SAYNOTO0870.COM
https://www.saynoto0870.com/cgi-bin/forum/YaBB.cgi
Main Forum >> Government and Public Sector >> NEG propaganda
https://www.saynoto0870.com/cgi-bin/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1160182005

Message started by idb on Oct 7th, 2006 at 1:46am

Title: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Oct 7th, 2006 at 1:46am
A wonderful example of exploitation:

http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/downloads/surgeryline-dartford.pdf#search=%22neg%200844%22

includes:

What is Surgery Line?
“Surgery Line is a cost-effective way for forward looking surgeries to improve the service that they offer to patients, reduce stress levels for staff and self-fund a state of the art phone system,” explains NEG’s CEO, Richard Chapman. “As you can see, this case study focuses on one of the hundreds of surgeries that have already switched to Surgery Line. By doing so, they have saved money, improved the service that they offer patients and relieved the pressure on busy staff.”

You and your staff benefit When a surgery switches to an 084 number, NEG will install and maintain the most efficient communications system on the market. You specify exactly what equipment you want to receive (from handsets to switchboards) for no extra charge. With your own 084 number, you keep about 2p from every call to re-invest in your practice, instead of BT making all the profit from calls to your surgery.

How your patients benefit Patients benefit by having their calls answered more quickly. The engaged tone becomes rare – even at peak times - because you are able to handle incoming calls more efficiently, whilst patient calls are spread out during the day. Calls to 084 or ‘lo-call’ numbers cost patients 4p per minute, the same as the first minute of BT’s standard call rate between 6am and 6pm. This means that many patients will actually pay less in total because their call is answered and processed more quickly. Significantly, the cost of calls from mobiles remains unchanged - these account for around 30% of all calls to surgeries.

The phone system that won’t test your patients “I’ve met a number of practice managers who think that Surgery Line sounds almost too good to be true,” says Chapman, “but after it’s been installed, they realise that NEG delivers everything we promise, and more.”

- Edited by DaveM - to improve readability !

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NonGeographicalMan on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:02am
Or "Surgery line is a way to ensure that if your patients are involved in a serious overseas road accident or other unexpected medical emergency that there is a vastly increased probability they will die unnecessarily as overseas doctors are not able to call a UK 0844 number as these numbers are barred by virtually all overseas telecoms providers".

There has to be an angle to take Ofcom to the Parliamentary Ombudsman over this for failing to keep the UK citizen consumer alive! :o ::) >:( >:( >:(

- Edited to remove extraneous data - DaveM -

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:21am
And from This is Wiltshire (ironically at 8:44am today!):

http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/display.var.954403.0.gps_install_hitech_hotline.php

<<
ENGAGED telephone lines at GP surgeries are a common problem up and down the country.

However, a practice in Wilton is tackling the issue by installing a new phone system, designed to all but eliminate the engaged tone.

This will provide an improved method for patients trying to get in touch with the particular service that they require at the Wilton health centre.

The new service came online last Wednesday, and now the main telephone number is 0844 477 3483.

The new system reduces call congestion by introducing extra phone lines and elements of call automation.

The health centre currently has more than 3,500 residents on its register, which, because of the volume of calls, can make it difficult to get through on the first attempt.

"At busy times, we receive more calls than our current switchboard can handle," said practice manager Pauline Mairs.

"We decided to address the problem by installing a new system, known as Surgery Line, which will manage calls more efficiently by routing a patient directly to the service they need."

The hi-tech service includes a new switchboard, headsets, a call-recording facility and extra safety features.

Designed specifically to meet the requirements of doctors' surgeries, the Surgery Line phone system has proved popular with both doctors and patients across the country.

"We believe that Surgery Line will considerably improve the service that we are able to offer our patients," said Ms Mairs.

"Calls will be answered every time, and patients should find it much quicker to make contact with the person they wish to speak to."

To facilitate the changeover, those calling the old telephone number will hear a recording, with details of the new number they need to call.

This redirection message will be kept on the old line for as long as it is needed.

The new number will be charged at local rates.>>


How much longer will the wretched 'local rate' description prevail?

Pauline Mairs - yet another clueless individual hoodwinked by the sharp-suited slimy NEG salesman.

OF COURSE THERE WILL BE NO ENGAGED TONES - that is the whole point of this scam, Ms Mairs. Queueing earns revenue for NEG. 'Nuff said.

Ms Mairs - just consider a patient trying to contact you from overseas - either for an emergency situation or for scheduling/altering an appointment. The patient will not be able to get through as your idiotic surgery has been scammed by NEG. Where was your due diligence Ms Mairs?

YOU NEED TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THIS DECISION, Ms Mairs.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NonGeographicalMan on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:28am

idb wrote on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:21am:
How much longer will the wretched 'local rate' description prevail?


For as long as Ofcom is hijacked by despicable self promoting careerist New Labour ladder climbers like Stephen Carter and Ed Richards interested only in a fat salary and their next knighthood or peerage from their New Labour masters and not giving one stuff for ensuring effective price competition in the best interests of the uk citizen consumers in the telecoms sector. :o >:( >:( >:(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:37am
Some more bull from NEG - this time, from Kath Simons

http://archive.mail-list.com/fpm-forum/msg13565.html

<<
Hi Heather

Whether this will work out to be self funding or not depends on how much
this company will give you back for each 0844 call...we also supply
Patient Partner as one of our 'add-on' modules and we give the practice
2p for each
0844 call - you may want to check this. It then depends on how many
calls you receive. We would be able to give you an indication based on
list size.

0844 numbers are not non-geographic numbers, they're lo-cal numbers, a
non-geo number would be 0870, which as you probably know, are no longer
allowed to be used by surgeries.

0844 numbers are fully sanctioned by the Department of Health and also
Ofcom, and there are no plans to change the ruling.

Patients (and the general public as a whole, i.e. you, me - us!), now
have a free rein to use who they wish for calls from home / landline,
and while some packages do give free calls, most of these are not during
the day and the costs are hidden elsewhere, plus of course it is up to
the individual to negotiate a suitable package with their provider.

Telephone systems, Patient Partner, Jayex wallboards, Automatic Patient
Check-in screens etc can all be a costly outlay for a practice, 0844
numbers are just a way of reducing this cost, either entirely or partly.

Kath Simons
N.E.G Surgery Line
>>

No wonder surgeries are being fooled when these utter lies are being output by NEG representatives.

A disgrace. The DH really needs to get a grip.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NonGeographicalMan on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:41am

idb wrote on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:37am:
A disgrace. The DH really needs to get a grip.


I think the recent admission by Ofcom's own experts that 0844 numbers cannot be called from overseas could really blow this scam out of the water.

As to the references to 0844 being local rate do you reckon this NEG stuff would be suitable for an ASA complaint?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:46am
I think bbb_uk has more familiarity with the ASA and I will defer to his opinion. It is quite incredible that this company can repeatedly lie and escape any sanction from any authority.

Sadly, it's probably going to take a death or serious problem caused by inability to connect from overseas to get any action by authorities.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by orsonkart on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:56am
Unfortunately the ASA have no control of whats written on web sites.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NonGeographicalMan on Oct 7th, 2006 at 1:14pm

idb wrote on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:46am:
Sadly, it's probably going to take a death or serious problem caused by inability to connect from overseas to get any action by authorities.


Writing to MPs on the Parliamentary Select Committee responsible for the NHS and GPs and getting them to ask questions tro the NHS senior directors at their next committee meeting might help prevent the deaths occurring.

As would getting press coverage that you cannot call your doctor from overseas if they have an 0844 number and for anyone in this position going overseas to write to their doctor demanding a geographic alternative.  If the doctor refuses they should go to their MP and get him to refer a complaint to the Ombudsman that Ofcom has failed to prevent 0844 numbers being used by doctors surgeries despite them not being accessible overseas at all and in the UK at the same cost as normal 01/02 numbers.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by orsonkart on Oct 8th, 2006 at 9:41am
Thread about this subject on MSE.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=278248

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Oct 13th, 2006 at 4:36pm

idb wrote on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:46am:

wrote on Oct 7th, 2006 at 2:41am:
I think the recent admission by Ofcom's own experts that 0844 numbers cannot be called from overseas could really blow this scam out of the water.

As to the references to 0844 being local rate do you reckon this NEG stuff would be suitable for an ASA complaint?
I think bbb_uk has more familiarity with the ASA and I will defer to his opinion. It is quite incredible that this company can repeatedly lie and escape any sanction from any authority.

Sadly, it's probably going to take a death or serious problem caused by inability to connect from overseas to get any action by authorities.
Sorry, just noticed thread.

As mentioned by Orsonkart, ASA have no authority over websites and having read the wording anyhow they state that 084 'lo-call' costs the same as BT standard rate.  Well as BT Standard Rate is no longer available and customers where moved to BT Together Option 1 where calls cost 3ppm then you could ask trading standards to investigate this as they are implying calls to 084 cost the same as a normal BT call which they are 1p more.

Apart from that though, I don't think much else could be done.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Oct 14th, 2006 at 11:45am

Quote:
Apart from that though, I don't think much else could be done


You could of course complain to the surgery pointing out that they had a new telephone system installed and patients are footing the bill for it.  This is in addition to the fact that their number cannot be called  from abroad if there is an emergency.

However, since the surgery signed a contract with NEG I agree that it is unlikely that they will revert to a geog. number

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Oct 14th, 2006 at 2:06pm
That is true you could complain to the surgery but as you said they have a contract for which they probably couldnt get out of.

I believe the best way to complain would be via DoH.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 14th, 2006 at 2:48pm

bbb_uk wrote on Oct 13th, 2006 at 4:36pm:
Sorry, just noticed thread.

As mentioned by Orsonkart, ASA have no authority over websites and having read the wording anyhow they state that 084 'lo-call' costs the same as BT standard rate.  Well as BT Standard Rate is no longer available and customers where moved to BT Together Option 1 where calls cost 3ppm then you could ask trading standards to investigate this as they are implying calls to 084 cost the same as a normal BT call which they are 1p more.


Since 1st October the first minute of a call on BT,(01/02), are:- 3p set up, 3p per minute,rounded to a full minute, therefore the first minute on BT cost 6p

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Cruz on Oct 14th, 2006 at 4:31pm
And, as the 0844 477 number used in the case is charged by BT at 5p/minute at all times, the first minute of a call to it now costs 8p (but that's alright, it's only a third more).

So, patients used to paying a total of 3p for a call of any duration to the surgery using 1899 and their previous 01 or 02 geographic number will be entitled to be well p*ssed off when they finish up paying 53p when they get stuck in the wonderful new, efficient system for 10 minutes waiting until one of the (same number of) staff gets round to answering their call, won't they?

"Free at the point of use.................."

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Oct 14th, 2006 at 8:20pm

Cruz wrote on Oct 14th, 2006 at 4:31pm:
And, as the 0844 477 number used in the case is charged by BT at 5p/minute at all times, the first minute of a call to it now costs 8p (but that's alright, it's only a third more).

Just to clarify, whole minute charging 'only' applies to geographical calls (remember them? ::)), international calls and calls to mobiles. All other numbers are still billed to the nearest second, and this includes 0844 numbers.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Cruz on Oct 14th, 2006 at 9:32pm

Dave wrote on Oct 14th, 2006 at 8:20pm:
Just to clarify, whole minute charging 'only' applies to geographical calls (remember them? ::)), international calls and calls to mobiles. All other numbers are still billed to the nearest second, and this includes 0844 numbers.

I've been told that - and that the antiquated 'whole minute charging' applies to all calls - by staff at the CEO's office.  So who knows which is correct?

In any case, it makes very little difference for anything except a call on which you immediately hang up.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Dec 16th, 2006 at 10:11pm
There's several threads on NEG now, the latest being one on its SchoolLine 'service'.

Since I last looked at the NEG website, this page has been added. It promotes 0800, 0844 and 0870 numbers. It does not come as a suprise that an outfit like this clings to the usual misdescriptions (lies) to sell its 'products':


Quote:
Choose a local rate 0844 number to save your callers money or national rate 0870 number to earn an income from your callers.

08 numbers are used by thousands of companies but choosing the right number depends on the type of service your are providing, click NGN to find out what number is right for your business. Our most popular numbers are lo-call rate 0844 which charges the caller BT's standard local rate of 4.2 pence per minute, so in many cases your UK customer could actually be saving money every time they ring your business. Once set 0844 numbers are completely free to use, you pay no standing charges or forwarding costs. Alternatively if you can choose a national rate 0870 number that pays an outbound payment of up to 3 pence per minute depending on call volumes.

Clicking the NGN link shows another page with more propaganda, most noteably:

Quote:
... Research shows that subsidising your incoming callers by charging local rates increases goodwill and the likelihood of a recommendation.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Barbara on Dec 17th, 2006 at 11:00am
Have been reading the latest comments and I know NEG appears in a number of threads.  Has anyone contacted them to draw attention to the misleading info they give?   I am sure this has been done but maybe all forum members interested could try it as a concerted campaign?   Would such campaigning be a way forward generally?   Members could be alerted to targets by PMs so the concerted nature of the complaints would be disguised.   Also are there any lawyers who are members of the forum who could take action on such misdescriptions?   I expect I am way behind and this has already been tried but thought it worth a post.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Dec 17th, 2006 at 11:53am

Barbara wrote on Dec 17th, 2006 at 11:00am:
Have been reading the latest comments and I know NEG appears in a number of threads.  Has anyone contacted them to draw attention to the misleading info they give?
The problem is that ASA has no remit over their website.  Trading Standards do and so I'm going to make a complaint.  I noticed they are careful about using the term, "BT standard local rate" which may be true however as this is no longer available they shouldn't be allowed to use it.

Thanks for spotting that Dave.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Dec 20th, 2006 at 4:28pm
The ASA have stated to me in a letter that they are hoping to deal with the issue of their various codes not covering advertising on websites at some point in the near future.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Dec 20th, 2006 at 10:36pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20th, 2006 at 4:28pm:
The ASA have stated to me in a letter that they are hoping to deal with the issue of their various codes not covering advertising on websites at some point in the near future.
Do you have anything new regarding ASA's different stance on this matter for TV adverts (broadcasting division) that currently don't have to abide by any of the 08x codes of practice/guidelines unlike the non-broadcast that do?

My last reply from them a few months ago (I think) stated that they were looking into this and are currently in contact with Ofcom for advice on a few things.  That's all they would tell me.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Dec 20th, 2006 at 11:30pm

bbb_uk wrote on Dec 20th, 2006 at 10:36pm:
Do you have anything new regarding ASA's different stance on this matter for TV adverts (broadcasting division) that currently don't have to abide by any of the 08x codes of practice/guidelines unlike the non-broadcast that do?


They did a formal adjudication on my complaint against Sky Travel Shop on Sky Three's claim that their 0870 calls were charged "at the National Rate of up to 8p per minute" or words to that effect.  They didn't formally rule against Sky on the basis that they had used the correct rate per minute, even though they had also used the words National Rate.  The ASA's letter said something along the lines of hoping that Sky wouldn't use the term National Rate in the future and to be fair I see they now don't make this claim on Sky Travel Shop.

Anyhow my complaint broke new ground in that the ASA decided they did have the power to review a tv program on the basis of a price claim made about an 0870 number.  It is unfortunate that Sky didn't get a formal ruling against them though.

The adjudication should be somewhere on the ASA website.

Just found it at www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/Public/TF_ADJ_41766.htm

Annoyingly I emailed the ASA before the adjudication to complain that the pricing information on BT's website that Sky referred to was inaccurate and also pointing to The MD of BT Retail's (Ian Livingston) comments that 084/7 numbers were a scam and extra charging should be ended but these were not taken into account at the adjudication.

