportunity to express their views on this particular issue - and on the use of 0845 numbers in general.

Being owned by its members, this is case where pressure is likely to have a positive effect.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jun 24^th, 2012 at 9:07pm:

With a passing reference to my earlier posting, may I simply endorse the comment suggesting that members of the coop and users of the banking and insurance services take every opportunity to express their views on this particular issue - and on the use of 0845 numbers in general. Being owned by its members, this is case where pressure is likely to have a positive effect.

I could not agree more, and have already suggested my Mum who banks with them express her serious displeasure in their "underhand" tactics.

catj wrote on Jun 24^th, 2012 at 8:07pm:

They are both 0844 "zero eight double four" numbers. One is followed by 844 "eight double four" again, then 8844 "double eight double four". The other is followed by 875 "eight seven five" then 8755 "eight seven double five". How easy is that?

I prefer and find my method easier.. however IF the Co-Op was as ethical as it claimed to be, it would transfer to an 03 number which is ALSO charged at a standard cost to all users, and has NO penalty for Mobile users..

It's main number would then be: 03457 212 212

which is much easier to remember... just my 2p worth

Mangling the "code" part of the number ultimately makes non-geographic numbers in general less easy to remember.

There are currently only four commonly used 08 'business rate' ranges: 0844 / 0845 / 0870 / 0871 (while 0842, 0843, 0872 and 0873 are starting to come into use or are coming into use later).

Once you've remembered which of the four codes it is, you've just 3 + 4 digits to remember.

Breaking in a non-standard way means there are now 40 codes. It's less easy to remember long term. What was that non-standard last digit of the "code" part?

It's no coincidence that momorable numbers that are memorable when presented in the standard way are more expensive to buy than memorable numbers presented in a non-standard way.

03457 212 212  - this is an 0345 number, not an 03457 number.

0345 721 2212  certainly isn't easy to remember, but thousands of other similar numbers are memorable when presented in the standard way: 0345 721 7721 or 0345 721 7211 or 0345 712 7122 etc.

@ catj,

Indeed, I agree that the 4 digit code denotes what type of number it is, much the same as 020 denotes London, not 0207 or 0208. As London can be denoted as 020 7xxx xxxx it is perfectly readable.. however 084 numbers are in my opinion easier to read as 08xx x xxx xxx as with National Rail Enquries or indeed Co Op bank.. however we are going slightly "off topic" here..

With regards to Co Op they are clearly trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

I have just had an enraging telephone conversation with a manager in the Co-op Skelmersdale call centre. Staff there are briefed that a 'market research survey' showed that 72% of customers will find it cheaper to call the 844 rip-off numbers! Staff are unaware that the Co-op website quotes a wrong price for calling 845 from a BT landline. (BT charges 2.042p/m or 0.51p/m, not 7.95p/m as the Co-op claims.) And, as SCV has already noted, on BT's most popular plan, Anytime, calls to 845 are included 24/7.
All originating providers make it difficult to find the cost of calling these 844 rip-off numbers, but as far as a I can make out, calls to  844844 (tariff g6) on Sky are, exceptionally, marginally cheaper than calls to 845. On Virgin, calls to 845 are (I think) a rip-off 10.22 p/m, and calls to tariff PG6 are (I think) 12.41 p/m.
I surmise (but of course, do not know) that the Co-op's management has been bamboozled by what would appear to be a fraudulent sales pitch from some purveyor of 844 numbers.
Incidentally, the manager at Skelmersdale mistakenly claimed to me that calls to the honest 01695 53760 number (which still works, for the time being) do not terminate on the IVR menu. In fact, they do (again, for the time being?)

I was very pleased to see this in The Guardian today http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/jul/13/coop-pulls-back-from-0844

This says it all...

Leaked internal memo shows Co-op was set to make extra £2.4m from charging customers more for calls.

However, it's a meaningless figure - 2.4 million quid per what?

You'd probably assume "year", but it could quite easily be "month" or "week".

catj wrote on Jul 14^th, 2012 at 7:23pm:

This says it all...

I can now say that we are seeing an early example of a Service Provider starting to come to terms with what the Unbundled Tariff will mean for many of them.

