i HAVE READ LOT OF THE POST HERE. But view that yourselves have been coming from the wrong angle.
I have carried out a 6 year investigation in to the 0845, 0870 number. The issue is not about consultation as I informed OFCOM 3 years ago but EU Law. OFCOM cannot and does not have system which states or allows 198 providers to state the price of the call before the call commences- it tries to get away with 5p/min from BT line or 10p/min from BT line on only a few traders who try to state the price, however this is not the same as when the call commences (that is a free caller to consumer announcement stating the price of the call).  This does not comply with the law if you have a NTL line or one from 198 other provider. So there can be no clarity. The other fact is that theses numbers 0845 and 0870 numbers are a Premium rate number - not because I say so but the EU Commission says so. ISTICS were not allowed to deal with 0845 and 0870 by OFCOM. ISTICS is told what to deal with by OFCOM. The only solution to stop this shamble is to get rid of 0845, 0870 number - the question has to be asked - why do company’s have to have these numbers? The answer is GREED - one can phone India or China for 0.02p min but pay 10p/min when they have a landline so that you as a consumer make a profit for them (by payback). a 60 min call generates £6.00 x 3 hours £18 x million consumers £18 million x 365 days £600 million approx- this is the scam - aided and abetted by the UK regulator - failing to act even when told that companies fail to state the price of that call before the call commences or misleading consumer when they ask that it is cost of a "local call rate" - all in breach of EU law.

 Firstly _ i asked the EU Commission if these numbers were Premium rate number. The Commission agreed with me. OFCOM have been dealing with in breach of various legislation. As a Premium rate number OFCOM should have treated it as such- instead OFCOM wanted to disguise it as first as a "non-geo" number then "lo-call " number and it used other disguises. The fact is a "spade is a spade" what ever you want to call it. The EC Commission called it a Premium Rate number. Thus the consumer is protected by various EU legislation. The Misleading Advertising Directive which will be replaced by UNFAIR CONSUMER DIRECTIVE – tha the trader must state "the cost of the call before the call commences, and failure to do so or mislead consumer that it is a cost of a normal call when it is not is in breach of the Directive".  Thus all those traders that failed to state the price of the call before and all those traders who breach mislead are in breach of the law.

 1. OFCOM as the regulator failed to deal with traders who breached EU LAW - by failing to state the price of the call before the call commence. The argued it would cost £100 million. I argued that it cost consumers £600 million on 3 hours x 10p min x 60min x 3 hours = £18 x million consumers x 365 day = £600Million approx

2. OFCOM should have place the number as Premium rate number - that’s what it is - the EC Commission agrees.

3. OFCOM has failed to deal with those in breach of EU Law. TESCO have changed all stores to 0845, Abbey, Halifax, Share dealers have all got these number s but no price and no other number.  

Thus each consumer as I did via MEP must take the matter to EU Commissioner and raise the above points and about OFCOM failure. The MEP must ask what the EU Commission and how he will deal with OFCOM and buinessiness in breach of EU law and the Premium Rate numbers and anti Consumer practices eg charging consumers 10p/min without choice and with out telling them the cost of the call BEFORE The call commence, and misleading consumer - that is "cost of a local rate call".  

Together with MEP's, MP  and consumers this practice must stop - but the biggest culprit is OFCOM. OFCOM should be fined and those companies, eg Tesco, Abbey, Halifax etc should be fined for breaching EU Law - but OFCOM has failed to do this or mention this. Next the OFT must be informed of anti consumer practices and breach of EU Law, as must Alistair Darling written to at the DTI  You may write to me at my email address.

Sorry about any spelling mistake as the content is more important  

Bobby
Back to top

Hi Bobbyboy.  You make some good points, especially about EU legislation.  If you can, will you split your post up into paragraphs so that your argument is better followed.  Can you include some EU directive reference numbers.  On 6 May 06 in “Ofcom review of UK telephone numbering plan” I made the following observation in respect of EU law.

“As you may know, 70 to 80% (80% according to the German Government) of our laws now originate from the EU. [Added Sep 11: For example, the past few week alone has seen Royal Mail increase postage charges for larger size items - this flows from an EU directive.  So does the introduction of under 12 child seats in cars.] To hide the fact that legislation comes from the EU, the founders of the EU ( then the ECC) devised a cunning plan. The EU bureaucracy issues a Directive. The (EU parliament has little function in the process, and do not vote for laws as we in the UK know.) Directives then have to be “implemented” by member states by a given date. The Directive is implemented by each member state, by it enacting primary legislation (ie Telecommunications Act ) and/or secondary legislation (Statutory Instruments) and putting in place a regulatory framework as necessary (such as Ofcom).

Each member state has no choice and has to fully implemented a EU Directive unless it has been granted a derogation by the EU. The Directive is then enforced in the normal way through the courts of member states. The Directive has superiority over any member state law. If a member state fails to fully implement a Directive, citizens of the member state can force, in effect, their own government (eg Department of Trade) or regulatory body (eg Ofcom) to properly implement a Directive by taking that government department or regulatory body to its own courts - in our case the normal UK civil courts - County Court (including Small Claims, for claims under £5,000) or High Court for claims over £50,000.

I am not in favour of the above undemocratic process, but that is the law, and citizens can use it, if they so wish.

I understand that the EU has issued a Directive, part of which mentions the requirement for “number transparency”. Ofcom’s own published evidence shows that UK citizens are confused by 087x and 084x telephone numbers and the evidence clearly shows that the current numbering scheme is far from transparent. Ofcom’s proposals, if implemented, are also far from transparent, and in some cases make the matter worse.

If Ofcom put in place its proposals, I feel that they will have failed to properly implement the EU Directive on the matter of number transparency and are susceptible to be taken to the UK civil courts by any person who feels aggrieved and can show that they have suffered a loss. The UK courts can not force Ofcom to properly implement an EU Directive, but can award damages against Ofcom.

If Ofcom do take the fully transparent route of eventually putting all revenue sharing numbers in the designated “09" category, then I would argue that they have then properly implemented the EU Directive.”

Thank you for your reply  KK:

The Commission was asked on whether he was aware of 0845 and 0870 and charging a Premium rate such as banks..  - he wrote back "The Commission is aware that Premium nubers are being promoted for calling banks and other services."

Firstly - there is nothing in Law stopping Traders (eg Tesco, Halifax, Abbey etc ) having these Premium rate lines but this does not mean the Consumer is not potected by EU Legislation. The consumer must be informed BEFORE making a call to a premium rate line.  This is what they fail to do.

The Directives are Misleading Advertising Directive (84/450/EEC) which will be replaced by the Unfair Consumer Directive as regards to buiness to consumer which requires price information, banning misleading, or unfair practices. My view forcing consumers to having to telephone a Premium rate number is an Unfair practice - especialy where every company that has a Premium rate line (0845, 0870) has a Land Line and that land line can be routed same as the 0845, 0870 numbers.

UNder the  MA Directive the failure to disclose BEFOREHAND the cost of the Premium Rate calls, or misleading consumbers to beliving that they are normal rate numbers when they not, constitute a misleading practice.