I suppose this really needs breaking off into a new thread entitled "ASA Ruling On Sky Travel Shop Claim 0870 is National Rate"

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jan 26th, 2007 at 4:38pm
Case studies for Surgery Line are here. Each one includes the following:

Quote:
You and your staff benefit
When a surgery switches to an 084 number, NEG will install and maintain the most efficient communications system on the market. You specify exactly what equipment you want to receive (from handsets to switchboards) for no extra charge. With your own 084 number, you keep about 2p from every call to re-invest in your practice, instead of BT making all the profit from calls to your surgery.

I thought that this 2p that they receive was paid straight back to NEG for the 'service'. That's what Janice Gregory, Welsh Assembly Member argued and got into hot water for, see here.


Quote:
How your patients benefit
Patients benefit by having their calls answered more quickly. The engaged tone becomes rare – even at peak times - because you are able to handle incoming calls more efficiently, whilst patient calls are spread out during the day. Calls to 084 or ‘lo-call’ numbers cost patients 4p per minute, the same as the first minute of BT’s standard call rate between 6am and 6pm. This means that many patients will actually pay less in total because their call is answered and processed more quickly. Significantly, the cost of calls from mobiles remains unchanged - these account for around 30% of all calls to surgeries.

Is this a contest to see how many lies they can fit into one sentence?

In the first paragraph they say that it's good because BT won't make the profit, and in the second they cling to the idea of BT rates!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jan 26th, 2007 at 6:32pm
Dave,

Where did you get this stuff from - NEG's website?

If you could get sent NEG's leaflets and these lies are in the leaflets then you can file a complaint with the ASA about it which NEG will obviously lose.  If its only on their website then trading standards is the only form of redress sadly. >:( :'(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jan 26th, 2007 at 7:21pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Jan 26th, 2007 at 6:32pm:
Where did you get this stuff from - NEG's website?

Yes, the website. Select the case studies link and select a case study from there. The PDFs are 2 A4 pages, so I'm sure that they're available double-sided on fancy glossy paper.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Jan 27th, 2007 at 9:40am

Quote:
Yes, the website. Select the case studies link and select a case study from there. The PDFs are 2 A4 pages, so I'm sure that they're available double-sided on fancy glossy paper.


Dave, couldn't find any actual case studies on the NEG website only general blurb about Bank of England, YMCA, etc. Might they have removed it, or am I just not sufficiently computer literate?

Could you provide a link?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Jan 27th, 2007 at 10:26am

lompos wrote on Jan 27th, 2007 at 9:40am:
couldn't find any actual case studies on the NEG website only general blurb about Bank of England, YMCA, etc. Might they have removed it, or am I just not sufficiently computer literate?

Could you provide a link?
If you view this page you can see that half way down they have 'Surgery Case Studies' where it mentions Fulham Surgery, Kingshurst Surgery, etc.


NGMsGhost wrote on Jan 26th, 2007 at 6:32pm:
If its only on their website then trading standards is the only form of redress sadly. >:( :'(
I've already made a complaint about NEG mentioning a tariff that is no longer available on BT so therefore it's unfair/misleading.  Can't really complain about lo-call though as far as I can see.

The problem is though due to bureaucracy, the complaint was made through Consumer Direct who then pass it on to my local trading standards who then pass it on to the trading standards where NEG's head office is.  Talk about useless 'red tape'.

I've not heard nothing as yet.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by KVSimons on Jul 17th, 2007 at 9:51am
Having read various incorrect postings re NEG, and quite frankly an offensive posting from user idb I felt compelled to register and post a response. I use the word 'offensive' as idb feels that a) he has the right to make assumptions about me and how I 'bull s**t' my customers and b) he assumes to know Surgery Line - when in fact this person has never even discussed our service with us.

Just to clarify; after 13 years in this business and a holder of both a degree and Masters I feel no need to go out and 'scam' people in order to make a living.

OK - personal feelings to one side;

It makes no odds to us at all if a surgery queues calls for 20mins or 1min or not at all and continues to give the engaged tone as we do not make money from this element.

The SURGERY makes this choice, and can change the queue duration at any time, as Surgery Line is bespoke it can often take about 3-6months before it fits the environment of the practice, list size and patient demographic.

Many practices conduct patient surveys, and this always bring up the problem of access, esp first thing in the morning.

The practice can either continue to give the engaged tone, meaning no one can get through - even if they wanted to cancel their appt, or employ another person to ans calls for the first 1.5 hours, OR adopt a queue facility which TELLS THE PATIENT WHERE THEY ARE IN THE QUEUE - so they have a choice.

I am also a patient, and before my own GP moved to Surgery Line it was a total nightmare to get through. I am far too busy to keep ringing an engaged tone in the hope I can get through. For this reason I often didn't bother to cancel my appts as I couldn't reach them. It also cost me 50p to use BT ring back.

It probably costs me about £1 a year to ring my doctor - lets get things in perspective shall we?

We are the preferred supplier to GP in the UK and again we don't make out money from the length of call, but the rental for the hardware of the system. Practices have a choice - THEY decide how it is set up, not us.

Rather than speculate about NEG - wouldn't it be far better to speak to us and get a true picture?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 17th, 2007 at 12:00pm
OK then Mr K V Simons, what is "the true picture"?  

By the way, who are you?  Do you work for NEG and in which capacity?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Kiwi_g on Jul 17th, 2007 at 12:18pm
I think that you’ll find that Mr KV Simons is in fact Kath Simons, referred to in a post from idb on 7 October 2006.

I do however think that our government must shoulder most of the blame.  They set targets and then expect these to be met without any cost to themselves – i.e. stealth taxation.  It’s the same with Patient Line (to put matters in perspective, I have nothing to do with any telecom company or service provider).

Even the watchdogs are on the side of the “powers that be” so where does that leave us?

All we can do is keep on prodding those in power.  I see that there are over 10,500 members.



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 17th, 2007 at 12:30pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 9:51am:
Having read various incorrect postings re NEG, and quite frankly an offensive posting from user idb I felt compelled to register and post a response. I use the word 'offensive' as idb feels that a) he has the right to make assumptions about me and how I 'bull s**t' my customers and b) he assumes to know Surgery Line - when in fact this person has never even discussed our service with us.

Just to clarify; after 13 years in this business and a holder of both a degree and Masters I feel no need to go out and 'scam' people in order to make a living.

OK - personal feelings to one side;

It makes no odds to us at all if a surgery queues calls for 20mins or 1min or not at all and continues to give the engaged tone as we do not make money from this element.

The SURGERY makes this choice, and can change the queue duration at any time, as Surgery Line is bespoke it can often take about 3-6months before it fits the environment of the practice, list size and patient demographic.

Many practices conduct patient surveys, and this always bring up the problem of access, esp first thing in the morning.

The practice can either continue to give the engaged tone, meaning no one can get through - even if they wanted to cancel their appt, or employ another person to ans calls for the first 1.5 hours, OR adopt a queue facility which TELLS THE PATIENT WHERE THEY ARE IN THE QUEUE - so they have a choice.

I am also a patient, and before my own GP moved to Surgery Line it was a total nightmare to get through. I am far too busy to keep ringing an engaged tone in the hope I can get through. For this reason I often didn't bother to cancel my appts as I couldn't reach them. It also cost me 50p to use BT ring back.

It probably costs me about £1 a year to ring my doctor - lets get things in perspective shall we?

We are the preferred supplier to GP in the UK and again we don't make out money from the length of call, but the rental for the hardware of the system. Practices have a choice - THEY decide how it is set up, not us.

Rather than speculate about NEG - wouldn't it be far better to speak to us and get a true picture?
Ms Simons, as you appear to need to state credentials, then I'll do the same. I have a bachelor's degree in engineering and a master's degree in computing. My former responsibilities in the United Kingdom included the administration of a telephone switch within the public sector. I am fully aware of how NGNs, including 084X, 087X, 070X and 09X are used by various organizations to establish a revenue stream and in many cases exploit the public.

SurgeryLine is a rip-off. It also may have serious consequences. Just because you are too busy to redial after receiving a busy tone doesn't mean that 80-year old Mrs Smith, living on benefits, is also too busy. I'm sure she would rather redial than pay the rip-off rate for dialing an 0844 number. Consider Mr Jones, a welfare recipient who either has to use payphones or PAYG cellular. Would he rather have a geographic number or one that begins 0844? I'll let you guess the answer.

Consider those, like myself, that had a requirement to call my surgery from overseas. Before becoming a permanent US resident, I was traveling back and forth between the UK and Florida whilst awaiting various medical test results. This happened over an eighteen month period. I also needed to schedule and change appointments. If my surgery had used a scam 0844 number, then I would have been denied access as my US telephone provider does not route calls to scam 0844 numbers.

My elderly parents have also visited me in Florida. Should the need arise, how can they or I or a health care professional call their UK surgery, in an emergency situation, when many foreign providers do not route to scam 0844 numbers? (If you don't believe me, either ask Ofcom, or I'll provide a link to Ofcom documentation). Please explain what we should do.

When will NEG stop calling these numbers 'lo-call', 'low-call' or similar?

Now 03 numbers are coming, will SurgeryLine use these as such numbers will have no detriment to the patient.



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 17th, 2007 at 1:29pm

loddon wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 12:00pm:
OK then Mr K V Simons, what is "the true picture"?  

By the way, who are you?  Do you work for NEG and in which capacity?


The only person at NEG mentioned on their website is their founder Scott Russell, who no longer works at the company.  Its directors seem rather keen to hide their identities, although no doubt they can be learned by purchasing the appropriate return for £1 from the www.companieshouse.co.uk website

See www.negtec.co.uk/scott_russell.htm

However after calling NEG's 0800 customer service number I have learned that K V Simons is in fact female and is a mere sales executive with the company and not as you might assume from her tone one of its directors or its managing director.

Her claims that NEG doesn't make any money from the 0844 numbers are so preposterous (we know the doctors don't get the revenue share and that the revenue share from these 0844 numbers exists so where then does the money go) that one can only assume that she has been taken in by the same brainwashing propaganda they dish out to their clients in which any old form of economy with the truth will do in order to con dumber practice managers in to believing that 0844 numbers are normal priced calls.

I have here several brochures from NEG with claims about phone call costs that I intend to file copies of with the ASA as a formal complaint in due course.  However as those brochure are all intended for doctors surgeries and not for doctors patients it remains to be seen whether the ASA will be prepared to investigate this further.

If Ms Simons in fact holds the qualifications she claims to then I cannot imagine any real form of job satisfaction for her from working at NEG other than the no doubt fast growing size of her bank account.

Yet it does not seem to even occur her to that every time she signs a new Surgeryline contract for NEG she is in fact stabbing all of the patients of those doctors in the back. :o >:( :'(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by leedslad on Jul 17th, 2007 at 1:39pm
Unfortunately I recently suffered at the hands of this outfit. My local surgery unbenown to me had changed to Surgery Line in the interests of 'Customer Improvement' after a survey of their patients. I should have known this was coming.
Recently I was on holiday in the Canaries and developed problems with my lower back which required the attendance of a local doctor to the complex where I was staying. Because I have had similar problems on a vist some months before to the Canaries the doctor would not give me any further treatment without speaking to my local GP in the UK. He tried the 0844 number and this would not connect. I then went to the expense of 'phoning a friend who uses the same surgery and asking her to obtain an alternative number. This was given as an 0870 number. Surprise surprise this wouldn't work either. Upon contacting Telefonica the main telecoms provider for Spain / Canaries I was advised that they will only connect to UK nos beginning with 01, 02 and 07 due to previous problems in attempting to recover monies owned due to the 'revenue sharing arrangement'. I don't take a mobile on holiday due to the cost of calls and I don't want to be disturbed either. After all I'm on holiday.

As a result I spent the best part of a day in hospital in Las Palmas for further checks. This all could have been avoided if the local doctor could have spoken with my GP in the UK. My insurance company wouldn't cover me either, so be warned in you're travelling abroad.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 17th, 2007 at 1:47pm

leedslad wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 1:39pm:
As a result I spent the best part of a day in hospital in Las Palmas for further checks. This all could have been avoided if the local doctor could have spoken with my GP in the UK. My insurance company wouldn't cover me either, so be warned in you're travelling abroad.


I would recommend you lodge this as a formal complaint with your MP and ask him to refer this to the Parliamentary Ombusman for a formal investigation as an example of the total and uitter failure of the regulator Ofcom to fulfil its Primary duty under part 3(i) of the Communications Act 2003 to look after the best interests of the UK citizen consumer.  Your complaint to your MP is about Ofcom who are accountable to the Parliamentary Ombudsman for their actions or in this case their inaction to stop the NEG scam.

I would also recommend you forward copies of all correspondnce to your MP by email to the executive and non executive directors of Ofcom, all of whom are listed on their website and for whom the email addresses are firstname.lastname@ofcom.org.uk Also copy in the Chairman of their Consumer Panel, colette.bowe@ofcomconsumerpanel.org.uk

In fact if you PM me and request it I will send you the email addreses of several UK national newspaper journalists who are likely to be rather interested in covering your story.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 17th, 2007 at 2:31pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 9:51am:
Having read various incorrect postings re NEG, and quite frankly an offensive posting from user idb I felt compelled to register and post a response. I use the word 'offensive' as idb feels that a) he has the right to make assumptions about me and how I 'bull s**t' my customers and b) he assumes to know Surgery Line - when in fact this person has never even discussed our service with us.

The response from yourself that idb referred to is this:

Quote:
Hi Heather

Whether this will work out to be self funding or not depends on how much
this company will give you back for each 0844 call...we also supply
Patient Partner as one of our 'add-on' modules and we give the practice
2p for each
0844 call - you may want to check this. It then depends on how many
calls you receive. We would be able to give you an indication based on
list size.

0844 numbers are not non-geographic numbers, they're lo-cal numbers, a
non-geo number would be 0870, which as you probably know, are no longer
allowed to be used by surgeries.

0844 numbers are fully sanctioned by the Department of Health and also
Ofcom, and there are no plans to change the ruling.

Patients (and the general public as a whole, i.e. you, me - us!), now
have a free rein to use who they wish for calls from home / landline,
and while some packages do give free calls, most of these are not during
the day and the costs are hidden elsewhere, plus of course it is up to
the individual to negotiate a suitable package with their provider.

Telephone systems, Patient Partner, Jayex wallboards, Automatic Patient
Check-in screens etc can all be a costly outlay for a practice, 0844
numbers are just a way of reducing this cost, either entirely or partly.

Kath Simons
N.E.G Surgery Line

The first highlighted paragraph is incorrect as a non-geographic number is, by definition, one that is not geographical. That means that 0844 is a non-geographical number prefix. The term 'lo-call' is one that was coined by BT to market 0845 numbers (not 0844), and is now no longer used by them for the very reason that it is potentially misleading. Refer to this page on BT's website. 0844 and 0871 are marketed as 'Contactcall' numbers and 0845 and 0870 are 'BT 0845' and 'BT 0870', respectively.

In the second highlighted paragraph you quite rightly identify that there is a free market whereby telephone users can choose a provider(s) for their service. As with most service providers, a doctor's surgery is fixed, and therefore it is reasonable to consider the price of a telephone call from the caller to them is the price of a (geographical) UK landline call as that is where the call terminates.

By imposing a 0844 NGN on the caller, they are paying a premium to call [Lookup the definition of 'premium' in the dictionary]. Simple. That is what Say no to 0870 is about. By being forced to call a company on 084x/087x they are charging me above the price of a standard landline call.