I have no proof, but I believe that there are many organisations in a similar position, who are only just now starting to understand the true impact of taking what seems to be "a good deal" from their telephone company.

Ignorance is no excuse. But its removal is seen here to have had a part to play.

I hope that when the Co-op gets to grips with what it is already charging customers on 0845 numbers, then it may be the first of many who do the right thing, ahead of being compelled to do so by the implementation of the Consumer Rights Directive, or embarrassed into doing so by the Unbundled Tariff.

Well done Miles, and his anonymous accomplice. This is going down the right course.

To rub salt into the wound, their Manchester-based complaints department (with whom I have recently had dealings relating to a large increase in the interest rate on a credit card- yet more Co-op style "ethics") is now publicising an 0843 number to contact them, instead of a geographical 0161 number as before.

And the standard letter the Co-op Bank sends to those who complain about the revenue-generating 0844 numbers is full of utter nonsense: "the move ... is both fairer and offers more transparency for our customers. Call charges ... will be consistent and clear whatever time of day you call." Co-op managers have not bothered to consider the (ever more punitive) BT connection charge, and appear not to know that (1) It's hard to find what BT charges for calls to 0844CDE (and, of course, it depends on CDE) (2) Only determined experts can find what Virgin etc charge; (3) ASDA mobile's website does not know, and nor do most ASDA call centre staff if you ring and ask.

Then the last stings: "If you have new or further information ... please contact me on [you've guessed!] 0843 208 7391."

And "you may refer your complaint to the FOS". Invoking the FOS is pointless, unless you are ill-informed enough to have actually lost money by calling the Co-op's 0844 number: the FOS will only investigate if you have "lost out" as result of a bank's incompetence.

Although the Co-op briefed The Guardian that they were having a re-think, there is no evidence of it, as yet.

You could always email Barry Tootell, Chief Executive at     barry.tootell@cfs.coop     and have a moan

Until the (possibly radical) outcome of the deliberations is determined - so that evidence can be provided - members and others should continue to make representations through whatever channel is most appropriate. (Ringing an expensive telephone number is not an appropriate channel!)

Constructive suggestions and serious complaints are likely to be more effective than moaning. There is so much that one can moan about. It takes a very large amount of moaning before an organisation recognises that there is a real problem which has a solution.

sherbert wrote on Aug 27^th, 2012 at 7:23pm:

You could always email Barry Tootell, Chief Executive at     barry.tootell@cfs.coop     and have a moan

On the grounds that BOTH Co-Op Bank and Insurance have 0844 numbers I gave them "feedback" and e-mailed Co-Op customer relations advising it was against their "ethical" stance and if they wanted to charge everyone a "set rate" as opposed to using 084 numbers to use an 03 number which is a Geographic rate..

I await a reply.

::)


Edited for mistakes... never write a reply this late!  :(

They are now reviewing their 0844 numbers.
http://www.co-operativebank.co.uk/servlet/Satellite/1336458204636,CFSweb/Page/CFSCtplStandard

But they have not changed their page, oddly headed What will you (ie the Co-op) charge for phone calls?
http://www.co-operativebank.co.uk/servlet/Satellite/1193206376679,CFSweb/Page/Bank#charges
This falsely asserts that Weekend is BT's most popular plan, falsely states that calling 0845 from a BT line costs the same as geographic, and falsely states that the set-up fee 'may' apply to calls to 0844. And weirdly tells us the cost of calling mobile numbers. Are there any mobile numbers that the Co-op publicizes?
Given that - with a bit of effort - anyone can find out the costs of calling 0844 in an afternoon, why is this review taking so long? Is there some issue about the Co-op's contract with whoever sold them the 0844 numbers? (Talk talk business, it appears.)

There is no excuse for not correcting the false information about call costs.

It is indeed sad that the review is taking so long.

Readers may however see a possible positive indication in the choice of words in the statement:

Quote:

In the meantime, we will continue to provide 0845 numbers too.

This should perhaps be read as implying that 0845 numbers are being retained as a temporary measure to relieve the excessive cost of calling 0844 numbers for some callers. This can only be taken to mean that the intended outcome is for there to be neither 0844 nor 0845 numbers.