Thus since I and many other Consumers have told OFCOM about this breach why has OFCOM failed to deal with it?  I have written to them and they have failed as of yet to respond to this issues: That Tesco, Abbey, Halifax on their letters do not state the cost of the calls NOR when you make the call.  The greedist  of the greed got more greedy while OFCOM sat eating the pie.  But on the serious side they have failed. I have written to OFCOM since about 2003. all they come back is "consultation". - which they fail to mention what I have put to them, their failures and what action they have taken or will take with those breaching EU Legislation or s1 of Misrep. Act . You have noted they have never dealt with theses issues - while you as the consumber are being ripped off.

You mention Legal Action - do what I have done - I have written letter before court action - where I have been told the "cost is that of a local call", ( I also recorded the call) and on my bill charged 6p or 10p/min. under breach of s1 Misrep Act. I charged £14.00 a letter plus postage.  The offenders have paid up. I have recently written to Tescos (lets wait and see)

Other Directives which may be use full - Distance Selling Directive, Unversal Service Directive which requires Member States to comply with.

The question is:
1      why did OFCOM disguise these premium Rate number 0845, 0870?
2.      Who at OFCOM decided to change from local call rate and national rate some 6 years ago to 6p/min and 10p/min at OFCOM?
3. Why those who want companies to have 0845, and 0870 brag about the fact - how much you can make from incoming calls - thus what did OFCOM, OFT and your local Trading Standards do about it?

My solution is ask OFCOM these question and ask your MEP to ask the Commisssion. This is the simplest way and the cheapest way - ask your MEP to ask the EU COMMISSIONER. Then push this with your local MP and what he proposes to do. Its a free service. Alternative take those others to Court like I do and wack on the charges in breach of MA Directive and s1 Misrepresentation Act.

Hope this helps

Bobby

~ Edit by Dave: Highlighting added

Bobbyboy wrote on Sep 11^th, 2006 at 4:34pm:

The Directives are Misleading Advertising Directive (84/450/EEC) which will be replaced by the Unfair Consumer Directive as regards to business to consumer which requires price information, banning misleading, or unfair practices. My view forcing consumers to having to telephone a Premium rate number is an Unfair practice - especially where every company that has a Premium rate line (0845, 0870) has a Land Line and that land line can be routed same as the 0845, 0870 numbers. Under the  MA Directive the failure to disclose BEFOREHAND the cost of the Premium Rate calls, or misleading consumers to believing that they are normal rate numbers when they not, constitute a misleading practice. Thus since I and many other Consumers have told OFCOM about this breach why has OFCOM failed to deal with it?  I have written to them and they have failed as of yet to respond to this issues: That Tesco, Abbey, Halifax on their letters do not state the cost of the calls NOR when you make the call.  The greedist  of the greed got more greedy while OFCOM sat eating the pie.  But on the serious side they have failed. I have written to OFCOM since about 2003. all they come back is "consultation". - which they fail to mention what I have put to them, their failures and what action they have taken or will take with those breaching EU Legislation or s1 of Misrep. Act . You have noted they have never dealt with theses issues - while you as the consumber are being ripped off. The question is: 1      why did OFCOM disguise these premium Rate number 0845, 0870? 2.      Who at OFCOM decided to change from local call rate and national rate some 6 years ago to 6p/min and 10p/min at OFCOM? 3. Why those who want companies to have 0845, and 0870 brag about the fact - how much you can make from incoming calls - thus what did OFCOM, OFT and your local Trading Standards do about it? My solution is ask OFCOM these question and ask your MEP to ask the Commission. This is the simplest way and the cheapest way - ask your MEP to ask the EU COMMISSIONER. Then push this with your local MP and what he proposes to do. Its a free service. Alternative take those others to Court like I do and whack on the charges in breach of MA Directive and s1 Misrepresentation Act. Hope this helps

Hi Bobby,

I find your posts very interesting and extremely well informed and thought out.  I too have recently been thinking about the EU Commission route having reached the conclusion that there is actually a conspiracy between the New Labour government (who were instrumental in allowing the disgraceful growth of these numbers into the public sector at both the BBC and at the DVLA who are amongst the most aggressive offenders in consistently having always described these numbers as National Rate) and the top level Ofcom management which they sign off on the appointment of.  Even though the official BBC position has changed to now saying they are up to 8p per minute on their phone in numbers even that is a lie as the numbers can cost up to 35p per minute to call from many uk Pay As You Go mobile phones and also excluded from inclusive calling plans which many customers are unaware of.

I have tried presenting well reasoned responses to several Ofcom consultations and from the fact that they have now incredibly come up with using the 08 prefix for Freephone, Premium Rate and National Rate calls without compulsory call price announcements it is clear that they just think they can get away with anything no matter how blatantly misleading and likely to leave the customer making the wrong assumptions about call costs.

Your post inspires me to take this up with my one of my three Conservative MEPs - Dan Hannan - who also writes for the Daily Telegraph and is one of the better and more active MEPs in general and quite interested in competition matters.

I think the key point you make so forcefully is that we are totally wasting our time with Ofcom and its predecessor OFTEL because Ofcom are the problem having deliberately all the way gone along with trying to pretend these 084/7 numbers were not like other premium rate numbers regulated by ICSTIS for which proper price disclosure is required.  Now they try to further confuser matters by allowing 0871 to become ICSTIS controlled instead of insisting that all 0845 and 0844 and 0871 numbers must change to start 09 so everyone recognises them as premium rate.  Instead they want 0870 as National rate and 0871 as Premium Rate and expect the public to understand the difference.  Surely only a commercial scammer would have the audacity to come up with such a proposal.  In my opinion all 0870 numbers and 0845 numbers should change to 03 and only be charged at normal geographic prices and all 0844 and 0871 numbers should move to 09 so people know they are premium rate.  This leaves 08 only used for Freephone numbers as it should be.

You are so right that the whole scam depends on people not knowing what they are paying for using a service beforehand and also on there being two prices for customers calling the same service at the same time of day but most customers not being made aware of the existence of the cheaper calling price.

I agree that this can probably now only be dealt with by the European Commission but as you know they take a long time to act investigate although no longer than the unspeakably useless regulator Ofcom.

Hi Geo Man

My point is a very simple one held by the EU Commission - the EU Commission was asked - that was he aware that banks and others were using 0845 and 0870 numbers at charging premium rate. The commissioner agreed.

He then went on to state that the cost of these calls "must be stated before the call begins, "or to mislead the consumer that it is a price of a normal call - when it is not is in breach of the Directive".

It is my view that the Regulator has failed to take action against all - ie banks such as Natwest, Abbey, Halifax, Tesco who on their letter heads only give 0845/0870 numbers, do not state the price, and when telephoning state that they are the "costs of a local call". These are the breaches of EU Legislation.