The potential merits of how the Surgery Line system functions are not being questioned in the same way that the benefits of NTS are not in doubt. Having a call answered and being put in queue costs the caller. That's the case choose what "product" is used. The only place where the caller doesn't pay is when they have an inclusive package, but then you believe and the surgeries (service providers) that you have carte blanche to decide what the market price is for a telephone call ("just a few pence").


KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 9:51am:
It makes no odds to us at all if a surgery queues calls for 20mins or 1min or not at all and continues to give the engaged tone as we do not make money from this element.

So where do the call charges go? The tooth fairy? ::)

Ms Simons, please clarify where the revenue from the 0844 number goes. I suspect you are splitting hairs in that the revenue (2p/min???) goes to the surgery who then (in practice) pay it back to NEG for provision of the service. If this is the case, then NEG would obviously receive payment regardless. Thus, the surgery is benefiting in kind.

At 2p/min there is obviously room for other party(ies) to profit, probably the telco providing NGN. As the customer of this company, NEG should be paying this, and not the caller. This would drive down the charges for these NTS numbers, rather than fixing them at xp/min to the caller. They are therefore contravene the free competitive market in telephone calls which has been introduced.

Also, if a company does not profit from an 084x/087x number, it certainly receives services in kind. These should be paid for out of the service provider's budget and not on a per minute basis by the caller!!!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 17th, 2007 at 2:31pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 9:51am:
It probably costs me about £1 a year to ring my doctor - lets get things in perspective shall we?

Ms Simons, a free market is just that. The telepone companies decide how much they charge for calling from A to B. In this case we are talking a UK landline. Any charges for additional services like NTS should be bourne by the receiving party as a business expense. It is therefore not for service providers to overrule this and say "well it's only x pence".


KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 9:51am:
We are the preferred supplier to GP in the UK and again we don't make out money from the length of call, but the rental for the hardware of the system. Practices have a choice - THEY decide how it is set up, not us.

And it is a patient's choice what sort of telephone package they use. It is not for the likes of NEG and doctors to step right over that and charge a fixed amount regardless of package.


KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 9:51am:
Rather than speculate about NEG - wouldn't it be far better to speak to us and get a true picture?

Will NEG be looking to move Surgery Line and others like School Line on to a 03xx number when they come into service?

What about people calling from phone boxes and mobiles? Especially during the daytime when they are likely to be out? Conveniently you don't mention them.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by KVSimons on Jul 17th, 2007 at 4:23pm
In answer to your response, I work as Snr Consultant for NEG - so you could say I am biased (!) or I am simply passionate about our company and the service we provide (depending on what side of the fence you sit at!!). To be quite honest we have taken a lot of stick since the days of 0870 - which were banned obviously by the DOH, shortly before they agreed to let us roll out 0844 - all this history and the fact we install at 30-40 surgeries a month make us even more determined because the bottom line is that it does work and it is a fantastic service, the queuing part is only 20% of the solution it offers so much more; both practice and patient perspective.

The public (which includes me!) have a right as to who provides their gas, electricity and telephony at home. There are more and more suppliers on the market. I am with One Tel, and as I may very few calls at peak time (as I am out working), my best package gives me free evening and weekend calls plus a low line rental (zero in fact). It does mean that I do have to pay to use my surgery's 0844 number; but I can book and cancel my appts 24/7 365 days a year, so while I am in the minority that does have to pay I feel it's worth it as I can access my surgery easily and at any time convienient to me. Plus of course I make 99% of my calls from my mobile.

The 0844 is charged the same as a standard BT rate.

I also go back to saying - practices don't have to have the queueing, plus they decide how many to queue; some practices we work with have this set quite high (these tend to be large) and other, smaller ones will either have no queuing or will have it set at say 5 or 10.

Re School Line, 03 numbers have been mentioned - these won't be rolled out for another 18 months - 2years - so who knows!!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Tanllan on Jul 17th, 2007 at 4:34pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 4:23pm:
...
The 0844 is charged the same as a standard BT rate.
Nope.
0844 is specifically excluded from landline and mobile bundles, that is why it is so lucrative.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 17th, 2007 at 4:44pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 4:23pm:
The 0844 is charged the same as a standard BT rate.


No it isn't.

BT Option 3 includes unlimited calls to 01/02 numbers.  0844 calls with NEG are not part of this allowance and are charged at 5p per minute at all times.

Virgin Everyday Pay As You Go tariff costs 12p per minute at all times to all 01/02 numbers and all 077, 078 and 079 mobile numbers.  0844 numbers cost 40p per minute at all times.

Contract mobile phone give 500 or 750 minutes a month for instance for say £30 to all 01/02 and other mobile numbers. 0844 numbers are excluded and cost around 20p to 40p per minute.  There are no packages that include these numbers.  The revenue share rake off makes it impossible.

So not a normal BT rate is it.

Its not just your own little scam 0844 numbers is it either ?  Its all the other lieing scam operators with scam staff like you with no principle and no conscience and only pound signs in their eyes and only interested in meeting their sales targets to get more money in their own pocket  and not able to think about the big picture of people only paying £5 per month for all 01/02 calls but another £20 per month for all the 084/7 numbers not in their calls package.  Which lieing toerags like you still outrageously claim are the normal BT rate.

My theory is that most people at NEG have either been lobotomised on joining the company or are congenitally stupid so they are not able to analyse facts in a normal logical and rational manner.  Look at your founder.  One shouldn't judge from appearances but he looks like more like Ducking and Diving dodgy Essex dell box than Brain of Britain doesn't he.

Yes that is rude but I think rudeness is entirely called for when it comes to NEG and its deplorable army of money grabbing staff.

For instance are you not aware that the cost of calling an NEG number from a phone box is 13p per minute compared to only 2p per minute for a normal 01/02 number.

Think of the 80 year old pensioner who has an ill wife with only a few coins in their pocket.  Where is your conscience young lady? :o ::) :'(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by mikeinnc on Jul 17th, 2007 at 4:54pm

Quote:
Think of the 80 year old pensioner who has an ill wife with only a few coins in their pocket.  Where is your conscience young lady?


How do you know she's young?

Lobotomised and consequently brain dead I'll go along with.......  ;D

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 17th, 2007 at 5:03pm

mikeinnc wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 4:54pm:
How do you know she's young?


Ah yes I missed the 13 years with NEG and I expect she was probably selling double glazing or life assurance before that.

So an inveterate lifelong sales women unable to tell truth from fiction and undoubtedly willing to sell her own grandmother in order to pay next month's mortgage interest.

You only need to look at the picture of NEG's founder under About Us to imagine the kind of people who work there.

Still there's always selling wheel clamping to councils next month if Ofcom ever wakes up and so causes NEG to go belly up.

I wonder what on earth the Masters can have been in?

NGMsGhost

BA (Hons) in Economics and Politics - but that was 1985 when getting a degree was a bit more difficult than it is today.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Jul 17th, 2007 at 5:07pm
Quote from KVSimons on Today at 9:51am:


Quote:
after 13 years in this business and a holder of both a degree and Masters I feel no need to go out and 'scam' people in order to make a living.


Your degrees are no guarantee of your fairness and honesty.  Look at the number of crooks identified in the House of Lords who have no doubt also been awarded various degrees in their youths.  

Quote from KVSimons on Today at 4.23pm:


Quote:
The 0844 is charged the same as a standard BT rate.


Flogging telecommunication services you should know better. 0844 calls to your GP clients from a private landline cost 5p/min at all times . Refer to the BT price list to see how much less the equivalent charges to geographical numbers are and also to see how much more than 5p/min 0844 calls cost from payphones and mobiles

Lompos (MSc)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Jul 17th, 2007 at 6:23pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 4:23pm:
The 0844 is charged the same as a standard BT rate.
Your qualifications can't really be in maths if you think that an 0844 which is generally charged at 5p/min at all times (from a BT landline) is the same as BTs normal rate.  BT currently charge 3p/min daytime and is cheaper of evening and weekend.

As Dave has mentioned, we don't generally dispute the benefits of non-geographical numbers but it's when companies advertise these numbers as local (you once did) or national when in fact the number is a stealth premium rate number.

It is stealth because there is revenue made from it either by the surgery and/or NEG and in many cases consumers (or patients in this case) aren't aware that money is being made from the call.

Some Communication Providers generally provide revenue to users who have an 0845 and as this is cheaper priced than the 0844 numbers used by NEG, then it becomes obvious that revenue is made from the call regardless of how it is used and by whom.

If you weren't that concerned about revenue (as supposedly NEG doesn't make any) then why do you go through all the trouble of disconnecting the geographical numbers used by surgeries and issue new geographical numbers which it appears in all cases you don't inform the surgery of their new geographical number instead just issue them an 0844 or 0870 to inform their patients of.

In most cases, non-geographical numbers like 0844 just divert/transfer to one or more geographical numbers.

Why do you try and hide the geographical number from surgeries and patients if there is no revenue made from 0844 numbers?

You could give patients a choice by issuing a geographical number to surgeries.  That way, patients can choose whether to keep trying to get through (in the case of an engaged geographical number) or wait in a queue and be charged for doing so.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by ultra1984 on Jul 17th, 2007 at 7:30pm
My surgery recently changed over to an 0844 number.  Signs went up everwhere in the surgery this is a low-cost number.  The first month it cost me nearly £5 due to problems with the system.  Never mind the fact I was in tears because I felt so ill and when I did get through the system hung up on me 3 times.  When I finally got through all the appointments had gone.  I cried because I felt so ill.  There was no other way of contacting the surgery. I complained to the practice manager but they never offered to refund the money!   :'(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 17th, 2007 at 8:00pm
Well Ms Simons, having invited us to talk to you to get the "true picture" I do believe you have failed to convince a single person on this site that there is anything "true" in what NEG says.   Indeed it apprears that just about everything you have said has been shown to be questionable, inaccurate, misleading or a downright lie.  

You have succeeded in calling into question not only your veracity and trustworthyness and that of your company, but have also convinced contributors to this forum of the very low intellectual capacity and moral degradation of yourself and all who work at NEG.   Your mathematical ability appears to be lower than primary school level.   I am sure many 10 year olds could tell whether 40p/min or 5p/min was more or less than 2p/min.   You have added to the general belief that NEG is essentially a parasitic, greedy, exploitative, rip-off company.  

You give no consideration whatsoever to the patients who are compelled to use your expensive phone numbers and in effect have to pay a stealth tax in order to call their doctor.    You have no compassion for the old, the sick and those of limited financial means and you have complete inability to envisage the distress your company is causing, to say nothing of the rage and pent up fury which is welling up in resentment of NEG and its practices.  You and NEG may yet have a to pay a very high price for all the damage you are doing.  You are causing  some difficulties in doctor patient relationships.   I know two retired dentists and a retired surgeon in this locality who are furious that their doctors have gone over to 0844.  

By the way, it is not necessary to adopt 0844 in order to   " adopt a queue facility which TELLS THE PATIENT WHERE THEY ARE IN THE QUEUE".   My doctor's system used to announce your position in the queue on their previous geographical number.   If you would care to call the Royal Berkshire Hospital on 0118 322 7400 you can enjoy being in a low cost or free call queue AND be told where you are in the queue!   I suspect this sizable regional hospital is several hundred times larger than any of your doctors practices so please stop telling your sales prospects that only by using 0844 may callers be told where they are in the queue -- that is another lie.



Do you think you could NOW look at the facts and the TRUTH objectively, dispassionately and logically and finally admit that what NEG is doing is largely dishonest and that you are encouraging doctors, of all people, to deceive and even lie to their patients?  This is fundamentally undermining the bond of trust between doctor and patient.  If doctors can be seen to lie about this, what doubts might patients have about other more important issues?   This especially at a time when GPs are reported to be paid on average £100k and up to £250k per annum(Daily Mail 16/07/2007), a massive pay increase in the past few years -- so why do they need to use NEG's underhand methods to fund a new phone system when they could easily finance it in an open conventional way as a normal business expense?

So having read all the comments so far, and your first message was only timed at 09.51 this morning, what have you now got to say?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 17th, 2007 at 8:47pm

ultra1984 wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 7:30pm:
My surgery recently changed over to an 0844 number.  Signs went up everwhere in the surgery this is a low-cost number.  The first month it cost me nearly £5 due to problems with the system.  Never mind the fact I was in tears because I felt so ill and when I did get through the system hung up on me 3 times.  When I finally got through all the appointments had gone.  I cried because I felt so ill.  There was no other way of contacting the surgery. I complained to the practice manager but they never offered to refund the money!   :'(


I suggest you send a complaint about this to Ofcom's CEO, Ed Richards (ed.richards@ofcom.org.uk) saying that they are failing in their principal duty under the Communications Act 2003 to protect the best interests of the UK Citizen Consumer by not using their reserve powers to stop doctors using these numbers and not preventing their description by doctors as "low-cost numbers".  Ask Mr Richards to investigate.  Don't be fobbed off to the Ofcom Contact Centre who are a waste of time.  Continue to pursue the matter with Ofcom until you are deadlocked with them and they refuse to help any more.

At that point approach your MP using www.writetothem.com drawing attention to his attention Ofcom's failure to both prevent the use of these numbers altogether by doctor's surgeries and their failure to prevent 0844 being called low-cost calls as the ASA have no power in this area.  Say you want your MP to write to the Parliamentary Ombudsman to have this investigated as a formal complaint against Ofcom for not properly fulfilling their principal duty under the Communications Act 2003 to protect the best interests of the UK citizen consumer.  At that point Ofcom might finally have to explain themselves.

You might also want to pursue the high level complaints procedure through the NHS which ultimately leads to the door of the same Parliamentary Ombudsman.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 17th, 2007 at 11:22pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 9:51am:
Having read various incorrect postings re NEG, and quite frankly an offensive posting from user idb I felt compelled to register and post a response. I use the word 'offensive' as idb feels that a) he has the right to make assumptions about me and how I 'bull s**t' my customers and b) he assumes to know Surgery Line - when in fact this person has never even discussed our service with us.
Given your two postings on here, in addition to what I quoted earlier in this thread, I fully stand by the BS assertion. It is clear that you have no idea how much 0844 is charged from a landline; no idea what premium is paid by callers from alternative networks such as cellular, VOIP and payphone, and no idea that international termination to such numbers is either difficult or impossible. Indeed, one poster has even stated his difficulty contacting his surgery from Spain, and all because NEG's revenue stream is more important than providing a SERVICE to patients.

Your odious organization is a disgrace. It exploits patients. It shafts the customer. You should hang your head in shame rather than perpetrate yet more BS relating to SurgeryLine.

The sad aspect is that it will need a death or serious incident, relating the inability to contact a healthcare provider from overseas for any action to take place to curtail this HUGE scam that NEG is hoisting on a largely unsuspecting public (although that may be changing). If this happens, then I hope that a sharp attorney will go after NEG for all it has, and then perhaps it will end up like Patientline - a sick patient in need of decapitation to put it out of its misery and liberate the patient from exploitation.

Does NEG staff have any ethics/morals whatsoever?

I am offended by NEG. IT PUTS LIVES AT RISK. IT PUTS PROFITS BEFORE PATIENTS. IT PUTS GREED BEFORE SERVICE.



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 17th, 2007 at 11:27pm
And, Ms Simons, let me give you an example of NEG's BS:

http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/downloads/surgeryline-thelodge.pdf

How your patients benefit
Patients benefit by having their calls
answered more quickly. The engaged
tone becomes rare – even at peak times -
because you are able to handle incoming
calls more efficiently, whilst patient calls
are spread out during the day. Calls to
084 or ‘lo-call’ numbers cost patients 4p
per minute, the same as the first minute
of BT’s standard call rate between 6am
and 6pm. This means that many
patients will actually pay less in total
because their call is answered and
processed more quickly. Significantly, the
cost of calls from mobiles remains
unchanged - these account for around
30% of all calls to surgeries.