The necessary negotiations may take some time. It is perhaps unreasonable to expect an organisation to openly declare its intended outcome ahead of what it hopes to be an imminent announcement of a resolution.

It is reasonable to assume that there must be an issue (or two) to resolve with the provider. This must be obvious when a review of a significant set of number changes has to occur so swiftly after they have been introduced.

Another problem with these numbers is that they state  on their web site that you can call from abroad by putting the UK dialling code in front and leaving out the first zero. ie 0448....... BUT  you can not - I know I live in France and it is impossible to call UK 08 numbers. France Telecom have no system to recognise them because they are charged nor do mobile phone operators.
So luckily I still have their old 01..... number but imagine some poor SMILE or Co-op customer who had lost their card or it was blocked for some reason trying to telephone, I do not think that they would be happy
I have informed them of this but they have not changed this information which is not hmmmm correct.

No wonder it is taking so long, if nicholas43 is correct about the provider of the number being Talktalk Business then we have here another example of NEG/Daisy false sales antics. Incidently where did nicholas43 find this information are you sure it is correct.

This looks like their underhand sales information in the same way that GPs were sold the 0844 concept, and no GP has migrated to 03 yet. I think they will buy themselves out of their new contract and revert to Enhanced geographic numbers. When will business learn NOT to take information given by an interested party as gospel without checking with an Independant Advisor who has a clue about the Telephone Industry.

Daisy tie up their 0844 customers tighter than a spider cocoons its lunch so I wouldn't hold your breath too long or you will wind up in the Co-operative Funeral Dept.

speedy wrote on Oct 10^th, 2012 at 10:15pm:

Incidently where did nicholas43 find this information? Are you sure it is correct?

Look in here: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/numbering/s8_code.txt

or here: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/numbering/s8.xls

Scroll down to '8448 44'.

Good Evening,

I complained to Co-Op regarding the use of 0844 numbers in both the Bank and Insurance arms, I finally received this response via e-mail:

"Dear Mr XXX

  Thank you for your e-mail received on 24 August 2012 in which you raised
  concerns with our decision to change our customer facing telephone
  numbers. I am sorry that you have had cause to complain.

  We believe the move from the 0845 number is both fairer and offers more
  transparency for our customers.  Call charges to you will be consistent
  and clear whatever time of day you call as there will be no peak and off
  peak charges and calls to 0844 numbers from a BT landline will cost no
  more than 5.1p per minute. Other network charges may vary and calls from
  mobiles vary depending on the network but will be considerably more.
  Therefore, we recommend you contact your phone provider for information
  in this regard.  The 0844 numbers will be accessible from abroad by
  replacing the initial zero with the international country code for the
  UK, +44.

  The new number will be introduced gradually to all our literature that is
  sent to customers and is available in our branches. The call charges are
  also clearly displayed on our website.  Although the numbers are
  changing, all our call centres will remain in the same location.

  However, as a result of feedback received from our customers, we are
  currently undertaking a review of our telephone numbers.  We appreciate
  that many customers will benefit from our new 0844 phone number and some
  will have packages with their phone providers which include preferential
  rates for 0845 numbers.  While this review is ongoing, customers will be
  able to ring either our original 0845 or our new 0844 telephone numbers.

  I note your comment that you feel we should use 03 numbers as they are
  charged at a standard geographical rate.  I can assure that this is one
  of the options which is being discussed as part of the review process in
  place.

  I would like to assure you that we continue to offer a range of free
  channels to service your account, including our branch network, which we
  expanded last year by introducing more than 200 new places to bank, our
  online banking service and our mobile banking application.

  Please be assured that we regularly review all of our policies and
  procedures.  Feedback from our customers plays a vital part in these
  reviews and I therefore thank you for bringing your concerns to our
  attention.

  I trust my letter clarifies this matter for you and you can regard this
  as our final response. However, if you have any new or further
  information, in relation to this complaint, that you would like me to
  consider please contact me on 0843 208 7391.


  If you remain dissatisfied you may refer your complaint to the Financial
  Ombudsman Service.  You must do this within six months from the date of
  this letter.  Further information can be found in the enclosed leaflet.

  Yours sincerely"

Apologies for the length of the response,

I would be most grateful for any idea's as to a suitable reply I can give them.