SO WHAT IS THE WAY FORWARD:
1. Write to The CE  Steven Carter at OFCOM - and dont be put of that he will not write back but a Jackie Caspery prob. will. She tends to says diffrent things in diffrent letters and makes very little sense.
* ask what measures OFCOM have taken against those traders/Businesses that have only 0845 or 0870 on their letter heads and do not state the price of the call or at all.  Please can supply the evidence within 7 days.
·      Secondly why this was not put in the consultation
·      When was OFCOM first informed that businesses  using 0845 or 0870 numbers failed to give price information before the call commenced ?
·      What action did OFCOM take? Provide dates, time and supporting evidence.
·      OFCOM was informed that the EU Commission views the 0845 and 0870 number as Premium rate numbers why has OFCOM not done the same?
·      Why did OFCOM take the 0845/0870 number and turned from local rate to Premium rate ?
·      OFCOM was informed suppliers of 0845 and 0870 lines to businesses promote how much they can make out of the consumer for incoming calls. Please can OFCOM supply evidence with dates, time and who with, what action it took to stop this practice
·      Can OFCOM supply evidence with dates, time and who with, what action it took to stop businesses that failed to tell customers the price of the call beforehand?  If it did not please state why not?
·      OFCOM claimed recently that it would cost businesses £100 m to give information to consumers. If a call cost 10p/min x 6 hours =£36. x million consumers calling x 365 days cost  =  £1.3 billion/year on 6 hours a day.  Is it not clear that OFCOM has  aided businesses to profit out of consumers in an unfair, unjust practice? Please state why this was not mentioned in any consultation
·      Why does business need 0845 and 0870 when OFCOM has clearly shown it cannot manage the pricing, and in 3 years businesses have done away with land line numbers and failed to state the price of the call or mislead customers to the price of these calls (and complaints have risen). Please supply all information relating to this matter and what actions and measure that OFCOM took to stamp out this practice and to stop consumers being ripped of?
·      Please explain why these business need 0845 /0870 in the first place when ALL these businesses had a land line number?  Is it not for that fact that they profiteering at the consumers expense.
·      Does OFCOM agree that there should be a CONSUMER WARNING  and Health Warning when telephoning 0845 and 0870 numbers “call this numbers will not hurt your wallet but be at your expenses while the owner of this line laughs all the way to the bank”.?
In regards to your MEP :  Ask him to get in touch with Liz Lynn’s MEP for Stratford Upon Avon  and with Chris in that office. Also not a question to the EU Commission has to be answered with I think it was 6 weeks.  The pressure the Commission is put under the betters.

You can also write to Sue Cook Director (Consumer)  at the OFT. I have started an investigation there - the more that write the better. Mention that those provide the 0845/0870 promote howmuch they can make out of incoming calls - that is at the consumers expense.
mention that there is no need to have these numbers charging 6p and 10 p /min
and that on 6 hours a day a million consumers calling is costing £1.3 billion approx and this matter should be referred to the EU Commissioner.
Also the failure of OFCOM - first to call 0845/0870 numbers Premium, numbers, 2. to take action against those operating these lines to not comply with EU Law. 3 The anti-consumer, unfair, restrictive practice forcing UK consumers to pay 6p and 10 p min.  4 That in 3 years OFCOM have demonstrated that they can not regulate nor give the price to these lines before the call commence. That there 198 Telecom providers and they are charged different the BT. for example mobiles 35p min.  Thus it is no good giving 10p /min from BT line if your call is NOT from a BT  line.

My Last point which I have already made - is that there is no need for these greedy business to have 0845/0870 numbers in the first place. For example Tesco changed all their land lines to 0845 so you as the consumber can generate them money -  

The more that write to MEP, MP, OFT the better.  It might be worth looking at the Regulator failed in its duty to regulate and asking the MEP and MP to look into this and supporting an anti-consumer practice.

Bobby ;)

Bobbyboy wrote on Sep 11^th, 2006 at 2:11pm:

... OFCOM cannot and does not have system which states or allows 198 providers to state the price of the call before the call commences- it tries to get away with 5p/min from BT line or 10p/min from BT line on only a few traders who try to state the price, however this is not the same as when the call commences (that is a free caller to consumer announcement stating the price of the call).  This does not comply with the law if you have a NTL line or one from 198 other provider. So there can be no clarity. ...

The situation is different in the US, where all premium rate numbers cost the same from all providers. Thus, the companies operating them can quote prices and they will be what the caller will pay. The regulation regarding the policing of these numbers is also much better than here; well it couldn't be much worse could it??! There is a thread on this here.

Trading Standards' responses to Ofcom's consultations suggest that it's actually best for service providers to give no pricing information as giving incorrect pricing information is breaking the law. But from what you've said, giving no information is breaking EU law. So, legally speaking, even those companies operating 09 services can't win, can they?


Bobbyboy wrote on Sep 11^th, 2006 at 2:11pm:

... The other fact is that theses numbers 0845 and 0870 numbers are a Premium rate number - not because I say so but the EU Commission says so. ...

So how come the EU doesn't take appropriate action? Or is it up to citizens to take action? Or do we have to wait for the EU Commission to carry out an investigation?


Bobbyboy wrote on Sep 11^th, 2006 at 2:11pm:

... The Misleading Advertising Directive which will be replaced by UNFAIR CONSUMER DIRECTIVE – tha the trader must state "the cost of the call before the call commences, and failure to do so or mislead consumer that it is a cost of a normal call when it is not is in breach of the Directive".  Thus all those traders that failed to state the price of the call before and all those traders who breach mislead are in breach of the law.

So even those operating on 09 numbers, which are labelled as "premium rate" are also breaking the law by only giving out prices from a BT landline?


kk wrote on Sep 11^th, 2006 at 3:53pm:

I am not in favour of the above undemocratic process, but that is the law, and citizens can use it, if they so wish.

Thanks for the explanation. Seems crazy to me too.

So the EU decides, in principal, what the law will be and then pass the buck to the member states to write it! If they don't write (implement) it correctly (according to the EU's definition), then citizens can take the government department to court.

Ofcom, throughout its consultations talks about value-added services. That is that the caller is paying for a service. On the subject of 0844 and 0871 numbers, which are charged at a hotchpotch of different rates, it thinks that these different rates will allow price competition. Of course, this cannot be the case when [accurate] pricing information consists of long lists of number prefixes.

I think that emphasis needs to be put on this when putting the issues of these phone numbers to the EU and our MEPs.

Hi Dave

Thanks for your comment: In my 6 year investigation I have only dealt with 0845 and 0870 numbers because the consumer in the last 3-4 years have been mislead to being told that they are a "local rate number". And secondley because the the Regulator OFCOM has failed to admit that they are Premium Rate numbers, disguising them as "non-geographical" or "lo-call" rate while the consumer has been scammed out of money to profit the buinesses.  Thirdly that the Regulator has done nothing nor taken any action against businesses for misleading consumers or failing to tell them the cost of these Premium Rate numbers.  fourthly none of these points have ever been mentioned by OFCOM, by Steve Carter CE, or to what action that OFCOM has ever taken. Fifthly if they then or why they failed to tell the OFT or others.

Concerning most of all is the growth of these numbers, and businesses replacing land line numbers to profit from consumers for no other reason out of greed.