This is pure bull. 0844 is not, and has never been described as 'lo-call', 'low-call' or whatever other sexy-sounding spin you want to attach to the true description of PREMIUM RATE SCAM.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 18th, 2007 at 12:21am

wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 11:27pm:
Significantly, the
cost of calls from mobiles remains unchanged - these account for around 30% of all calls to surgeries.


This is also pure bulls**t

0844 calls are consistently excluded from inclusive calling bundles by all contract mobile providers and charged at a premium rate of up to 40p per minute.  Also on a a Pay As You Go tariff such as Virgin's Everyday you pay 40p per minute at all times for 0844 compared to 12p per minute for 01/02 and mobile calls.

The whole NEG house of cards is based on simple lieing and given the kind of people who work for them that is hardly much surprise.

What is much more surprising and alarming is that the continued growth of this appalling ripoff empire relies on the apparent stupidity of and/or lack of concern for the economic welfare of their patients of professionally qualified doctors and also the total failiure of Ofcom to take any action to stop the continued scamming or the lies about the call costs, even though the Communications Act 2003 gives them all the powers they need to do so.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 18th, 2007 at 1:20am

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 18th, 2007 at 12:21am:
The whole NEG house of cards is based on simple lieing and given the kind of people who work for them that is hardly much surprise.
These are the warm cuddly people who run NEG (pictures on web site) who are putting LIVES AT RISK by forcing surgeries into operating numbers that cannot be called under certain circumstances. They withdraw the geographic numbers so that patients are forced to dial premium rated numbers. Perhaps you would like to tell them how you feel:

http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/about/management_team.html

Dean Rayment – Managing Director

Dean is one of NEG ’s longest serving employees who joined the company in 1993 leaving 3 years later to co-fund Mediacom Global Communications Ltd. In a twist of fate NEG acquired Mediacom during an acquisition programme in 1999 and Dean rejoined NEG as part of earn-out arrangement and decided to stay. In the summer of 2002 Dean was appointed to the board accepting the position of Customer Accounts Director responsible for the management of the existing client base and internal marketing. In October 2004 after an MBO (Management Buy Out) Dean was appointed to Managing Director of NEG . Dean lives in Essex with his wife Rosie and is a keen sportsman enjoying golf, skiing and most water sports.

deanr@networkeuropegroup.com

Craig Hughes – Engineering Director

Craig Hughes joined NEG after 14 years in the Royal Air Force as a Telecommunication Engineer. He subsequently gained extensive experience in data, satellite and voice communications. He left the RAF finishing at the rank of Non Commissioned Officer after completing a tour at the Defence Crisis Management Centre in Whitehall. Craig joined NEG As the Nortel Product Manager, with his wealth of experience he was soon promoted to Engineering Manager. In 2003 Craig was rewarded for all his hard work with promotion to the position of Group General Manger. In October 2004 as part of the Management Team Craig became Engineering Director of NEG after an internal Management By Out. Craig has settled down in Essex and is a very keen sportsman and continues to participate in his love for the sport of rugby.

craigh@networkeuropegroup.com

Scott Russell – Non-Executive Director

In 1992 Scott Russell founded Network Europe Telecommunications ltd growing the company organically and through strategic acquisitions to become one of Europe’s premier suppliers of business telephone systems. In the Autumn 2004 Scott stepped down as Managing Director of NEG after successfully spearheaded the sale of the highly profitable Network division to Cable & Wireless’s largest international business partner, then orchestrating a consolidation and Management buyout of the remaining group companies. Scott is now a respected industry consultant regularly contributing to several leading telecommunication publications and has appeared on both television and radio. He lives in rural Suffolk with his wife and two boys, is a keen sportsman and private pilot, and strongly believes "if you look after your customers, they'll look after you"




Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 18th, 2007 at 1:47am

idb wrote on Jul 18th, 2007 at 1:20am:

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 18th, 2007 at 12:21am:
The whole NEG house of cards is based on simple lieing and given the kind of people who work for them that is hardly much surprise.
These are the warm cuddly people who run NEG (pictures on web site) who are putting LIVES AT RISK by forcing surgeries into operating numbers that cannot be called under certain circumstances. They withdraw the geographic numbers so that patients are forced to dial premium rated numbers. Perhaps you would like to tell them how you feel:

http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/about/management_team.html

Dean Rayment – Managing Director

Dean is one of NEG ’s longest serving employees who joined the company in 1993 leaving 3 years later to co-fund Mediacom Global Communications Ltd. In a twist of fate NEG acquired Mediacom during an acquisition programme in 1999 and Dean rejoined NEG as part of earn-out arrangement and decided to stay. In the summer of 2002 Dean was appointed to the board accepting the position of Customer Accounts Director responsible for the management of the existing client base and internal marketing. In October 2004 after an MBO (Management Buy Out) Dean was appointed to Managing Director of NEG . Dean lives in Essex with his wife Rosie and is a keen sportsman enjoying golf, skiing and most water sports.

deanr@networkeuropegroup.com

Craig Hughes – Engineering Director

Craig Hughes joined NEG after 14 years in the Royal Air Force as a Telecommunication Engineer. He subsequently gained extensive experience in data, satellite and voice communications. He left the RAF finishing at the rank of Non Commissioned Officer after completing a tour at the Defence Crisis Management Centre in Whitehall. Craig joined NEG As the Nortel Product Manager, with his wealth of experience he was soon promoted to Engineering Manager. In 2003 Craig was rewarded for all his hard work with promotion to the position of Group General Manger. In October 2004 as part of the Management Team Craig became Engineering Director of NEG after an internal Management By Out. Craig has settled down in Essex and is a very keen sportsman and continues to participate in his love for the sport of rugby.

craigh@networkeuropegroup.com

Scott Russell – Non-Executive Director

In 1992 Scott Russell founded Network Europe Telecommunications ltd growing the company organically and through strategic acquisitions to become one of Europe’s premier suppliers of business telephone systems.  He lives in rural Suffolk with his wife and two boys, is a keen sportsman and private pilot, and strongly believes "if you look after your customers, they'll look after you"

What a shame that Mr Russell's customers don't seem to have the same caring attitude towards their own sickly captive human customer base.

I still can't believe the NHS hasn't made it illegal for doctors surgeries to use anything other than 01/02 geographic phone numbers.

A shame about the bloke from the RAF as he does seem to have had a reasonably useful career prior to joining NEG.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 18th, 2007 at 2:36am

KVSimons wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 4:23pm:
The 0844 is charged the same as a standard BT rate.

"Standard BT rate" for what? ::)

As has been pointed out, the 0844 numbers provided to surgeries by NEG are charged at 5p/min at all times from a BT landline. You have pointed out that consumers have a choice about which provider that they use. These numbers effectively drive a coach and horses through this process and are charged at the same rate across (most) landline providers. Mobiles and payphones usually charge more.

So on the one hand, you claim that consumers are 'liberated' through market choice, and on the other, cling to BT's standard (sic) rates to justify your company's actions.

You haven't answered my question about where the proceedes of the 5p/min go. I understand that surgeries receive 2p/min and (in practice) they pay that back to NEG. Is this correct? So what about doing away with 084x NTS and providing 01/02 geographicals??? This will give patients a choice; remember them???!

Oh, and where has the st...st...stuttering Mr Chapman gone? :-/ Cl...cl...click here. ;D

And what's more, NEG continues with its lies of "national rate" respective of 0870 numbers. See here. This is misleading, as well you know, and Trading Standards have stated that they consider that it may be misleading within Part III of Consumer Protection Act 1987, and therefore the company liable for prosecution.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 18th, 2007 at 10:05am
My betting is that Kath Simons won't be sticking her head above the parapet in this thread again anytime soon.

The main technique ignored by sales people when confronted over their lies is usually simply to act as though they have never heard the question.

The fact that she has been there for 13 years says that she can't possibly not understand what is really going on.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 18th, 2007 at 7:42pm
What has happened to Kath????

You could almost hear a pin drop in this thread today. ;) ::) ;D

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 18th, 2007 at 11:51pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 18th, 2007 at 7:42pm:
What has happened to Kath????

You could almost hear a pin drop in this thread today. ;) ::) ;D
I didn't think she would return - her lack of understanding is all too clear.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by alan99 on Jul 19th, 2007 at 12:06am
Hello

Agree with you 100%. NEG are a despicable, odious company. They just want
to make money from anyone especially picking on the elderly, confused
and sick.

They deliberately charge the max for an 0844 number, cashing in on mosts peoples confusion on the ridiculous Ofcon charging structure for 08x numbers. Most people think 0844 is "local" like 0845. They dont give an 09 number knowing patients will smell a rat.

When they put in a 0844 number they then deliberately  cut off
the old trusted geographic number? This is not "providing a service "
, where is the choice? This is forcing patients to put money into these
bloodsuckers  pockets.

From Ms Simons NEG
QUOTE"I am also a patient, and before my own GP moved to Surgery Line it was a total nightmare to get through. I am far too busy to keep ringing an engaged tone in the hope I can get through. For this reason I often didn't bother to cancel my appts as I couldn't reach them. It also cost me 50p to use BT ring back.  "UNQUOTE



My local surgery is still on geo numbers. People MUST phone them in
the morning to make an appointment. Think this is same for all surgeries.
I phoned them some time ago at 08.00 hrs, engaged , 08.30 engaged.
I tried again 08.45 got the ring back service and ring back phoned me
back about 09.00 hrs
The cost of ring back on BT is 15p (or £1.75 pm) ,not 50p AFAIK.
total cost about 30p . How much with NEG hanging on for about 30 mins.
£1.50 plus the stress of an ill person having to keep the phone  pressed
to his/her ear all that time.
Disgraceful. Keep the geo number, give people the option.

Any chance , someone who can work these things, put this nasty scheme
onto front page of a national newspaper. I think a journalist will find some
unfortunate soul "Sick, frail 80 year old charged £12
(or whatever) to phone his doctors surgery" "I thought 0844 was a local
number says patient " 40p min  from some  mobiles. Or what happens if the patient runs out of PAYG credit?

All the best, keep up the good work.

Alan

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 19th, 2007 at 1:09am

alan99 wrote on Jul 19th, 2007 at 12:06am:
Any chance , someone who can work these things, put this nasty scheme onto front page of a national newspaper. I think a journalist will find some
unfortunate soul "Sick, frail 80 year old charged £12 (or whatever) to phone his doctors surgery" "I thought 0844 was a local
number says patient " 40p min  from some  mobiles. Or what happens if the patient runs out of PAYG credit?


I think leeds lad's case a few posts back would be precisely the kind of thing that would make an interesting newspaper story.

I guess now could be the time to try and turn up the heat against OfCoN, who I see are now trying to put the heat on the broadcasting companies to direct attention away from a scam that is actually entirely a result of their regulatory failure to properly restrict the use of these numbers and control access to them on ordinary domestic phone lines.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 20th, 2007 at 6:00pm
To NMGsGhost
I have sent you a personal message on this topic, please look asap. URGENT,
Good Luck, Loddon

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 20th, 2007 at 11:23pm

ultra1984 wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 7:30pm:
My surgery recently changed over to an 0844 number.  Signs went up everwhere in the surgery this is a low-cost number.  The first month it cost me nearly £5 due to problems with the system.  Never mind the fact I was in tears because I felt so ill and when I did get through the system hung up on me 3 times.  When I finally got through all the appointments had gone.  I cried because I felt so ill.  There was no other way of contacting the surgery. I complained to the practice manager but they never offered to refund the money!   :'(


Hi there,

I noticed your post and thought you might want to know that there is a journalist at The Times called David Rose, their health correspondent, who is currently writing up a story on the NEG doctor's surgery scam and is wanting to talk to real life examples of people like you who have actually had their own doctor's surgery number change to 0844 as a result of NEG's activities, and so who have to call one of these 084 or 087 numbers and suffered financially as a result.

If you would be interested in talking to him and having your case featured can you send an email to him at david.rose@the-times.co.uk also giving your phone number (home and/or mobile) and name and he will get in touch with you (probably this weekend as he is writing the story for an edition of next week's Times newspaper) to discuss it further.

I hope this is not intruding but you seemed pretty upset about what NEG has done and thought you might want to have the chance to strike back against them.

Regards,

NGMsGhost

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 20th, 2007 at 11:28pm

leedslad wrote on Jul 17th, 2007 at 1:39pm:
As a result I spent the best part of a day in hospital in Las Palmas for further checks. This all could have been avoided if the local doctor could have spoken with my GP in the UK. My insurance company wouldn't cover me either, so be warned in you're travelling abroad.


Hi there,

I noticed your post and thought you might want to know that there is a journalist at The Times called David Rose, their health correspondent, who is currently writing up a story on the NEG doctor's surgery scam and is wanting to talk to real life examples of people like you who have actually had their own doctor's surgery number change to 0844 as a result of NEG's activities, and so who have to call one of these 084 or 087 numbers and suffered financially as a result.  Your case in Spain with urgent medical treatment in Spain sounded a particularly bad example of the consequences of NEG's cynical and ruthless action.

If you would be interested in talking to him and having your case featured can you send an email to him at david.rose@the-times.co.uk also giving your phone number (home and/or mobile) and name and he will get in touch with you (probably this weekend as he is writing the story for an edition of next week's Times newspaper) to discuss it further.

I hope this is not intruding but I thought you might want to have the chance to strike back against NEG.

Regards,

NGMsGhost

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 20th, 2007 at 11:56pm
The devious NEG, obviously recognizing the problems with not only international termination to 0844 but also from, for example, VOIP networks, started issuing 0870 numbers as alternatives for calls from overseas. Although 0870 can sometimes be called from outside the UK, albeit at an extortionate rate, there is, as we know, no guarantee that the foreign network will terminate the call.

Now, come Feb 2008, or whenever Ofcom implements its solution to 0870, which will make 0870 all but equivalent, rate-wise, to geographic calls, NEG will be in a difficult position - patients will clearly be able to call the 0870 number at geographic rates and thus deny income to NEG.

I'm sure the deviants at NEG are trying to think of a way around this, but what are the options - 0871 is no good as it has the same issues relating to international termination as 0844. I'm sure 0845 will not provide sufficient revenue. 09X is also out of the question. Perhaps a personal number 07 or 06 - I'm not too sure about availbility of terminating these from overseas.

Hopefully the database will grow with a mapping of 0844 to alternative 0870 numbers for surgeries which will be very useful from Feb 2008 onwards.

I wonder what NEG will do about this potential issue? I'm sure this matter is taxing their phenomenal brain power as we speak.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Jul 21st, 2007 at 9:45am

idb wrote on Jul 20th, 2007 at 11:56pm:
Now, come Feb 2008, or whenever Ofcom implements its solution to 0870, which will make 0870 all but equivalent, rate-wise, to geographic calls, NEG will be in a difficult position - patients will clearly be able to call the 0870 number at geographic rates and thus deny income to NEG.

I'm sure the deviants at NEG are trying to think of a way around this, but what are the options - 0871 is no good as it has the same issues relating to international termination as 0844. I'm sure 0845 will not provide sufficient revenue. 09X is also out of the question. Perhaps a personal number 07 or 06 - I'm not too sure about availbility of terminating these from overseas.

Hopefully the database will grow with a mapping of 0844 to alternative 0870 numbers for surgeries which will be very useful from Feb 2008 onwards.