Thanks in Advance.

:)

CJT-80 wrote on Oct 11^th, 2012 at 6:53pm:

However, if you have any new or further information, in relation to this complaint, that you would like me to consider please contact me on 0843 208 7391.

Ho hum  ::)

While 0844 or 0845 numbers might only be "pence per minute" to call from a landline, calls to 01, 02, and 03 numbers cost most callers nothing at all above their landline line rental cost.

From mobiles, calls to 0845 and especially 0844 and 0843 numbers have an added 'premium' that has to be paid. These calls are often 40 pence per minute from a mobile. From contract mobile phones 01, 02, and 03 numbers cost nothing at all above the mobile line rental cost.

They could avoid all this.

Point them at the Consumer Rights Directive 2011/83/EU which states they will have to change to an 01, 02 or 03 number anyway.

By quoting an 0843 number for you to call, he just doesn't get it.

Double standards.

I am a member of the National Co-op Group, but take little active interest in their affairs - they seem to be slipping in several ways these last few years.

My Bank current account accidentally went overdrawn - there is money sufficient to cover the overdraft in a savings account also with the Co-op.

They wrote to alert me of the overdraft and said if it was put in credit within a few days there would be no charges, so I transferred sufficient to cover the OD and give me a 'cushion' until next pay credit goes in to the A/C The OD  was only £25.00.

A few days later I received a letter confirming account now in credit and they will not be charging me the £40.00 penalty for an "informal overdraft request" They offered a telephone number to call with queries -08448 44 88 44.

I had a query (which is not relevant now) & looked for a cheaper number to use - 01621 829 5860 (engaged)

I checked my saved numbers on my phone and found the more familiar 08457 212 212 and used that.

After I checked the comparative call prices - with The Phone Co-op (my call provider - independent of but in a business association with The Co-op Group) the 08448 was a g11 rate call about twice the cost of an 0845 call.

I then noticed on the Bank Statement they sent today in a separate envelope the phone number shown is 08457 212 212 - so they are prompting me to use a more expensive number for my business today than the one they still normally use - I feel cheated

As you can see from the Co-Operative Bank link here: http://www.co-operativebank.co.uk/customerservices/contactus/phone-us

They advertise BOTH numbers with a small * - the advice reads: Call charges will depend on your phone provider, please consider this when deciding whether to call 0845 or 0844

Perhaps it should read: Call charges will depend on your phone provider, we had no idea what the charge was when we set the 0844 number up, but we know it's expensive!

0844 - up to 41p/min on a mobile phone, 5p to 12p/min plus ~15p connection fee from a landline (all calls include 7p/min Service Charge).

0845 - up to 41p/min on a mobile phone, 2p to 10p/min plus ~15p connection fee from a landline (all calls include 2p/min Service Charge).

A small number of people may find the 0845 number to be an "inclusive" call on their landline. For everyone else, 0844 and 0845 numbers are both expensive calls, with mere pennies between their rates. From mobile phones, the two prices are often identical.

The decision should NOT be between 0844 and 0845, but between 084 and 03. Calls to 03 numbers are "inclusive" in all call plans on mobiles and landlines, else charged at "geographic rate".

Only BT customers (and customers with other landline providers that copy BT prices) with NO inclusive minutes will find the 084 numbers to be cheaper than the 03. However, once the cap placed on BT's 084 and 087 prices by the "NTS Condition" is lifted in 2014, 084 numbers may no longer be cheaper than 03 numbers for those BT and other customers.

I agree with you Ian G,

The "need" for 08 Non-Geographical numbers is solely for a business to direct it's calls and to have a "Non Geographic/UK Wide" presence.  However that does NOT mean that we the general public should have to pay through the nose for those "facilities"

If any company has a "need" to have a Non Geographic number then they should absorb the full cost! They should provide a Geographic Rate alternative, which can be accessed from ANY UK and overseas phone.

We have got into this unfortunate mess, as Ofcom have done SO little to actually manage it.  They have simply left it to the companies supplying these numbers to the business' and the business' themselves!

I can only hope that continued efforts and complaints from members of the public including on here, and the EU Directive will stamp out and sort out this sorry mess for once and for all.