In regards to value added service - that is new to me you need to go back to OFCOM and ask "what Value added service - what is the value added service that is supposed to have been given?  Tesco had land line numbers and changed all to 0845 - I see no value added service, nor with Barclays, Abbey, Halifax and I could go on.
I have given calculation how on a 6 hour day it would cost the consumer £1.3 billion that it should not.  Yourself have told stories how it takes business longer to deal with 0845, 0870 lines - the longer you the consumer are on the phone the more money they make. As I have mentioned what is being promoted for businesses to have - is an 0845 or 0870 so that they can make money, or be with them to make more money per minute per incoming call.

In regards to Trading Standards - I would put to them about their failure to act in regards to anti-consumer law and unfair consumer practice.  Ask what they have or what action they have taken to buineses who faile to :
1. Advertise the Price of the call beforehand in accordance with the Misleading Advertising Directive and Unfair Consumer Directive.
2.  what action was taken against buinesses that gave misleading price information which is in breach of s1 Mis rep Act and MA Directive
3. whether they have referred the matter to Sue Cook at OFT
4. if they have not done so why not?

You metion the EU Commissioner - I took the question as to the EU Commissioner sview on 0845 and 0870 number and if they were a Premium number - thus that they pricing should be dealt with them accordingly.  I have done that. I view that was a major mile stone it showed that OFCOM was dealing with 0845 or 0870 numbers as so - thus them calling it non-geographical or  what ever the fact remains a  spade is a spade.  This leads to what has OFCOM done about it? What action OFCOM took as the Regulator for those businesses that failed to state the price before the call or mislead consumers  to the cost of that call. It is for yourself to keep writing to OFCOM and ask why for 3 years they have done nothing - failed to mentione this in consultations, and that they do furbish with evidence, dates, time and names and when they did if they did at all. If they did not why did they not do so?

Under the Universal Service Directive (2005/22/EC) that is part of the regulatory framework for electronic commuincation requires Member states to ensure transparent and up-to date information on applicable prices and traffs of pubicly avilable telephone services to consumers - this applies to Premium rate number such as 0845 and 0870 numbers. Thus this is why it was important that 0845 and 0870 were agreed that they are Premium rate numbers. They charge over and above  a normal number. It is my view that it is irrelvamt that they charge a "value added service" which OFCOM wants consumers to belive. Tesco when changed as, Barclays, Abbey, Halifax, to 0870 or 0845 have added no value - in fact they take longer, phones are put down on customers, or made to all other 0870 or 0845 numbers without stating the cost beforehand or at all, and often mislead the consumer to believe that the cost of that call is that of a normal number.

The best way is get in touch with your MEP and write to him or her to put a question to the EU Commission - for example ask is he aware that business in the UK fail to stae the price of 0845 0870 before and also mislead consumers and what action he will take and what action he proposes to take against OFCOM for failing to act.

Ask that MEP to contact Chris at Liz Lynns Office MEP at Straford Upon Avon.  Just keep in mind that buinesses can have 0845, 0870 but they must state the price before hand, or failure to so or mislead consumers is breach of Directives.

The more consumers know the price of 0845 and 0870 and that they are being charged say 6p/min and 10p/min the more effective I believe it will become. At the moment consumers do not know and buinesses get away with it while they profit. there should be a free pre-announcement before the call begins of the price per minute of that call.The ASA adapted my idea and I am told recommended (can some one get back to me on this) - but I have not see it myself. When writing to MEP's please ask that you want this. It will stop or make buinesses think on this scam.

8-) Together if we write to our MEPs the more the EU Commissioner gets involved the more the issue has to be deal

Bobbyboy wrote on Sep 14^th, 2006 at 6:20pm:

Concerning most of all is the growth of these numbers, and businesses replacing land line numbers to profit from consumers for no other reason out of greed.

It's difficult to get an idea of how much companies actually benefit because they never want to enter into such discussions. Whether they are paid directly or not is irrelevant; they are getting services paid for by the caller. Hence, they are saving as they don't pay for the NTS.


Quote:

In regards to value added service - that is new to me - what is the value added service that is supposed to have been given?  Tesco had land line numbers and changed all to 0845 - I see no value added service, nor with Barclays, Abbey, Halifax and I could go on.

You must not have read Ofcom's many consultations then. I'm sure you know that you haven't missed anything. I cannot see any 'value-added' part of the services you mention; it's more a case of telephoning the company concerned, and it is reasonable to expect that it should cost the price of a telephone call to UK landline (as that is where the call terminates).


Quote:

... Tesco when changed as, Barclays, Abbey, Halifax, to 0870 or 0845 have added no value - in fact they take longer, phones are put down on customers, or made to all other 0870 or 0845 numbers with stating the cost beforehand or at all, and often mislead the consumer to believe that the cost of that call is that of a normal number.

Ofcom conducted some research and came to the conclusion that queue times aren't longer on 0870 numbers than freephone ones. This was published along with one of its many consultations.


Quote:

Ask that MEP to contact Chris at Liz Lynns Office MEP at Straford Upon Avon. ...

Chris has an interest in this issue then?


Quote:

... Just keep in mind that buinesses can have 0845, 0870 but they must state the price before hand, or failure to so or mislead consumers is breach of Directives.

But with the way in which telcos can set their prices, there is no way that service providers can give accurate information.

Bobbyboy wrote on Sep 14^th, 2006 at 6:20pm:

... The ASA adapted my idea and I am told recommended (can some one get back to me on this) - but I have not see it myself. When writing to MEP's please ask that you want this. It will stop or make buinesses think on this scam.

Discussion on ASA is here, and contains links to relevant pages on the ASA site.

ASA's code says that service providers should state the price from a BT landline and that calls from other networks may vary. See here.

Hi Dave

I had OFCOM's report - i was being sarcastic  in regards to "value added service" that OFCOM claims.  Please enlighten me to what they are? Having read other emails the members here have noted no difference.

Just as a matter of interest did OFCOM supply you the terms of referance - when they looked at the length of the calls and value added service? What did they claim was the value added service?

I am not sure what you asking re Chris - Chris is a Contact at a MEP office. He deals with the work with at Liz Lynns Office. Questions are put forward via MEPs to Eu Commissioners and to MPs and policy report. If you wanted some information it is a name for you to ask and share information so he can pass to your MEP.

I think the question you asked "It's difficult to get an idea of how much companies actually benefit because they never want to enter into such discussions. Whether they are paid directly or not is irrelevant; they are getting services paid for by the caller."

The Businesses gets paid By a "Payback". - but this irrelevent in law. It is the Businesses with the line that must state the price of the call. I refer you to my earlier reply.


Re your last point:  This is my point the 0845 and 0870 is a mess and shamble because OFCOM cannot manage the pricing on them. The Misleading Advertising Directive and Consumer Directive require price information to be give to consumers. One needs to grasp this point;  The failure to disclose beforehand the cost of a premium rate call or mislead consumers to believing that they are cost of a normal call is in breach of the Directive.

Thus it is not my problem that OFCOM or telecom providers cannot do so, but as a consumer and what business are required in law to do which is important.  OFCOM in 3 years have not managed to sort out the 0845 and 0870 scam thus must get rid of it.  

They must have free call pre-announcement on all Premium Rate calls and 0845 and 0870 fall under them.