I wonder what NEG will do about this potential issue? I'm sure this matter is taxing their phenomenal brain power as we speak.
That is a good point.  They're prob working overtime to think of a way of keeping the revenue they get (or don't according to recent poster from NEG) but still allows international access.

Title: URGENT - TIMES NEED PHOTO TODAY OF NEG PATIENT
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 22nd, 2007 at 10:58am
The Times is proposing to run a major article in tomorrow's (Monday's) newspaper about NEG's Surgeryline service based on its conversations with myself and another forum member and further background material that I sent them.  But they want to photograph and include a picture in the article of someone who has had their own doctor's surgery change over to NEG Surgeryline, and ideally who has also suffered a major issue with getting access to their doctor from overseas (eg LeedsLad) or at least suffered a lot more cost and inconvenience in reaching their doctor (ultra).

They want to do this today because the article is planned for tomorrow's newspaper (no time related reason it has to run tomorrow but Monday's newspaper has a lot more space for articles that are not immediately strictly time related to recent hard news events).

Although they would find it easiest to photograph someone in London they do also use photographers in the regions and so could probably get to photograph LeedsLad today in his home area.  Alternatively if anyone has a good quality picture of themselves in head and shoulders format in a JPG or whatever and your own doctor's surgery uses an NEG 0844 phone number then perhaps you may also be suitable for The Times purposes as long as you are prepared to be quoted expressing your outrage over your doctor's use of the NEG Surgeryline product and can email it to them today.

If you can do this please PM me.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 12:21am
Article by David Rose now available at http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article2120932.ece

<<
Why it will cost more to phone your GP

David Rose

Millions of patients could be paying more to telephone their family doctor as surgeries switch to numbers that are more expensive than the traditional local call, The Times has learnt.

Even though the telephone watchdog Ofcom is critical of the idea, about 1,200 practices have abandoned their area code numbers and now use numbers that have an “0844” prefix which may allow them to earn money from patients booking appointments.

Although not officially classed as “premium rate”, the new numbers are up to 4p a minute more expensive to call from a standard BT landline, and can cost up to 40p a minute using a mobile phone or other price plan. GPs’ practices can also receive a rebate of up to 2p a minute on incoming calls.

[...]

The Say No To 0870 campaign against chargeable numbers said that callers were queueing much longer under the Surgery Line system and being left out of pocket. “It is a scandal that doctors are switching to 0844 numbers without providing an alternative geographic number,” a spokesman said. “Although the banned 0870 numbers cost 7p per minute in the week they cost 1.5p per minute at the weekend, whereas 0844 numbers cost 5p per minute at all times. So anyone needing to call their doctor on a Saturday morning is worse off.” Ofcom should do more to address the issue, he said.

The regulator said it had no remit to prescribe what numbers were used by organisations, but added: “Our general advice is that public sector bodies should not use chargeable 08 numbers.” GPs “should be considering the new 03 numbering range. Calls to these numbers cost the same as a geographic call regardless of what type of line the call is made from and can be included in an inclusive minutes package.”
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 1:41am
I have to say I'm not overly impressed after all the effort put in on this.

I note that NEG get their Scott Russell quoted by name while I only get quoted as a vague representative of the campaign, like a sort of shifty Captain Gatso afraid to reveal their true public identity.  And our forum member loddon, who started the whole thing off, doesn't seem to be mentioned at all, although let us hope that his picture is published in the hard copy newspaper version with some kind of caption as he was promised.

All my points about most people now having fixed price calling plans like BT Option 3 (£7.95 per month) or even cheaper plans at £5 per month for all 01/02 calls and these 084/7 calls costing another £20 per month on top have been totally expunged and just the usual old tosh about it only being 3p vs 5p per minute remains.  Although they do show the astronomic costs of calling NEG Patientline from a BT Payphone vs an 01/02 number in their table, once again the whole descriptive comparison I gave of an elderly 80 year old pensioner not having a mobile and fumbling for enough change to pay the extortionate NEG charge to get a doctor's appointment for their sick wife is excised.

I am beginning to believe there is actually a stock national newspaper approach where this story is always axed back to it only being 3p vs 5p per minute (0844) or 7p per minute (0870) and the much bigger issues of it being a billion pound stealth industry and most households paying another £150 to £200 per extra on their phone bill per annum for formerly normal priced calls are always excised.  However hard one trys to get across the big story of a huge organised commercial ripoff and major regulatory failure by Ofcom the national newspaper's "keep it simple for our moron readers" subs always hack it back to just 3p vs 5p per minute.

Of course tell me I'm wrong and that this was a hugely significant article that is going to mean the end of the road for NEG.

I think not.  Over 1200 surgeries now - these numbers are truly shocking and still the useless NHS does nothing about banning the use of anything other than 01/02 or the new 03 numbers by doctors surgeries. :o >:( :'(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 7:39am

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 1:41am:
I have to say I'm not overly impressed after all the effort put in on this.

On the other hand it is the number 2 story on The Times website and it is an attention grabbing headline "Why it will cost more to phone your GP".

David Rose has probably flattered by calling us a "campaign" whereas, as far as I know, we are actuallya few anonymous contributors to a discussion forum.

He has revealed that about 1200 GP practices have gone 0844 -- a shocking number and he does say that it l "may allow them to earn money from patients booking appointments".   He also says "But patients’ groups told The Times that the 0844 code put an “unfair financial burden” on pensioners and others with chronic illness or disability who have to contact their surgery regularly. Those taken ill abroad may have difficulty contacting the doctor back home on an 0844 number, as many foreign networks will not connect to them."   Also, “It is a scandal that doctors are switching to 0844 numbers without providing an alternative geographic number,” .   This is surely quite damning.  

But patients’ groups told The Times that the 0844 code put an “unfair financial burden” on pensioners and others with chronic illness or disability who have to contact their surgery regularly. Those taken ill abroad may have difficulty contacting the doctor back home on an 0844 number, as many foreign networks will not connect to them".

Ofcon are quoted -- "Ofcom said that use of the numbers by public sector bodies was “not appropriate” and there were cheaper options".    This surely is a most significant statement -- Ofcon are criticising "public sector bodies".   This is point that must be followed up.   We must quiz Ofcon deeply on this and question Ofcon why they are not doing something about this.  

I would urge contributors to this Forum to write their comments to The Times directly (comment on the article on The Times website) and to write to the editor about the article and issues like Ofcom inaction raised in their article.   I would also suggest that we should draw our MPs attention to this story and ask them to take action in getting this scandal removed.     This is our opportunity to initiate something like a campaign on the whole NGN issue by attacking doctors use of 0844 without an alternative geographic number.    

~ Edited by Dave: Quote box tidied up

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 9:45am
loddon,

Perhaps I am downplaying the article's significance but it does seem to me to not be very different in tone and content from several other articles that have mentioned the use of 084/7 by public sector organisations and is full of "on the one hand" and "on the other hand" type statements.

It is not written in terms of "public and politicians outraged at use of covert premium rate numbers by doctors to further bump up their already inflated earnings".  Now that would have made an impact.

Perhaps we are approaching the wrong paper on this issue given reader numbers.  What we need is a big article with a sensational headline in the The Sun or the Daily Mirror.

As to useless OfCoN it is nothing new for their spokesman to say public sector bodies shouldn't be using non standard priced numbers and then do nothing at all about it (even though they have the powers to do so under the Communications Act 2003).   Matt Peacock said the same thing on BBC Radio 4 You & Yours in Nov 2004 and promised OfCoN would force the publication of 01/02 alternatives but now OfCon aren't even committed to that.  Instead all they are commited to in conjunction with ICSTIS is allowing more expensive 0871 numbers to replace 0870.

And where were any comments from the Department of Health or from any offical bodies representing GPs in this article - nowhere it seems.  If Mr Rose had been more patient (sorry no pun intended) and waited till this week and done more research it could have been a much better article.

Of course I would imagine that a lot of doctors read The Times so perhaps the article will at least be effective in making new sales by NEG more difficult.  But why did Mr Rose just accept the Ofcom definition of what is a Premium and not refer to the dictionary definition of Premium instead?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 10:06am
A hard hitting headline and good to see it's on the homepage. Where abouts is it in the newspaper?

The amount quoted for a geographical call is 3p/min which is daytime rate on Option 1. No mention of inclusive packages and the evening and weekend rate is given as 1p/min, which is shown as the same as 0845, something which isn't correct for Option 1.

I had hoped for more on the possible consequences should someone fall ill abroad. However, it did mention rates mobile phones and even public phone boxes.

Still, it's a start and even mentions NEG. Let's hope that the NEG name gets the same reputation as Patientline.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 10:19am
By the way the fact that this campaign is not more organised is very much a reflection of how Daniel, the owner of this website, wants things to be.

If Daniel had ever called any meetings for supporters (even once a year given travelling distances) and given different people in the campaign different jobs and nominated public spokespeople for the press etc then a great deal more in lobbying terms could have been achieved.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 11:15am
Dave says "Where abouts is it in the newspaper? "

On page 5.  More than half page is used.   There is a sub-heading "Public sector bodies should not use chargeable 08 numbers"   This is a quote from OfcoN and it seems to me that this is a very significant statement.   The Times has picked it out and highlighted it, lets not be too critical.  If we can get the press on our side we could capitalise on this initial publicity.   Now we should be pressing OfcoN to do something about this - its their area of responsibility and within their remit.   We should urge our MPs to put pressure on Gordon Brown to insist that OfcoN start doing their job properly.   Make OfcoN prove that they are acting for the "citizen consumer".

As NGMsGhost says, perhaps we should start a "Campaign".   If Daniel won't initiate it then we should do it ourselves.  How about getting together for a discussion???   Who would like to attend?   Where?   I could arrange a venue somewhere in Berkshire.  Let me know what you think.   We could work towards getting that sensational headline, but more importantly, we want action by OfcoN or we want them sacked and a proper regulatory Authority installed.

I  agree to involving the Sun, Mirror etc.  The more publicity the better, but remember, it is only a means to an end.   We only want fair play for the citizen and not to be ripped off.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 11:45am

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 9:45am:
loddon,



And where were any comments from the Department of Health or from any offical bodies representing GPs in this article - nowhere it seems.  If Mr Rose had been more patient (sorry no pun intended) and waited till this week and done more research it could have been a much better article.

?


I  empathise with all you say NGMsGhost, and as you know I fully support your views on this and all related issues.
What you say here could well be a further line of enquiry by David Rose and I will suggest it to him.   I forsee another chapter in this saga quite possibly appearing in The Times next Monday.  

Although the scope of Rose's article is somewhat limited I think that is no bad thing.  It focusses on a specific issue of public concern that must be addressed.   It is only a start.   There is every chance that there can be a whole series of articles in the future if we raise awareness of the issues with the press.   It is up to us to continue to talk to the press.    

If anyone, as well as NGMsGhost, has a an idea for future topics, how we address them, or other routes to publicity I suggest they post them here on the Forum or send me a private message.   I will be happy to talk.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 12:03pm

loddon wrote on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 11:45am:
If anyone, as well as NGMsGhost, has a an idea for future topics, how we address them, or other routes to publicity I suggest they post them here on the Forum or send me a private message.   I will be happy to talk.


loddon,

Are you a marketing man or a public relations man by profession.

You seem to understand how to get publicity for an issue and how to gradually develop that issue and enhance its visibility in the world at large.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 12:41pm
Unfortunately not.  Just an ex IT Manager.  My understanding of the Press, if I have any at all, arises from my general understanding of human nature -- what am I saying???) --- my wife would never stop laughing if she read this!!  Still I like to pretend.

Admittedly, there are more important, even life and death issues, around that concern me and generally they get their fair share of attention.   This is one of those lesser matters that can be ignored by the powers that be, albeit it has to do with matters of personal freedom and the ordinary person not being bullied, oppressed or ripped-off by big business.   So I think some of us need to devote just a little of our time and attention to getting something that is blatantly wrong put right.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by alan99 on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 8:48pm
Hi

The Daily Mail also run an article today.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=470379&in_page_id=1774


One reply to the  Times article was very disappointing from a doctor. The guy seemed quite stroppy not very patient orientated.   The  previous entry on this forum from Leedslad explains the problems cleary about 08x numbers from abroad. Also patients may need to cancel long standing appointments from overseas with eg nurses  at the surgery  re routine checkups.

QUOTE "Those taken ill abroad may have difficulty contacting the doctor back home on an 0844 number, as many foreign networks will not connect to them. We are not responsible for your health when you are on holiday in another country you are meant to call the local doctor, we also don't do international visits." UNQUOTE

Dr Borrill, Midlands, UK

Also what is the NEG man in the Times article talking about an average of 2 mins wait for patients. Surely the bottleneck is in the receptionists answering the phone to book an apointment.


I think the Mail may be a good organ for anti 0844 newspieces. Should we try again giving them more ammo.


Alan




Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 11:03pm

alan99 wrote on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 8:48pm:
Hi

The Daily Mail also run an article today.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=470379&in_page_id=1774
Also an article in the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/23/ngps123.xml

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 24th, 2007 at 7:55am
This was mentioned last night on Real Radio Yorkshire's news. It was very brief and just said that GP surgeries are switching to "more expensive" 0844 numbers. They have longer news bulletins at 1pm and 6.30pm where they have extended reports and I hope that they will do a follow-up on this.

I think that this Times (and others) have certainly got the ball rolling.

There are really two aspects that must be reported:

1. Cost to callers, whether they be UK landline, mobile or public phone box.
2. Difficulty for calls to be made from overseas.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 24th, 2007 at 8:57am

Dave wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 7:55am:
There are really two aspects that must be reported:

1. Cost to callers, whether they be UK landline, mobile or public phone box.
2. Difficulty for calls to be made from overseas.


and also

3. Exclusion from 0844 SurgeryLine numbers from Inclusive Call Packages to all 01 and 02 numbers such as BT Option 3 that cost only between £4 and £8 per month these days

4. 0844 doctors calls therefore being part of a class of stealth premium rate business phone calls that are putting an extra £200 or more per annum on most domestic phone bills and/or mobile bills that should not be there.

5. That the regulator Ofcom is failing in its primary duty under the Communications Act 2003 to protect the UK citizen consumer by not using its backstop powers under the Communications Act 2003 to impose big penalties on businesses that middescribe these numbers as local or national call or low cost call like NEG.

6. That the regulator is failing in its primary duty under the Communications Act 2003 to protect the UK citizens consumer by not using its backstop powers under the Communications Act 2003 to prevent public sector contact centres using anything other than an 01 02 or 03 phone number for customer contact.

7. That the failure of the regular to adequately fulfil its primary duty under the Communications Act 2003 should be the subject of appropriate investigate by the relevant Parliamentary Select committee and/or by the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

8. That It appears that like the BBC, which Ofcom has so cheekily complained about over Premium Rate numbers that it allowed to exist, that Ofcom has entirely forgotten who it owes its primary duty to and that this primary duty is to the protection of the UK citizen consumer and not the profitability of UK businesses.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:07am

idb wrote on Jul 23rd, 2007 at 11:03pm:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/23/ngps123.xml


Really a better article than the one in The Times because it is harder hitting and a lot stronger on saying "this is wrong and should not be happening".

But obviously still missing the key point about the exclusion of these calls from fixed price calling plans on landlines and mobiles so that the real difference is up to 40p per minute on a mobile vs zero p per minute on a mobile if that call was part of a bundle allowance of say 500 minutes per month.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:09am
Some comments by the general public on the Times article:----

Its about time the public realised that GP surgeries are private businesses whose primary objective is to make profits for the partners, the GP's themselves.
Remember that when you cannot get through to your GP on the phone it is because the practice decided to allocate the funding from the NHS in the way it choose. Look at the car your GP is driving next time you are at the surgery and you will see where much of the increase in funding to Primary Care has gone

Please why are doctors and NEG allowed to get away with this. Something should me done about it.