>:(

All non-geographic numbers - 03, 08 or 09 offer the same technical facilities, as do the newer "enhanced" 01 and 02 numbers. The difference is in how the provison of service is funded.

080 - fully paid for by the business so that calls are free to caller (at least that's the aim of the Ofcom proposals that these calls also be free from mobiles).
030, 033, 034, 037 - call routing paid for by the business so that caller pays only "geographic rate" or has the calls as "inclusive".
084, 087, 090, 091, 098 - caller pays Service Charge that covers the call routing costs incurred by the business with any excess being paid out as revenue-share to the business.

I agree the business should absorb the full cost. They can do this by changing to an 03 number. No need for an "alternative" number; just scrap the 084 or 087 number and move to 034 or 037. The additional cost to the business is much less than 1p/min but the saving for the caller is up to 41p/min.

Ian G wrote on Sep 15^th, 2013 at 2:05pm:

080 - fully paid for by the business so that calls are free to caller (at least that's the aim of the Ofcom proposals that these calls also be free from mobiles). 030, 033, 034, 037 - call routing paid for by the business so that caller pays only "geographic rate" or has the calls as "inclusive". 084, 087, 090, 091, 098 - caller pays Service Charge that covers the call routing costs incurred by the business with any excess being paid out as revenue-share to the business. I agree the business should absorb the full cost. They can do this by changing to an 03 number. No need for an "alternative" number; just scrap the 084 or 087 number and move to 034 or 037. The additional cost to the business is much less than 1p/min but the saving for the caller is up to 41p/min.

I am still unaware as to why the 03 numbers are charged at a per minute rate to the business or end party using the number.  Surely a better scheme would be to charge a monthly fee?! Perhaps this is one reason business' are reluctant to use these numbers and instead keep the 08 numbers and sometimes provide an 01/02 alternative.

It's just a thought.

:-?

There are deals with 20 000 incoming minutes for 50 quid per month for 03 numbers.

The payment doesn't have to be "per minute".

While 20 000 minutes sounds a lot, it's actually only about 60 calls of 10 minutes duration each day.
It also equates to about 2.5p per call or 15p/hour, so it's a minor expense.

Ian G wrote on Sep 15^th, 2013 at 3:41pm:

There are deals with 20 000 incoming minutes for 50 quid per month for 03 numbers. The payment doesn't have to be "per minute".

In which case perhaps the companies that have the NGN's need to be better informed!

The charging per minute for a service on an incoming 03 line does look odd, although it has always been in place for 080 numbers, at higher rates to also cover the cost of call origination.

Services on non-geographic numbers has been traditionally funded out of the enhanced termination fee, i.e. deducted from that to give the revenue share. When 03 numbers came along (in their present form) it was natural to retain the same system. Because there was no enhanced termination fee from which to deduct the charge, it became a simple charge. (As Ian G says, there are some who offer 03 numbers on a fixed fee basis, given a minimum number of incoming call minutes. I understand that similar arrangements apply with 0845 - i.e. free service, given a minimum number of incoming call minutes.)

When discussing a move from 084/7 to 03, we must remember that the whole of the Service Charge is lost, including that used to pay for network facilities (which becomes a charge on the user), not just the balance that is seen as a revenue share.

e.g. If someone using a 0844 g6 number (Service Charge 7p per minute) receives 4p per minute in revenue share, on moving to 03 they should expect to be billed at the rate of 3p per minute, to cover use of the 03 number and whatever other facilities are being provided. The situation is often complicated by the fact that the actual user is involved in an arrangement that includes a system and / or call centre provider as well as the network telephone service provider. The benefit to them of using a 084/7 number may be reflected only in a lower bill for telephone services than they would see on migration to 03 - the difference is the full value of the Service Charge.

(N.B. That is the basic theory and the simple arithmetic. In the real world, in specific cases, there are often other odd things happening. I was recently involved with an organisation that migrated from 0845 to 0345 and incurred no additional cost. One cannot expect that to be repeated in every case.)

I used 01618550011 successfully today to contact Co-op Bank Personal account enquiries (including Current Accounts, Savings and Loans)


08448 44 88 44 ==>> 01618550011