Bobby

Bobbyboy wrote on Sep 14^th, 2006 at 7:28pm:

Just as a matter of interest did OFCOM supply you the terms of referance - when they looked at the length of the calls and value added service? What did they claim was the value added service?

Ofcom's market research is here. This accompanied "NTS: A way forward" consultation here.

I don't think that I've ever seen Ofcom define the term "value-added service".


Quote:

I am not sure what you asking re Chris - Chris is a Contact at a MEP office. He deals with the work with at Liz Lynns Office. Questions are put forward via MEPs to Eu Commissioners and to MPs and policy report. If you wanted some information it is a name for you to ask and share information so he can pass to your MEP.

Liz Lynne MEP's website is [url=www.lizlynne.org.uk[/url]]www.lizlynne.org.uk[/url] and this page is about 0845/0870 numbers.

Are you saying that I should suggest that my MEP contact's Chris for more information?

Find out your local MEPs here.


Quote:

... OFCOM in 3 years have not managed to sort out the 0845 and 0870 scam thus must get rid of it.

Indeed, it's nearly two years since Matt Peacock, Ofcom's Communications Director, went on BBC Radio 4's You and Yours programme to say that something would be done by early 2005. A transcript of the interview can be found here and you can listen to the interview here. This was broadcast on 8 November 2004 and Mr Peacock's interview is about 6 minutes in. He agrees with the interviewee's question that 0870 numbers are "premium rate numbers but by another name".

Hi Dave

thanks for the links which are very helpful.

I was saying that if every one can go to their MEP and raise a question on the issues that i have mentioned in my previous replies. Then we can get the MEPs in diffrent parts of the country to take the issues up with the EU Commissioner.

It would be good and productive if you did contact your MEP as I found that most MEPs did not know about the problem Eu Legislation and OFCOM.

Bobby

Bobbyboy wrote on Sep 14^th, 2006 at 6:20pm:

Under the Universal Service Directive (2005/22/EC) that is part of the regulatory framework for electronic commuincation requires Member states to ensure transparent and up-to date information on applicable prices and traffs of pubicly avilable telephone services to consumers - this applies to Premium rate number such as 0845 and 0870 numbers. Thus this is why it was important that 0845 and 0870 were agreed that they are Premium rate numbers. They charge over and above  a normal number...

Ofcom have not long introduced regulation to ensure that teleco's (not companies or anyone else) be more transparent with regards to 084x/087x numbers and that they must be on the same page and have equal prominence as normal geographical calls.

Only a few teleco's out of all that's available have actually complied with this new regulation - Ofcom are aware of this non-compliance issue and are looking into it!  [smiley=lolk.gif]

I started a thread about it here.


Dave wrote on Sep 14^th, 2006 at 7:10pm:

Bobbyboy wrote on Sep 14th, 2006 at 6:20pm: ... The ASA adapted my idea and I am told recommended (can some one get back to me on this) - but I have not see it myself. When writing to MEP's please ask that you want this. It will stop or make buinesses think on this scam. Discussion on ASA is here, and contains links to relevant pages on the ASA site. ASA's code says that service providers should state the price from a BT landline and that calls from other networks may vary. See here.

The problem with this is that the ASA code only applies to non-broadcast adverts so therefore TV and radio adverts are currently exempt from it.  Bearing in mind that TV adverts have a much wider audience so therefore more consumer harm can be done.  By the ASA not having their broadcast and radio guidelines inline with that of their non-broadcast guidelines just creates a divide and if you ask me causes more consumer confusion.

The broadcast side of the ASA need to bring out similar guidelines as their non-broadcast counterpart.

The problem then still remains that teleco's, in most cases, still refer to these numbers as local / national rate for which Ofcom refuse to do anything about and passing the buck again to Trading standards to deal with.  Teleco's are a communications provider so if you ask me then Ofcom need to deal with it and not pass the problem onto some other department that don't really specalise in telecommunications.

Hi BBK

The issue in all this is we can talk till the cows come home but OFCOM have demonstrated they will do everything to uphold 0845 and 0870 numbers and charging at Premium rate while business do away with with landlines. Just bear in mind OFCOM has all the time in the world. Dont also forget that OFCOM came into in 2003 while the Misleading Advertising Directive was in 1988.

The question is what do yourselves want to do about it?

You cannot stop businesses from having 0845 and 0870 numbers - but as a consumer you can make them comply with law and hold OFCOM accountable for its failing for 3 years of failing.

The consumer can also make sure by Business having to have a free "pre-announment" of the cost of the call that the Consumer (from my own investigation) are angered about it, espically where Land lines are been done away,  so that you as the consumer profit the businesses at your cost and by unfair practice.

The qusetion is Business do not need 0845, 0870 as all calls can be Diverted anywhere. In fact it is cheaper - .03p/min to phone India instead of 0870 at 10p/min - So when Business divert to India a 60 min call cost £6.00. £1.00 is a wage in India - £5.00 profit for the Businesses and the JOb in UK is got rid off.

Thus it does mean going to your MEP, OFT and Trading Standards:

"In regards to Trading Standards - I would put to them about their failure to act in regards to anti-consumer law and unfair consumer practice.  Ask what they have or what action they have taken to buineses who faile to :
1. Advertise the Price of the call beforehand in accordance with the Misleading Advertising Directive and Unfair Consumer Directive.
2.  what action was taken against buinesses that gave misleading price information which is in breach of s1 Mis rep Act and MA Directive
3. whether they have referred the matter to Sue Cook at OFT
4. if they have not done so why not? "[/i]

Bobby

Bobbyboy wrote on Sep 15^th, 2006 at 10:21am:

Hi BBK The issue in all this is we can talk till the cows come home but OFCOM have demonstrated they will do everything to uphold 0845 and 0870 numbers and charging at Premium rate while business do away with with landlines. Just bear in mind OFCOM has all the time in the world. Dont also forget that OFCOM came into in 2003 while the Misleading Advertising Directive was in 1988. The question is what do yourselves want to do about it?

I agree - less talk (which we're quite good at on this site!) and more action....

Using the excellent http://www.writetothem.com/ I have e-mailed the following missive to the 7 Euro MP's who represent Scotland:

"The Universal Service Directive (2005/22/EC) requires member states to ensure transparent and up-to date information on applicable prices and tariffs of publicly available telephone services to consumers.

In UK non-geographical 0845 and 0870 numbers are advertised as ‘local’ and ‘national’ rate respectively even although this tariff distinction no longer exists. More to the point consumers are misled into thinking calls to these numbers are cheaper than using geographical equivalents.

The opposite is the case. 0845 calls cost approx 4p/min and 0870 cost 8p/min and these numbers are widely used by large organisations who obtain a revenue share from their telecom providers. Most consumers now benefit from an inclusive call allowance with their telecom supplier but these non geographic numbers are always excluded.

By not making a tariff announcement before the call starts, consumers are being misled into thinking they are ‘lo call’ when by their nature – usually to a call centre – they will last for some time and result in a high charge.