It's quite clear why companies or anyone switches to 084 and 087 numbers. It is so that the callers to these numbers are ultimately going to pay the ongoing costs such as rental etc. for them. I think It's daylight robbery that these people should be allowed to get away with it, because mark my words, when the funds need building up, the time that you are kept waiting will get longer and longer.

It is a disgrace the greedy GPs are allowed to make money this way. Surely Ofcom must do some thing about this and get them to change back to 01/02 numbers.

The best thing to do is vote with your feet. I changed surgeries and was also plesently surprised to also find a far superior doctor and far better reception staff. It was win win win and I recomend it. If a sugery pulls strokes like rip off phone lines they most likely are not very good on many fronts, this was my experiance

To answer Dr Borrill

If someone is taken ill overseas the doctor may need medical history and exact current medication. This could be vital. I know of someone whose foreign attending doctor couldnt get thro to the surgery in UK on a 0844 number, therefore denying patient best care.

BT has ringback service for 15p. If line is engaged then you will get ringback. Much better than holding on a 5p a min 0844 number.
Surgeries deliberately disconnect their 01/02 number on insistence of NEG to maximise income. Absolute disgrace.

I'd just like to say how gratefull I am that I am not one of Dr Borill's patients. Having had the experience of being injured abroad it was reassuring to be able to discuss the issues ( local op in 3rd World / fly home for private op / fly home and attend A&E) with my local GP on a regular BT landline

Given the free call packages offered by reputable providers - such as TelecomPlus or Utility Warehouse, dialling the normal surgery numbers doesn't cost the patient a penny. Now with the 0844 number, it costs money because it's not classed as a free number. How can they say it costs less because you're on the phone less??? Ridiculous, and another stealth cost. Not only do I now pay to ring my surgery, where I didn't pay before, I'm now in a heightened state of anxiety and worry over increased expenditure. Given GPs now earn over £200,000 a year, and still opt out of the 'Out of Hours' service, they earn far too much

immoral and unprincipalled

Edna, Blandford, Dorset

The massive rise in GPs salaries - no strings attached - has not resulted in a rise in productivity. No surprise there - anyone who has ever run a business could have told the government that simply paying someone up to or over their 'comfort level' is a strategy that only ever results in the recipient wanting to do less, not more work, to enjoy their new-found wealth. Our doctors see themselves as office workers: they do no out-of- hours work - that's given to locums - and home visits are virtually unheard of. If they also start charging the patients to make appointments, that will simply fit in perfectly with the general, offhand attitude we've come to expect. There was a time when doctors were much respected for their dedication and commitment, but there's little sign of that, now they're on their way to the Rich List.

sarah m, bournemouth

0845, 0844 and 087 numbers are being used by many companies and now by GP's to rip the public off. I wrote a letter about these numbers to BBC working lunch ( consumers ) programm but they did not even bother to reply. I think Government must authorise OFCOM to enforce the ban of the use of all these numbers by all public bodies and all other private companies. These days we have to use 087 number even to get a spare part for an appliance. Why consumer protection agencies do not staret a campaign against these numbers?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:16am
More comments by readers of The Times :---

That is absolutely disgusting behaviour. Patients don't ring the doctor unless they absolutely have to.

ARK, Norwich, UK

I'm thinking of getting an 0845 number installed at home. Registering the number with all my banks, building societies, do a load of online insurance quotes and quote my phone number.
When the phone starts ringing, and all their call centres start mithering me with products they wish to sell, I'll answer and tell them to hang on a second...
and watch the money roll in.

Richard Garland, Manchester, Greater Manchester

Not so long ago we could turn up for an appointment without booking, and therefore without any cost to the patient....!

I have today spent 19 minutes on hold to the 0844 number of my doctor's surgery. This is on top of the 8 minutes I spent on hold last Monday and the 7 minutes I spent on hold last Wednesday. I then spent between 1 and 2 minutes making my arrangements. This huge telephony expense shows lack of consideration of the patients at a time when GPs are handsomely rewarded

Rip off Britain at work again using the smokescreen which phone companies have used by quoting huge amounts of variable information about different charges. It works for the phone companies now it will work for the GPs. I detect the work of "managers" put in place to run a business and damn the patient.. Note the comment by DHM: If hospitals can fleece the patients why shouldnt the GP. These people are in the "care" industry, remuneration for GPs has gone up in advance of inflation but greed still drives some of them to further excess.

mike gee, bournemouth, uk

They now have an answer machine at my surgery, so instead of a engaged tone, the call is connected only to inform you that the lines are too busy and to try again. So I am paying for the privilege of being told I cannot speak to anybody. It's a farce!

Dan, London,

Just another way to rip off the longsuffering taxpayer - GPs are extremely well rewarded for doing less work that they have in the past

What old days you could never get through, I have never rung my Doctors without taking half a day to get through and then you are always put on hold I spent so long on the telephone thet B.T.suggested it for my family and friends numbers. What B.T. also forgot to mention is the minimum amount per call I can call anyone for an hour for 5p on evening and weekends (when Doctors are closed) but If I talk for 20 seconds it cost 5p and don't for get the VAT. What it does is penalize the sick. Who has tried to live on sickness benefit, I think they think because you are sick you do not need everyday thinks like Gas, electric Water and a house to live in, you know what most of your money goes on!

June Hart, Hockley Essex, U.K

08xx numbers are a racket. The so called 0845 local access numbers to 'save' money for callers is a nonsense for those with mobiles. Companies and organisations should be required by law to offer a national landline number if they have an 08xx number . To get through to my bank I have to use the international number on my mobile should I wish to call without charge. Does the bank know the issues this creates? Most definitely, but it is not in their financial interest to do anything about it.


At least we should be given the choice; to call a local number at less cost to the patient

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:19am
More comments by the public on The Times :---

You can get around this problem by using the website "Say No to 0870" . This publishes the normal numbers that you can dial instead of the non-geographic premium numbers.

The link to the website is :
http://www.saynoto0870.com

Richard Wyld, Effingham, UK

Probably the biggest user of these "revenue sharing" numbers, and certainly the one with the longest calls is NHS Direct.

With calls averaging 25 minutes it could cost 75p to call which will not be included in any calling plan

GJ, Swindon, UK

It's simple really....patients should have to give a landline number to be contacted by their surgery. Then the surgery won't be paying out as much on calls and won't need to go down the line of 0844 numbers.
Maybe they should also start charging for missed appointments but that's another issue for another discussion.

Helen, Midlothian, Scotland

Surely Ofcom must do something about this scandal. Doctors should not be forcing patients to pay for their new phone systems. By doing this using NEG doctors are forcing patients to pay many thousands more than the true cost and this is no doubt amounting to millions of pounds nationally. This is nothing more than a rip-off perpetrated by NEG and their doctors. It is a disgrace to the medical profession.

Mike Kelly, Reading

No patient should have to pay a premium line to phone a doctor and no public service should have to phone a mobile (premium rate) number to contact a customer. The standard land line service is all that should be used.

jj, Cambs, uk




Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:24am
More comments on The Times website ;---

GPs and the iniquitous company NEG ARE "out to fleece their patients". NEG are out to make excessive profits out of sick people who are calling a health service. Calls to 0844 are always more costly. The public should be able to choose whether to call a premium rate or a normal number when calling an essential service such as a doctor.

Mike Kelly, Reading

If I call a doctor’s surgery that uses normal telephone numbers (01 or 02) it usually costs 3p/min, but as I pay my phone company an extra £10 a month, all my 01 and 02 calls are “freeâ€.
If my doctor was using one of those dreadful 0844 numbers, the call would cost me 5p/min at all times, and they would receive about half of my call charges as a extra fee.

I would change my doctor.

kevin kearney, Liverpool,

To say that the 0844 number gives the advantage of a single contact number is disingenuous. The same can be achieved with an 01 or 02 number.

PaulK, Thornton

think it is terrible that the GPs surgeries telephone area code will cease and we will need to use 0844 numbers which are more expensive. It is already hard for pensioners to manage on their limited income and they are the ones who need the doctors most. Not fair on the other people who live on shoestring budgets either. It should not be allowed.

Lee To, Swindon, UK

It is shocking that even GP's are now ripping off consumers by using these types of numbers. It certainly isn't fair !!

JB, Manchester

Can I echo the earlier contributor and ask when the Times is going to do a story about the vast cost to the NHS of mobile calls?

Patients lack of a fixed line is costing the NHS millions as hospital secretaries, midwives, distict nurses and family doctors are forced to phone mobile numbers a huge costs compared to a local call.

I am also a GP and the costs of phone bills has risen more than any other cost in the last few years, mainly due to the large number of calls we have to make to mobiles.

Perhaps patients who do not have a fixed line should not expect to be phoned by their health care workers

Dr Trefor Roscoe, Sheffield,

My landline calls are free as I subscribe to Option 3. I pay 2p per minute to call one daughter in Hong Kong and 1 p to call another in Canada. It seems ridiculous to have to pay more to call my doctor down the road.

Stephanie McKenzie-Hill, Uckfield,

I pay a flat rate of £23.49 a month which gives me all 01 and 02 numbers 24/7 and includes the phone line rental. It used to be a good deal. Now more and more companies use 0870, and 084 numbers, and I have to pay for these calls on top. Why do they do it? There is only one answer. Greed.
Doctors should not be allowed to use these 0844 numbers. If I phone my surgery, which is an hour's walk away, it is only because I have to. There is no bus going there, and I don't own a car. Incidentally my surgery hasn't treated me in the past 3 years at all. Do they refuse to collect the allowance they get for having me on their List?
Beryl, WINDSOR, England


Sorry, but I couldn't understand why the change of numbers have occurred: were the doctors offered new mobile phones with the new prefix?

Bernardo, QUELUZ, Portugal

So why do GPs do it?
As the article states, the GPs pay for the installation of the system. This will run to thousands, so any suggestion of GPs profiteering from this system seems misplaced.
Maybe, just maybe, they are trying to provide their patients with better access to the surgery by phone.
I guess we could always go back to the old days when you could never get through. I suspect the same people moaning now were moaning equally vociferously then.

Simon, Poole,
The use of 0844 without providing a geographic alternative number is truly a scandal. It significant that Ofcom say "that use of the numbers by public sector bodies was “not appropriate†and there were cheaper options".
Surely, doctors must be compelled to provide an alternative geographic number to 0844 - otherwise this is another stealth tax on the public and a tax on the old and sick in particular!!


Mike Kelly, Reading



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:29am
More comments on The Times article :---

Absolutely unacceptable.

Michael Harding, Tenterden, Kent

"Scott Russell, of NEG, said that patients calling the Surgery Line system spent two minutes on average on each call, compared with 5½ minutes before."

It will be of interest to have the full explanation for this reasoning. Many surgeries will only take appointment bookings at certain times of day and it it takes many attempts before a connection can be made. I cannot see that patients will spend any less time on these calls because of the prefix change.

Alan Challoner, Llanerchymedd, Wales UK

My surgery uses a normal local call telephone number. However the greatest rise in practice utilities over the last 5 years has been telephone calls because patients increasingly use mobile phones instead of land lines. GP's are paying premium rate to call patients on mobiles. Ofcom says that public sector shouldn't use 0844 numbers, but
GP's are encouraged by the Department of Health through the quality and outcomes framework to have a single access number for emergencies. The 0844 system allows this as calls can be automatically diverted out of hours to the out of hours provider without the need for an answering machine and the patient making a second call. Having just spent £12000 on a new phone system and an annual phone bill of similar size I resent the portrayal that GPs are out to fleece their patients. If hospitals can charge premium patient phone and car parking rates why shouldn't GPs be able to marginally offset the costs of a single access number which improves safety

DHM, chichester,

One way to get action taken over this immoral practice would be for all those whose surgeries adopt 0844 numbers to use the (free) 999 number instead - my guess is that a determined campaign along these lines would provoke the authorities to ensure all surgeries used normal, cheaper, numbers instead.Giles Falconer, Sleaford, Lincolnshire



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:46am

loddon wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:29am:
Alan Challoner, Llanerchymedd, Wales UK

If hospitals can charge premium patient phone and car parking rates why shouldn't GPs be able to marginally offset the costs of a single access number which improves safetyDHM, Chichester


Would that be the same single access number that improves safety from overseas by either blocking all access to your doctor and/or turning it into a £1 per minute call? :o >:( :'(

Why does this doctor or NEG rep (he is claarly one of the two) not explain why they cannot use an 01/02 voip geographic number that can be redirected anywhere they want it to.

I have allways found doctors to be arrogant individuals who dictate to you as though you are a naughty pupil rarher than treating you as a valued customer who might take your business elsewhere if the service is not what customers want.

Speaking of which I would urge anyone with an NEG 0844 doctors surgery to move elsewhere and to make a point to the national newspapers that this is why they have chosen to do so.  However if another doctor refuses to take you on because you are moving to avoid 0844 then you should publicise that to a national newspaper and to the highest level of the NHS's official complaints procedure (which ends at the Parliamentary Ombudsman).

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:56am
The Daily Mail article has managed to generate only one comment from the "public" so far!!!!  :----

With LIFT (Local Investment Finance Trust) gaining a bigger private foothold by the day in GPs' surgeries and Health Centres, and doctors threatened with bankruptcy and redundancy if they fail to balance their books, it's no wonder they'll do all they can to "make a swift buck". What we need is the people who thought this all up plus the ones who are happily carrying it out behind our backs to be packed off to the USA, where presumably they'd be happy surviving on private medical insurance.

- Bob Edwards, UK


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 10:02am
I cannot find any public comments on The Telegraph website.  Do they have a facility for comment on their articles?   I cannot find it.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 24th, 2007 at 10:10am
Michael Summers of The Patients Association has just been interviewed for several minutes on BBC News 24 (9.55am Tuesday July 24th).

He said that patients were generally happy with the actual treatment they receive from their doctors when they could get to see them but that the greatest issue patients had was with accessing their doctors at convenient times and then also mentioned the high cost of accessing their doctors on expensive non standard priced 0844 numbers.  Mr Summers seemed to feel strongly on this issue.

The BBC presenter then totally ignored this as most of them seem to be under strict instructions never to criticise 084/7 numbers for fear of their own 0870 numbers again coming under scrutiny.

So with great respect to loddon it is actually the current government survey of patients views that is driving media coverage but it provides the perfect opportunity for us to raise the issue because it has actually been raised in this survey as I understand it?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 10:12am
The Telegraph article also quotes Ofcon :---

"However, the telcoms watchdog, Ofcom, has said it is not appropriate for public sector organisations to use the more expensive phone lines. "

Also :----

"Joyce Robins, co-director of Patient Concern, said: “It is quite ridiculous. People should not pay more for their calls to their GP. I thought this had been stopped by the Government, but they have obviously found a loophole. "
“It can be very difficult to get through to your surgery in some cases and you can run up quite a bill.”

And NEG :---

"Scott Russell, of telephone service provider Network Europe Group (NEG), said that patients spent on average three and a half minutes less on the phone when calling the Surgery Line system.
He said it does not cost patients any more to make the call, it simply removes some of the profits made by the call providers."

So Neg rake off the profits instead of some other 'call provider' ... and that makes it quite alright then??!!!  NEG can perpetrate a rip off with impunity because they are only diverting the ill-gotten gains from another exploitative greedy phone company.  Ofcon surely must do something about this outrage now.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Jul 24th, 2007 at 5:57pm

loddon wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 10:12am:
So Neg rake off the profits instead of some other 'call provider' ... and that makes it quite alright then??!!!  NEG can perpetrate a rip off with impunity because they are only diverting the ill-gotten gains from another exploitative greedy phone company.  Ofcon surely must do something about this outrage now.
To be honest, there is an extremely good chance that BT may still be involved in handling the call so BT still makes money (assuming NEG are referring to BT).  If it is BT NEG are referring to then how much BT charge for handling calls is determined by Ofcom cos BT are only allowed to charge what is necessary to carry the call and I assume a very small amount on top to make a profit.

Either way, the amount of money BT or any other provider makes on geographical calls is very, very small.  However, I'd say for 0844 calls that NEG themselves own then I'd say NEG prob get more money from an 0844 than they did from a geographical that.

I like it where Scott says, "... It does not cost patients any more to make the call....", because last time I went to school, a geographical call costing 3p/min (from BT but cheaper from most other providers) compared to an 0844 call costing 5p/min (or more from some providers), then a geographical number is cheaper to call.

His statement if completely flawed in my opinion.  Let's deal with fact:

Geographical numbers:
  • Cheaper cost.
  • You only get charged when they answer so therefore you only pay for the amount of time you are actually speaking to the surgery (with the exception of surgeries using IVR)

0844 numbers:
  • Cost more per minute than geographical numbers
  • You get charged even whilst waiting for surgery
So with the exception of not (or unlikely) getting an engaged tone I personally can't see any advantage for us patients.  The advantage is for the surgery and the fact they may be able to receive revenue from the call but the most advantage has got to be for NEG for the money they make.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 7:51pm
I have just discovered that Daily Mail story only appeared in the paper today although it was on their website yesterday!   It has now accumulated about 10 comments from readers (although they seem to have ignored my 2 comments)  as follows :----

With LIFT (Local Investment Finance Trust) gaining a bigger private foothold by the day in GPs' surgeries and Health Centres, and doctors threatened with bankruptcy and redundancy if they fail to balance their books, it's no wonder they'll do all they can to "make a swift buck". What we need is the people who thought this all up plus the ones who are happily carrying it out behind our backs to be packed off to the USA, where presumably they'd be happy surviving on private medical insurance.

- Bob Edwards, UK

How long is it going to be before the "ripped off" people of Britain can no longer afford the expensive wheezes devised by the evil people at the helm of this poor country.

- G. Dawson, Halifax UK

Surely if the practice is giving a better service to patients this somewhat small increase is acceptable? My sister's GP uses a 0844 number and she seems to be able to get through all the time, whereas mine just rings and rings, for so long after a while the line goes dead. I have twice had to drive to the practice just to make an appt, and as for cancelling my appointments - I don't even bother to try anymore!

- Suzie Stone, Hereford, England

This is a very interesting article that manipulates the true cost of phone calls and ignores the reason GPs have switched to 0844 numbers in the first place – to eliminate engaged phone lines and provide better service to patients.

Results from a survey taken of patients NOT using 0844 numbers in order to establish their viewpoint tell a different story with 66% saying that had they have experienced problems in trying to make an appointment to see their GP.

Given the alternative between calling their GP and being put in a queue or hearing the engaged tone and having to re-dial, 71% said they would prefer to be put in a queue.

Patients were asked what was a reasonable price to pay to call their GP to book an appointment, find out test results etc. 82% agreed that the average tcall cost to an 0844 number of 9p was a reasonable charge and would have no issues paying this amount.


This is a great British idea that solves a real problem faced by patients every day.

- Alastair Campbell, Market Harborough

Email them instead. I refuse these excessive phone prices wherever I can... the clue is in the title: Network Europe Group... anything to do with Europe is bound to be expensive and useless.

- Samantha Jones, Bucks

What on earth do you expect with most of this country's subjects worshipping the god of money? Time to get back to what's important in life, and to stop trying to screw each other over for a few quid.

- Mark R, Coventry UK

Greed entered the medical profession more than a decade ago and because of the general stupidity of this government in not negotiating sound contracts with doctors in the last decade the British public are now paying more for less and will continue to do so. It used to be 'how fat is my cat', referring to fat cat businessmen but now it seems to be, 'how fat is my medic'.

- Ken, Suffolk, England

Switching patients' calls into a queue at twice the normal calling charge is hardly what I'd call progress. At the moment, if I get an "engaged" tone, I just re-dial at no charge at all until I'm connected.

- Will Hames, London, UK

The GP's have to fork out for ringing people on their mobiles instead of landlines nowadays which has massively increased costs to them.
People should keep a sense of perspective. NHS GP care is the best in the world at the moment.


- Gus Barker, UK

Has anyone noticed that the Dept. of Environment uses an 0845 (local call rate) Number for its flood risk emergency line instead of an 0800 (freephone) number?

They're all 'at it'!

- A.W., Wales

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 24th, 2007 at 8:04pm
Two or three of the responses are clearly made by NEG staff or by members of staff in doctors surgeries that use NEG's product.

Everyone else seems to be against them.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 8:40pm

loddon wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 7:51pm:
This is a very interesting article that manipulates the true cost of phone calls and ignores the reason GPs have switched to 0844 numbers in the first place – to eliminate engaged phone lines and provide better service to patients.

Results from a survey taken of patients NOT using 0844 numbers in order to establish their viewpoint tell a different story with 66% saying that had they have experienced problems in trying to make an appointment to see their GP.

Given the alternative between calling their GP and being put in a queue or hearing the engaged tone and having to re-dial, 71% said they would prefer to be put in a queue.

Patients were asked what was a reasonable price to pay to call their GP to book an appointment, find out test results etc. 82% agreed that the average tcall cost to an 0844 number of 9p was a reasonable charge and would have no issues paying this amount.


This is a great British idea that solves a real problem faced by patients every day.

- Alastair Campbell, Market Harborough


Could this possibly be THE Alastair Campbell?   He's obviously keen on quoting surveys.

The question arises -- what survey?  Who prepared it?  Was it entirely independent?

What about surveying patients where their doctor HAS moved to 0844?   What do they say then?

Anyway, doesn't this somewhat miss the point?   The benefits of different call management, queueing, storage and forwarding etc arise from the installed system, not from the number.   Systems can do all this stuff with any number, geographic or non-geographic.   0844 is there to generate revenue for funding ......... and profit.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:04pm

loddon wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 7:51pm:
I refuse these excessive phone prices wherever I can... the clue is in the title: Network Europe Group... anything to do with Europe is bound to be expensive and useless.

- Samantha Jones, Bucks


Brilliant.  Well said Samantha!! :) ;) :D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:20pm

loddon wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 8:40pm:
Could this possibly be THE Alastair Campbell?   He's obviously keen on quoting surveys.
This particular flavor of Campbell was connected with NEG at some point (search the archives here) and not the former Director of Communications for Blair. The so-called survey was probably an NEG initiative.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:37pm
The NEG story has now been picked up by local media:

http://www.thisislincolnshire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=156130&command=displayContent&sourceNode=242285&home=yes&more_nodeId1=156139&contentPK=17905234

<<
OVERCHARGING? NOT WHAT THE DOCTOR ORDERED

Doctors' surgeries across Lincolnshire may be charging patients over the odds for getting in touch, a new study has shown.

When GPs change their phone numbers from local dialling codes to 0844 numbers it means they charge patients up to 5p a minute.

And now communications regulator Ofcom has said it thinks it is "not appropriate" for public bodies such as GP surgeries to use those kinds of numbers.

An Echo study revealed about one in 11 GP surgeries in Lincolnshire now have 0844 numbers.

[...]

Alastair Campbell from Surgery Line, which runs many of the phone systems at Lincolnshire GP practices, said GPs introduced the new numbers for the benefit of patients.

"Calling these numbers costs the average person almost the same as calling a local rate number," he said.

"And what people don't realise is that a lot of public services use 0844 or 0845 numbers. NHS Direct is an 0845 number and a lot of police forces use them, too."

[...]
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 24th, 2007 at 9:50pm
And look at some of the comments already posted on the "Lincolnshire Echo" :----


I don't see how it benefits patients at all! Especially when the automated lady tells me to press one for this or 2 for that.....and when I finally get through the receptionist STILL asks how she can help! Plus with the number for my sugery now being so long I can't remember it off by heart. It now takes ages to get through to South Park surgery, and it's so annoying! Pathetic, expensive and a waste of time!
hayley, lincoln




I note the comment re the comments "Advantages to GP practices using these numbers, as they meant a patient would never be faced by an engaged tone when they called" What is wrong with the patient using the call back feature on the phone, Mobile have retry, land lines have press "5" or have the GP's specificaly asked this service not be available on their lines, so they can gain some income, also BT Virgin Media offer a service as do many mobile opperators, a FREE NATIONAL & LOCAL CALLS to ANY LAND LINE IN THE UK. Some what knocks off the Comments "advantages to GP practices ect" I must remember to ask my GP to pull the other it has a ring tone on it now!!  
wayne, Lincoln




I'm sorry! but how does charging us more to phone the doctors surgery benefit the patients? is this not just another excuse to squeeze that extra few pence out of the masses? and to reply with something like it's for your benefit is beyond belief. maybe we would not mind so much if we could get an appointment when we are actually ill. how long do we the public have to endure these sort of schemes that are 'for our own good' it may only be a few pence to you but it adds up! and a few pence could be a loaf of bread to some people. if the NHS was better managed by people who knew what they were doing maybe so much money would not be wasted on administration and would filter down, so the local surgeries would not have to try and raise their own cash from us.
Alister williams, Lincoln


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 25th, 2007 at 8:52am
My comments on Mr Campbell's response:

Quote:
This is a very interesting article that manipulates the true cost of phone calls and ignores the reason GPs have switched to 0844 numbers in the first place – to eliminate engaged phone lines and provide better service to patients.

Firstly, it criticises the call charges which pay for the system. Mr Campbell, why does this not operate on an 01/02 number?


Quote:
Results from a survey taken of patients NOT using 0844 numbers in order to establish their viewpoint tell a different story with 66% saying that had they have experienced problems in trying to make an appointment to see their GP.

Ahh, surveys and statistics.  ::)


Quote:
Given the alternative between calling their GP and being put in a queue or hearing the engaged tone and having to re-dial, 71% said they would prefer to be put in a queue.

So were these people reminded that an engaged tone is always free whereas a geographical call is free when on an inclusive tariff and always chargeable with this system (Surgery Line)? :-?

Of course, the system itself could still operate on an 01/02 (or 03) number...

Did all the respondees consider that a geographical number could have been used did they have a sufficient understanding of telecoms and economics to understand that the price should be set by the telco? I think not. It's really a leading question.


Quote:
Patients were asked what was a reasonable price to pay to call their GP to book an appointment, find out test results etc. 82% agreed that the average tcall cost to an 0844 number of 9p was a reasonable charge and would have no issues paying this amount.

Not sure how this "average" has been arrived at. :-/

The answer to such a question must be something along the lines of "market value for a telephone call to a UK landline." Was there a box for this on the survey sheet or must respondees give a monetary value? Has Mr Campbell forgotten that the price of a telephone call is set by telecoms companies for connecting parties A and B. It does not allow for the receiving party to dictate what this market price should be.


Quote:
This is a great British idea that solves a real problem faced by patients every day.

This idea is synonymous of Rip-Off Britain.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Jul 25th, 2007 at 9:07am

Quote:
Patients were asked what was a reasonable price to pay to call their GP to book an appointment, find out test results etc. 82% agreed that the average tcall cost to an 0844 number of 9p was a reasonable charge and would have no issues paying this amount.

What a very interesting 'statement'!

From 1/8/07, even a one minute call from a residential BT landline to a 5p/minute SurgeryLine 0844 number will cost 11p (6p call set-up fee + 5p for the first minute).  

It follows that, in 7 days time, the 82% who thought that 9p was a reasonable charge will then join the other 18% and make 100% who'll be dissatisfied with the minimum 11p cost of a call to their GP's SurgeryLine system!

Bearing in mind though that Scott Russell of NEG has said that patients calling the Surgery Line system spent two minutes on average on each call, the cost will be 16p (if you believe that 2 minutes claim).  In NEG-speak, that must be seen as "nearly double" the acceptable cost according to 82%.

OTOH, that'll be BT's fault for raising the call set-up fee to 6p.  Silly me.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 25th, 2007 at 9:26am

Heinz wrote on Jul 25th, 2007 at 9:07am:
OTOH, that'll be BT's fault for raising the call set-up fee to 6p.  Silly me.


Out of interest does that 6p connection fee get shared with NEG or does it all go in to BT's pocket?

I would imagine it all goes to BT and that this is why they are so jolly keen on bumping up these fees?  Also the idea is to force everybody on to BT's Option  3 by closing the price difference massively with BT Option 1 (note BT Option 3 is now only £7.99 per month) and thus guaranteeing a much higher average revenue stream from every BT customer.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 25th, 2007 at 11:39am
A few more comments on The Times website about doctors 0844 numbers : ----

To Alan johnson, Leicester,
0844, which charges 5p per minute at all times, is substantially higher than a normal priced phone number. 01 and 02 numbers are free to people with a call package on both landlines and mobiles. Even the basic BT charge rate is much cheaper. So to my mind, 0844 IS a premium rate number -- it is MORE expensive than any normal call whichever way you look at it.
You may have been deceived by the phone industry and regulators. The meaning of Premium in the dictionary -- a sum of money paid in addition to a regular price. So your phone bill has it right. My phone bill describes 0844 as "Premium rate g6".
I don't think there is any confusion, ordinary people know when they are being overcharged!!
Mike Kelly, Reading,

My wife & I have been dismissed from our previous surgery, because I had the "audacity" to complain concerning this matter.And not only that, the surgery was being run on strictly military lines , with one only being able to make an appointment by phone Monday,Wednesday & Friday only at 8 AM, so everyone was waiting to get through at the same time. I never was able to make an appointment by phone and had to get in the car to drive to the surgery for 8 AM. If that isn't a rediculous state of affairs, I don't know what is, and have made an official complaint through the proper channels. This has occurred only recently, and am awaiting further developements.
Benjamin Sefton, Leeds, West Yorkshire

My gp surgery uses a 0844, i think through a company based in Basildon, and actually used to have a 0870 number. The 0870 number did cost me quite a bit more to call, but it was better than not being able to get through at all. Now they have a 0844, and it costs me about the same, so i have no problem with that.

We need easy access to our gp due to my partner's ill health. We seem to be connected straight away and then we can press an emergency option if we need to get straight through. Before it was ALWAYS engaged.
Leigh Healey, Huddersfield,

We recently had a 3rd party conduct a survey to the general public - findings showed that 66% had experienced problems contacting their GP, 71% said they would prefer to be placed in a queue rather than hearing the engaged tone all the time and 69% said they were frustrated when they were ill and could not contact their GP.
As regards to the cost of the call, only 3% said that they knew that 0844 was less than 5ppm (interesting, it is 4.2p + VAT), and the average cost of a call to a surgery with 0844 is just 9p. When asked if this was a reasonable charge 82% said it was, and they had no problem with it. More to the point, EVERY single call is answered first time every time and patients always know what is happening and can make informed choices. Surgeryline was designed very much from the patients perspective. One installation every day, for the last 3 years, proves this.
Jason Slade, Manchester, UK

To Alan Johnson, Leicester, I would say that the improvement in access to your surgery could easily have been achieved without using 0844. All it requires is a well organised telephone system which many other companies can supply. Ultimately someone still has to answer the call for you to make your appointment!
A normal 01 or 02 number could still be used. The problem is that your doctor decided to go with NEG, who promote 0844, because your doctor then has no capital outlay and other revenue costs, while his patients are paying through the nose, via the phone, for his new system (and for NEG's excessive profits). This is a very expensive solution but it is the patients who are footing the bill.
You may not see what the fuss is all about but for some people, old and sick, it can cost them many pounds per month which they cannot afford. While if they use a call plan their doctor calls could cost them nothing (all call plans exclude 0844). 0870, 0845 etc,
Mike Kelly, Reading,

To clarify the position when patients are abroad.