I request you raise this matter with the Information Commissioner. I would like to know why he has taken no action against Ofcom as they have not ensured telecom companies inform consumers that these numbers are in fact premium rate"

Perhaps others could use this text, correct it or otherwise edit in e-mails to their representatives

Hi BB

Thanks for the email to MEPs. I am due to write to OFCOM askin why they missed out issues in their consultation.  They seem to want to attack me rather then deal with the content of my letter. Last time they threaten to not respond claiming if there are new issues regardless of the fact they are and even if they were mentioned to them OFCOM has failed to answer. The approach OFCOM now is using is fustrate and delay because they have no answers.  If they they had nothing to hide they would answer with clarity, eveidence, names, date and time.

For members I like to share that OFCOM uses the ploy "consultation". They have been having this ploy for the last 3 years. In their letter to me 8th August 2006 there way forward was 0800 at free, 084 at 5p/min from BT line, 087 10p from BT line ;D It is laughable that is all they come up with.

They claimed it would cost £100million if Businesses had to comply with the law. When I put it in fact cost consumers £600 million on a 3 hour daily call - no answer. This was not in the consultation - why?

Secondley OFCOM failed to consult what Businesses themselves (their staff) have confussed have told me that Consumers detest 0845 and 0870 numbers when they are informed and paying 6p or 10p / min.  and in my own investigation informed consumers that all Busnesses that have 0845, 0870 line have land line, but that Bunisess actually get a "payback" and profit out the consumer. So why was this not in the Consultantion.

In the Consultation it was not mentioned  or I did not see that Businesses are to comply with the M A Directive and by failing to disclose before hand the cost of that call or misleading consumers the cost of that call was in breach of the M A Directive and Misrep. Act. Nor was it put what action OFCOM has taken with evidence and against who, when and where and dates.

The Consultation has failed to mention that OFCOM has failed to take any action against Buinesses that have not complied with the law, or potect the consumer , instead trying to potect Premium rate charging on 0845, 0870 numbers so Business can make money at the consumers expense.

The point here  - is not there was a consultation - but how the consultation was geared and what it excluded. Further that those taking part was not the above.

 Any one wishing to use what I put above and also wish to write to OFCOM and MEP please use the above freely.

Bobby

Hi Farci and or bobbyboy

I can't find "The Universal Service Directive (2005/22/EC)" in my law database.  Is your ref correct?

I did find:  Decision No 2/2004 (2005/22/EC) of the joint veterinary committee set up under the Agreement. between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on .......

Hi KK

The referance I have for the Universal Service Directive  (202/02/EC)  of the European Parliment and the Council of 7th March 2002  OJ L 108 24.4.2002

;)  Bobby

Well back on the 19th September I sent the EU the following (bear in mind that their online form does have a limited number of characters for which I had to make several amendments to reduce the number of characters allowed:-


Quote:

I would be grateful if this could be passed on to the relevant person/department most able to answer my query. I would like to ask for your opinion about UK telephone numbers beginning 0844, 0845, 0870, 0871. Here in the UK the above telephone numbers are NOT charged the same as a normal number because the company & government department using these numbers can, & in most cases do, earn a revenue from anyone calling these numbers which can vary but can be around 4pence per minute (ppm). Due to the fact that these type of numbers can earn any company or UK Government department using them to receive payment (ie a revenue) for every minute us citizens call these numbers, they have been extremely popular and are very common numbers now. In fact following the introduction of the FoI Act 2000, it turned out that some UK Government departments are earning £1,000+ per year from us citizens calling these numbers. The main problem with these type of numbers is that despite them being premium rate numbers (due to the revenue sharing), Ofcom, The Office of Fair Trading, Advertising Standards Authority, etc refuse to admit and deal effectively with the fact that most UK citizens are NOT aware that these numbers are in fact premium rate type numbers and that the company/government department using them earn a revenue from the use of such numbers and the fact that they are often misleadingly advertised by companies/government departments and UK telephone providers as local or national rate. In fact, UK Telecom regulator Ofcom, admitted that us consumers have no idea how much these calls actually cost and the fact that they earn the company/government department using them money in return for every minute someone is calling them. Here in the UK, we have ICSTIS (http://www.icstis.org.uk/) that is the regulator for premium rate numbers.  ICSTIS only regulate any number beginning 09x but DON'T regulate 0844, 0845, 0870 & 0871 numbers. To date, Ofcom and other government departments that are meant to be here to protect us consumers refuse to deal with any of these issues effectively and instead keep 'passing the buck' (ie refuse to have anything to do with it and ask that we contact another government department who in turn do the same) for not fully protecting us citizens. Due to lack of call announcements, us citizens have no idea how much these calls actually cost and in fact they can vary from 8ppm to 40ppm for an 0870 number depending on telephone provider. Bearing in mind everything I’ve mentioned, are UK companies/government departments, Ofcom (and other UK government departments that are meant to protect us citizens), contravening any EU directives such as misleading advertising, or not indicating the cost of these numbers despite the obvious fact that they are a premium rate number but just not regulated by premium rate regulator, ICSTIS? I look forward to your response.

Below was their recent reply:


Quote:

Thank you for your communication concerning 084 and 087 telephone numbers in the UK. You are quite right in pointing out that there are EU Directives concerning misleading advertising and indeed many other aspects of consumer protection. A Directive, despite its name, is not directly applicable in each member state, but is "transposed" by each member state into its own national law. The provisions of EU directives therefore become part of national law and are therefore subject to national jurisdiction. Precisely whether these telephone numbers contravene provisions of UK law is something that only a lawyer can decide. It appears that you have not had much luck in writing to government departments and so I would suggest that you write to the UK Consumer Association and perhaps to the media (in particular those which have programmes dealing with consumer issues). This will throw a spotlight on the problem. At the same time, I would suggest contacting your local MP to have the matter brought up in Parliament. Once an EU Directive is agreed at EU level, the member states are given a deadline by which the provisions of the Directive must be incorporated into national law. It may well be that the telephone numbers concerned in this case "slip through" the legal provisions in force in some way, but you will need legal and consumer advice on this. Yours sincerely Jean-Louis COUGNON Head of Division

EU, UK, whatever, all the piggies are munching from the same trough, whilst scratching each others backs (yes they are clever enogh to be multi-talented!), so they are all equally good at the "It's not me, Guv" scenario.
We really do have the governance we deserve - bring on the revolution!!

Hi firestop,  

I agree with what you have said, especially the last line.  Lets start by getting out of the EU, that at least will save us some cash.  What is the point of the EU.

The reply was the usual bureaucratic “do nothing” reply to a well crafter and detailed letter sent by bbb_uk.

bbb_uk, that response seems to be a pass the buck down the chain to the UK. So what's the point in EU directives? If a member state has enacted a law due to a directive, and it doesn't enforce that law, isn't it up to the EU to take action?

Although their reply was pass the buck, I also believe they are right in that its up to each member state on how much they basically implement of a EU directive.

For example, when we (as in the UK) implemented the Working Time Directive which amonst some things dealt with how many hours were allowed to be worked in a working week (48hours I think), our government applied some exclusions to the likes of doctors, etc as they were worried there wasn't enough doctors to cover if they applied it to them them as well hence why they were excluded for so long.  I believe now though that they've applied it to doctors now.

So it seems that our government can vary, apply exceptions, etc to any directive they choose to adopt from EU law.

I'm no lawyer but we need to know exactly which EU laws apply with regards to this and if the UK have adopted EU law on this subject (and whether it was adopted fully).

Even with all this information, it would probably mean taking the UK to EU court over it.

Hi bbb_uk

Look at my post (#1) above, which I hope explains (in part) EU law vis a vis UK law.

kk wrote on Nov 1^st, 2006 at 11:07pm:

Hi bbb_uk Look at my post (#1) above, which I hope explains (in part) EU law vis a vis UK law.

Thanks for that.

Basically, to get anywhere someone has to take them (Ofcom, etc) to EU court?

bbb_uk wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2006 at 10:32pm:

Basically, to get anywhere someone has to take them (Ofcom, etc) to EU court?

In principle yes action in the EU courts is the only way if the EU doesn't choose to take action against the UK government itself (as it could if it was so minded).  There are loads of directives that member states are not allowed to opt out of or have chosen not to opt out of and I don't think the UK opted out of any part of the misleading advertising directive.

An action in the EU courts wouldn't be worth it because geographic numbers will probably have disappeared and been replaced by Voip dialling names before the case ever gets to court.

Failing action in the EU courts I think several of us raising the issue with our Euro MPs and asking them to write to Ofcom suggesting they have failed in their duties to implement the misleading advertising directive might possibly put the frighteners up its greedy and self serving board members and Chairman just a little.

Also some of us explaining to our MPs that we feel Ofcom has not ensured proper price disclosure under Fair Trading legislation in the way that the Office of Fair Trading would have done if they had jurisdiction over this matter (they have taken action on matters as silly as cartels on the price of sunglasses).  We could also ask our MPs to refer a complaint about Ofcom to the Parliamentary Ombudsman that they have not been correctly implementing the OFT powers they have been delegated.  That would start to put the frighteners up Ofcom.

I also think we have to move the media message on a little from Daniel's far too simplistic "its 3p vs 7.5p per minute" to saying many uk households now have all 01/02 inclusive call plans for as little as £5 or so fixed a month that they have been sold as being all "uk landline calls" only to find that they are typically paying £10 to £15 a month (£120 to £180 a year) to call number starting 084 and 087 which are never disclosed as being non standard numbers when you dial them.

A senior Eurocrat like a senior Ofcom bureaucrat is only going to try to cover their back.  Your MP or MEP if they are sympathetic enough to the cause may actually start to get somewhere with the issue.  Especially if they spoke on the matter in the European Parliament as that would start to get the attention of the EU Commissioners and other senior staff.

Firstly, and most importantly, I would like to congratulate and thank Bobbyboy for rising above all the posturing and pontificating that seems to characterise this site. I logged on today to post a request for a simple format letter that I could use to send to companies who use NGNs and to voice my frustration that no-one on the site seems able to direct us to a more direct and effective means of influence than just exchanging comments and arguing about semantics.
(This came about because yesterday I wrote to an insurance company who claim that "We have introduced an 0845 local call charge number to help reduce your call charges" and I had to start from scratch to compose the letter (although based on the information I have gleaned from this site). Wouldn't it be more useful if someone could provide a standard list of facts to combat this type of misinformation?)
Anyway, back to Bobbyboy. He has given me something to do, ie to write to MEPs and raise the matter with them, and I am delighted to have something specific. Instead of debating the accuracy and format of the response, can I just suggest that everybody should do as he suggests? Write a letter to your MEPs and raise the profile of the issue. Ignore all the detail, write as consumers, which is what we are. Complain that we are not being protected from the bad boys of business, and our teleophone bills are higher than they should be. I sent an email to all 9 of my local MEPs. One of them mailed back in less than an hour with a copy of what he had already sent to the Commissioner for Information & Media in Brussels, which is an almost verbatim extract from my email to him, which is pretty similar to the example from farci. For reference he is Brian Simpson, Labour MEP for the North West. Thanks and well done Brian. So how about we just get on and do it? I don't mean to offend the participants, there is some great stuff on here, but Bobbyboy has suggested something specific we can do, so shouldn't we just get on and do it? Get emailing and writing..please!

Ben,

I'm glad to hear you have written to your MEPs and already prompted one into action.  There are actually a lot of standard points that can be used in the sticky threads at the top of the forums.

Giving people a standard letter to send is not however helpful as the companies then see that as being an organised petition drummed up by a few activists rather than a widespread movement of spontaneous public opinion.  MPs and MEPs in particular handle petition letters quite differently from real individual letters.  Real letters get a reply while petition letters  by and large don't or if they do they only get a standard response.

While you are feeling energetic you should also write to your MP if he is not amongst the 60 or so who signed the Parliamentary Early Day Motion against 0870 numbers (see below) also drawing his/her attention to the failings of Ofcom on the EU misleading advertising directive and enforcing UK Fair Trading legislation on telecoms price disclosure.

http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=28872%09%09%09%09%09%09%09&SESSION=875

You come to the site full of zeal but you don't realise that we got over 1,000 people to write in on the Ofcom consultaion called NTS Way Forward and Ofcom incredibly still allowed most of the 084/7 scamming to continue by the slight of hand of banning 0870 but allowing the continuation virtually unfettered of even more expensive 0871 numbers and slightly lower priced 0844 numbers.

If it was just as simple as make a noise and the scam would stop it would have gone away long ago.  Unfortunately you must realise that some extremely important New Labour friends are behind this whole elaborate telecoms industry scam and the regulator has consistently bent over backwards to find any flimsy and pathetic excuses it can to stop the whole scam  being closed down.

Hi NGMsGhost,
I appreciate the response but I need to point out that I have been a member here for quite some time. I was one of the people who wrote in regarding the Ofcom consultation, and I have also written to my MP, so I am aware there are things we can do. For the record, both of these were good suggestions. (By the way, I have now had a response from a second MEP - Den Dover)
However I also think that the general nature of the site, while commendable, tends to focus on the technicalities of the arguments rather than the general injustice, and the actions which may have an effect, and this is where Bobbyboy scored a point with me. He suggested a practical, relatively simple way of having an effect, and these seem to be somewhat thin on the ground.
By the way, I did not ask for a standard letter, just some clear, factual, simple non-technical bullet points to make in a letter of my own. I still have not found that anywhere.
Thanks anyway for taking the time to reply.

Some months back I wrote to Elspeth Attwooll MEP asking her to raise the question of transparency of price information under the EU Universal Services Directive with the Commission. She has replied:

'...I have now received a reponse from Commissioner Reding.. (who) ...believes that the consumer protection..may be inadequate and currently the Commission is conducting a thorough review...They have suggested that they will come forward with a legislative proposal to better serve consumer protection...'

Reding's written answer actually states:

...According to a study commissioned by the Commission , many Member States have requirements for a price announcement at the beginning of the call at least for some service categories, such as for calls that are priced over a given threshold. Usually these price announcements are free of charge....

...In the context of the ongoing review of the regulatory Framework for Electronic Communications , the Commission has indicated that it proposes to strengthen consumer protection by improving the transparency and publication of information, for example, when calling a premium rate number. The Commission is currently evaluating the results of the public consultation on this review and will come forward with legislative proposals in due course....
E-4337/06EN
Answer given by Mrs Reding
on behalf of the Commission
(10.1.2007)

Is this good news or are we being conned again?

farci wrote on Jan 15^th, 2007 at 2:33pm:

...I have now received a reponse from Commissioner Reding..

More on Commissioner Reding here.

farci wrote on Jan 15^th, 2007 at 2:33pm:

Is this good news or are we being conned again?

It all depends on whether we can get the EU to classify all non 01/02/03 numbers as being premium rate and so requiring a price announcement.

As to Commissioner Reding she personally is certainly on our side as a former journalist and a Luxemburger no doubt with an absolute bee in her bonnet (along with fellow countrymen) about being constantly and unknowingly hit for roaming charges on incoming calls as she moves around the boundaries of the tiny state that is Luxembourg.  The big EU mobile phone companies all hate her after she announced she was going to stop them charging for incoming calls when roaming some time later this year.

I do think more of us ought to contact our MEPs though to get them to individually raise the matter with the Commission.  That really achieves far more than posting on this website does.

NGMsGhost wrote on Jan 15^th, 2007 at 3:33pm:

farci wrote on Jan 15th, 2007 at 2:33pm: Is this good news or are we being conned again? It all depends on whether we can get the EU to classify all non 01/02/03 numbers as being premium rate and so requiring a price announcement. As to Commissioner Reding she personally is certainly on our side as a former journalist and a Luxemburger no doubt with an absolute bee in her bonnet (along with fellow countrymen) about being constantly and unknowingly hit for roaming charges on incoming calls as she moves around the boundaries of the tiny state that is Luxembourg.  The big EU mobile phone companies all hate her after she announced she was going to stop them charging for incoming calls when roaming some time later this year. I do think more of us ought to contact our MEPs though to get them to individually raise the matter with the Commission.  That really achieves far more than posting on this website does.

Good idea to write to other MEP's. If anybody would like further details of the correspondence please PM me for copies.

You all know about [url=www.writetothem.com[/url]?]www.writetothem.com?[/url]

Source: Stephen Hughes MEP's website

Date: 21 January 2008

http://www.stephenhughesmep.org/press/PR054.htm

<<

Pre-fix telephone number Rip-off

Stephen Hughes, Labour MEP for the North East has the backing of Commissioner Vivian Reding to call upon Ofcom to do something about  the pricing policy for calls to non-geographic numbers in the North East of England.  Many people will have been forced to use phone numbers  with a 0844 or 0845 numbers to get health advice or to make an appointment with a doctor only to find that these calls are charged at up to 5p per minute on top of what their telephone provider has already charged them.  Other examples of organisations using these pre-fix numbers are:  Police Forces (Durham Constabulary for incident reporting-- number is 08456060365) and even Council Departments.  Stephen Hughes and now the Commission believe Ofwat should do more.

The Commissioner has confirmed that pricing policy for calls to non-geographic numbers must comply with Directive 2002/22/EC (the Universal Service Directive) and in response to a letter to the European Commission on the matter, Commissioner Reding said, "Ofcom in the United Kingdom has primary responsibility to consider the extent to which the relevant requirements of price transparency are being met by the telecommunications service providers and to take corrective action...".

Speaking today, Stephen Hughes said, :--

"Too many public and private institutions are using these premium rate phone lines when providing vital information required by the public.  Many times people don't even know they are being charged these rates on top of what it normally costs them to make a regular call. European law does not ban the use of the numbers, but it does say that people should know what such calls cost them.

The fact that people don't know the costs, means that the directive is not being complied with.  For this reason, I have written to Ofcom to ask that they take action to make these charges more transparent so people can make an informed choice as to whether they make a call or not.

I think it is scandalous that the police are using a 0845 number for people to report crimes.


On the Commissioner's advice, I have written to Ed Richards, Chief Executive of Ofcom to ask whether he believes the transparency requirements of Directive 2002/22/EC are being met.  Depending on his reply I may be asking the European Commission to launch legal action relating to non-compliance with EC law."

>>

Source: Liz Lynne MEP's website

Date: Mon 13 Aug 2007

http://birminghamlibdems.org.uk/news/000814/euromps_campaign_against_premium_phone_ripoff.html

<<

Euro-MP's Campaign Against Premium Phone Rip-Off

West Midlands MEP Liz Lynne has again spoken out against commercial phone numbers such as 0845 and 0870 which are lucrative for businesses but costing their customers a packet.

Having taken up the issue on behalf of constituents in the past, and fallen foul of the numbers herself, Liz has had enough and is launching a campaign against their ongoing high prices and lack of transparency regarding pricing.

Liz said: "The biggest insult for customers is that so many of these numbers are helplines for products they have already paid for, such as BT Broadband Internet, that customers haven't managed to get working properly."

"These numbers ought to be free of charge, yet many businesses continue to prey on the fact that most people think these numbers all cost the same as a regular call or are free."

"Now that excessive mobile roaming charges have been addressed, we must tackle premium commercial numbers. A BT peak-time national call typically costs 3p per minute but 0845 numbers can cost up to 5p and 0870 up to 10p. Businesses often take a cut of this extra cost and are reluctant to give customers non-premium alternatives."

"Ofcom has standardised the prices customers pay, but despite their recommendations, many commercial numbers give customers no warning of the high charges before calls are connected."

"I am campaigning for these costs to be forced down and for free customer warnings about the charges before connection. This would give greater transparency and better value for money for the consumer."

"I shall be writing to BT and Ofcom to complain and will also continue to raise this issue in the European Parliament when possible. However where customers are misled, it is the job of the national regulator to enforce the rules, which at the moment is not happening."

>>

Dave wrote on Feb 13^th, 2008 at 8:56pm:

Stephen Hughes, Labour MEP for the North East has the backing of Commissioner Vivian Reding to call upon Ofcom to do something about  the pricing policy for calls to non-geographic numbers in the North East of England.  Many people will have been forced to use phone numbers  with a 0844 or 0845 numbers to get health advice or to make an appointment with a doctor only to find that these calls are charged at up to 5p per minute on top of what their telephone provider has already charged them.  Other examples of organisations using these pre-fix numbers are:  Police Forces (Durham Constabulary for incident reporting-- number is 08456060365) and even Council Departments.  Stephen Hughes and now the Commission believe Ofwat should do more.

I think you surely meant Ofcom Dave. ;)

But coming back to the main news this is really very significant indeed as the EU is about the only organisation that has the power to force the ultra corrupt and ultra Telco loving Ofcom to fulfil its duties under EU price transparency legislation.  Of course only the Parliamentary Ombudsman has the power to force Ofcom to fulfil its principal duty to UK citizens and UK consumers under section 3(i) of the Communications Act 2003.

It seems rather ironic though that one of Labour's own MEPs is having to bring Ofcom to book for slavishly following the secret instructions clearly given to it over 084/7 numbers by Gordon Brown and his other senior New Labour cronies.