The consultation is deemed to be at the place where the patient originates the phonecall. As this call is abroad, the UK GP will not be registered with the medical regulatory authorities in that country and would be giving medical advice illegally.

Also, GPs will not be covered by medical indemnity and could be disciplined by the GMC for not registering as a working doctor in another country.

UK doctors when abroad are essentially lay, and have no medical privileges.

For their own protection, patients should not phone their home surgery when abroad and in all circumstances must contact local registered practising doctors for their medical care, and ensure they have appropriate travel medical insurance.
Dr C, Wales,

Dr Burrill says that he is not responsible for his patients' health while abroad, implying that he doesn't care if local doctors treating his patients are unable to get through to him on his 0844 number for details of medical history, drugs prescribed, etc. Has Dr Burrill forgoten his Hyppochratic Oath, or more recently (2006) the description by the General Medical Council of a doctor's duties:
Make the care of your patient your first concern;
Protect and promote the health of patients
A Schwartz, London, UK


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 25th, 2007 at 11:43am
The original comment on The Times website by a Mr Alan Johnson which provoked some of the above responses : --


Our surgey now has an 0844 number and finally I can get throught to make an appointment. I don't call up to make an appointment often, but before they were always engaged. For the price of a few pence a year for a better service I just don't understand what the full is about! Perhaps the confuion is that 0844 numbers are listed in the 'premium calls' rate section of my phone bill, but I know that premium rate calls start at 10p or more so this might confuse people. I'm happy to pay 5p a minute to get a better service from my GP.

alan johnson, Leicester, Leicestershire

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 25th, 2007 at 11:55am
A further 7 comments on the Daily Mail website about doctors 0844 numbers : ----

Is there no end to the display of sheer greed in British society today? These doctors have just been "awarded" a huge salary increase which obviously isn't enough, so they have to find other sources of revenue to support their abundant lifestyle.
- Kathab, Oxford, UK

It is a scandal that doctors should extract money from sick, old and vulnerable people who cannot afford it.

The bond of trust between patient and doctor is being put in jeopardy by doctors charging patients for phone calls. If doctors can be underhand, greedy and misleading towards patients on this matter how can patients trust their doctor on more important matters?

Even Ofcom are critical and say that public bodies and services should not allow higher cost phone numbers to be used. The use of 0844 should be stopped immediately. Or at the very least an alternative geographic local number should be also made available.

What are the BMA and GMC going to do about it?
- George Kendrick, Swindon Wilts

Yet another example of greed and rip off Britain.
- Alanjohn, Shoreham-by-Sea

GPs are paid outrageous salaries these days and now they have the nerve to fleece the taxpayers who pay their wages!
- Roger Kingston, York, North Yorks

Congrats on 10 years, Labour! It's much much worse than I remember pre 1997.
- Mr Reeve, London

But a spokesman for service provider Network Europe Group insisted its Surgery Line system helped patients by diverting them into a queue when lines were engaged.

Thereby creating a monetary gain where once there was none. If the surgery line was engaged people, just re dialed the number, now they are put in a queue that costs them money!

I wonder how many GP's practices would lose patients if it was more well known about these charges.
- A Connor, Blackpool, Lanc's

It is not possible to contact utility companies, banks, etc when you have genuine concerns or problems without paying through the nose for the calls. You then have to 'wait' on the line listening to a load of rubbish, then get put on hold while you wait for a 'busy' person to answer. It is about time the so called government watchdogs did something about it (by the way, you have to phone a premium rate number to get hold of them too!).
- Sp, Southampton


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 25th, 2007 at 11:55am

loddon wrote on Jul 25th, 2007 at 11:43am:
Perhaps the confuion is that 0844 numbers are listed in the 'premium calls' rate section of my phone bill, but I know that premium rate calls start at 10p or more so this might confuse people. I'm happy to pay 5p a minute to get a better service from my GP.

alan johnson, Leicester, Leicestershire

This guy must be an NEG empoyee or an NEG using doctor to make such precisely targetted comments to try to justify the NEG ripoff.

It seems clear NEG will fight to death for the right to keep their rotten ripoff system

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 25th, 2007 at 3:56pm

loddon wrote on Jul 25th, 2007 at 11:39am:
… The meaning of Premium in the dictionary -- a sum of money paid in addition to a regular price. …

Which is what I've been saying for ages and why, by definition, "standard" numbers can't vary in price.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 25th, 2007 at 4:35pm

Dave wrote on Jul 25th, 2007 at 3:56pm:
Which is what I've been saying for ages and why, by definition, "standard" numbers can't vary in price.


What is the betting that Ofcom and New Labour use their own dictionary with different definitions of certain words from the ones that we are used to. ;) ::) >:( :'(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Jul 25th, 2007 at 5:49pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 25th, 2007 at 4:35pm:
What is the betting that Ofcom and New Labour use their own dictionary with different definitions of certain words from the ones that we are used to. ;) ::) >:( :'(
I wonder what meaning they have for the word "premium?"

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Jul 25th, 2007 at 6:12pm

bbb_uk wrote on Jul 25th, 2007 at 5:49pm:
I wonder what meaning they have for the word "premium?"


Extra dosh for us to stuff in our already money-laden pockets?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 25th, 2007 at 6:14pm
I have located and spoken to Mr Sefton of Leeds, who described on The Times website that he and his wife were dismissed from their surgery.   The dismissal is described by the doctor as due to his abusive behaviour and he acknowledges that he may have loosened his self control momentarily.   It appears that he was put under severe provocation by the surgery as he tried to complain about their use of an 0844 number.

Following his attempt to register his complaint he received a letter from his doctor telling him that he was removed from their list of patients and I quote : ---
" The receptionist who dealt with your query tried to explain our current practice appointments policy, but clearly you were not prepared to listen to her.   I personally explained to you that the 0844 number is not a premium rate number and that the practice itself makes no profit from the very small extra charge over and above the standard BT rate."

You could well imagine how this conversation must have gone which no doubt lead to utter frustration on the part of Mr Sefton.   It is a sad and disturbing tale.   Mr Sefton will not call 0844 numbers on principle, nor 0870, 0871, 0845 or any equivalents and I belive he may have told his doctor that.

If this is how doctors are now treating patients well into their 70s who try to complain directly about 0844, then no wonder trust and respect for doctors is rapidly deteriorating and soon they may be seen on an even lower professional level than estate agents and journalists (-- sorry that may be an insult to estate agents and journalists).  

GPs are already being referred to as greedy, profit seeking, disgraceful, rip-off merchants, overpaid, immoral and unprincipled by numerous people in recent days.    How bad will it have to get before the BMA, the GMC and the DoH do something to halt the extreme damage that use of 0844 numbers is causing?????  And then what about Ofcon getting a grip on this issue?   Any chance???

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 25th, 2007 at 9:42pm

loddon wrote on Jul 25th, 2007 at 6:14pm:
I have located and spoken to Mr Sefton of Leeds, who described on The Times website that he and his wife were dismissed from their surgery.   The dismissal is described by the doctor as due to his abusive behaviour and he acknowledges that he may have loosened his self control momentarily.   It appears that he was put under severe provocation by the surgery as he tried to complain about their use of an 0844 number.

Following his attempt to register his complaint he received a letter from his doctor telling him that he was removed from their list of patients and I quote : ---
" The receptionist who dealt with your query tried to explain our current practice appointments policy, but clearly you were not prepared to listen to her.   I personally explained to you that the 0844 number is not a premium rate number and that the practice itself makes no profit from the very small extra charge over and above the standard BT rate."

You could well imagine how this conversation must have gone which no doubt lead to utter frustration on the part of Mr Sefton. …

Firstly, the reception is clearly arguing that it is not premium rate by the definition of the telecoms industry. But all of us who know better go by the dictionary definition of "premium" (as mentioned above in previous posts).

Secondly, I do not condone what Mr Sefton is reported to have done. But the receptionist should be trained in how to handle irate patients. In effect, telling them that they are wrong only builds barriers and is likely to inflame the situation and cause them more frustration.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 25th, 2007 at 9:46pm
A few more comments on The Times website :  ----

It's all of a piece with hospitals installing phones by the bedside which cost the earth to access. To make things worse, when you phone your ailing friend you have to listen to, and pay for, a needlessly long spoken introduction. Needless to say, the charges are similar when your friend phones out.
Who invents these schemes? To profiteer from the sick and the isolated is immoral.
I can remember a time (actually within living memory!) when we had a health service to be proud of. Hospitals were clean. Nurses nursed instead of gossipping round a "nursing station." Hospital acquired infections were rare. In hospital, one felt as safe as the technology made possible.
How did it all go so badly wrong?
Michael Bruce, Selby, Yorkshire

My surgery doesn't use an expensive code, it uses our local area code. They also listen to patients' views and have a policy of acting on patients wishes with regard to privacy and surgery availability. I am sure that if they considered an 0844 code, they would ask us beforehand and act accordingly. It couldn't be any better if it tried.
Jennifer Hynes, Plymouth, England

Although BT calls are charged at 3p per minute- BT also charge a 'Call Set Up' fee of 3p. So a one minute call from BT costs 6p, but a one minute call to an 0844 number only costs 5p. It's swings and roundabouts. I would be happy to pay a slightly higher call charge for an improved service like this.
Most places you call nowadays have an 0844/0845 number.
Liz Kerr, Leicester,


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 25th, 2007 at 9:50pm
The manager of my surgery has said that they have spoken with NEG. He assured me that they won't be changing to 0844 as they don't consider it right that patients be asked to "subsidise the costs of a new telephone system at the practice."

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Tanllan on Jul 25th, 2007 at 9:51pm

loddon wrote on Jul 25th, 2007 at 9:46pm:
...
Most places you call nowadays have an 0844/0845 number.
Liz Kerr, Leicester,

No they don't.
And the fact that most people used to use children to clean chimneys did not make it right.
Scamming people by using a rate that rides round the rules to trick people into calling revenue sharing numbers is wrong.
WRONG.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 25th, 2007 at 9:51pm
And yet more comments on the Daily Mail website : ----

This is intolerable. Making money out of the sick. The surgeries that have adopted these telephone lines should be severely reprimanded and have their funding reduced by the amount that is gained from this totally unacceptable method of adding to their income. We live in Britain - not the U.S.A. where such sharp practices may be acceptable. The NHS is free? Give me a break.
- Francis Nelson, Brighton and Hove, UK

This is nothing new. Years ago my local surgery replaced it's geographical number with an 0870 profit-making one. Only after the involvement of the local press did the practice manager relinquish his former denials that it was a money making exercise. The number was subsequently changed again, but not back to a geographical number (cheapest option). It's yet another obscene tax on the sick and vulnerable.
- Glyn, Southampton, U.K.

I am a GP at a practice which has an 0844 number. We dont make any profit from this at all. These are the facts:
1. Prior to implementation our old telephone system was obsolete and patient satisfaction at telephone access only 41% - they often got an engaged tone.
2. We applied for an NHS improvement grant on 2 separate occcassions and were turned down.
3. By going to a telephone company with an 0844 number, the income from the incoming calls offset the cost of the new telephone harware meaning we could offer a virtual queing system for incoming calls and telephone consulting. This has increased our telephone access satisfaction to 60% which is just above national average.
4. In April 2007 the average incoming call length was 2.23 min. At 1.2p extra per minute, the average call costs the patient 2.7p more. But the surgery doesn't profit from it - the patient profits with a better telephone access the NHS refused to pay for!
- Dr Tim Ramsbottom, Hitchin Herts

People on a low income will now have to think twice before phoning the GP surgery. This will affect the most vulnerable people such as the elderly or some of those with mental health problems. If the NHS needs more money why not charge people for missed appointments, or make a charge for the 40 per cent of A&E admissions which are alcohol related?
- Anonymous, UK


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 25th, 2007 at 10:18pm

Quote:
I am a GP at a practice which has an 0844 number. We dont make any profit from this at all. These are the facts:
1. Prior to implementation our old telephone system was obsolete and patient satisfaction at telephone access only 41% - they often got an engaged tone.
2. We applied for an NHS improvement grant on 2 separate occcassions and were turned down.
3. By going to a telephone company with an 0844 number, the income from the incoming calls offset the cost of the new telephone harware meaning we could offer a virtual queing system for incoming calls and telephone consulting. This has increased our telephone access satisfaction to 60% which is just above national average.
4. In April 2007 the average incoming call length was 2.23 min. At 1.2p extra per minute, the average call costs the patient 2.7p more. But the surgery doesn't profit from it - the patient profits with a better telephone access the NHS refused to pay for!
- Dr Tim Ramsbottom, Hitchin Herts

Don't make "any profit". How noble of you Dr Ramsbottom. So where do the call charges go that put this call over and above the price of an 01/02 call? Then in point 3 you refer to it as an "income", thus you are receiving something (the phone system) which you would have otherwise had to pay for out of your budget, leaving you with money to spend elsewhere. You have mentioned "profit" (and lack thereof) to cover the fact that you are really benefitting covertly at callers' direct expense and you consider this quite acceptable.

And the cost to your patients varies. A landline user will pay anything from 2 to 5 pence per minute on top of what they pay to 01/02 numbers. Mobile users pay anything upto 40p/min and those who have to call from a BT Payphone pay more than 10 times the price of an 01/02 call.

Now consider how much your callers actually pay to your 0844 in addition to what they paid when you used an 01/02 number. Aside from the fact that you are forcing them to pay for your new phone system, does the cost really reflect what the system is worth? If you receive 2p/min which you pass onto your providers (which I understand is a typical amount that surgeries receive), then the telco providing the 0844 which (presumably) the system's supplier appoints, keeps most of the other 3p/min. A small amount will be retained by the telco that the caller is with to carry the call.

So it is not even a case of your surgery using 2p/min of incoming call charges to finance the system. At 2p/min on a 40p/min or even 10p/min call, 2p/min is a tiny amount and reflects the inefficient way of being paid revenue from your callers [patients].

Moreso, the price of a system (product) such as this is usually determined by market forces. Supermarkets offer different ranges (brands) of the same type of product which usually vary in price. The price you (the customer) pays is the price on the shelf. It's clear to see and there is a competitive element which helps drive down prices and thus reduce "excessive" profit by the manufacturer (some may disagree with this, put in principal this is what happens for the good of the consumer).

With these telephone systems and with so-called revenue sharing NTS numbers this doesn't really exist because the pratice is the customer and gets patients to subsidise the phone system through an extremely inefficient transaction where telcos must be raking it in!

BTW, Dr Ramsbottom practices at Nevells Road Surgery in Letchworth.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 26th, 2007 at 6:20pm
Seen on the Anorak News Website :----

GPs Profit From Patient Calls      25th July

FIRST it was Richard and Judy, then Blue Peter and now we find that even the most trusted member of society, the family doctor, has been making money out of our phone calls.

According to the Mail, doctors are being accused of switching local surgeries to more expensive 0844 phone numbers in an attempt to boost their profits. The switch means that millions of patients face paying at least 40 per cent more to book an appointment with their GP.

patient Says:
July 25th, 2007 at 10:55 am
For training and quality purposes all calls will be recorded.
To be put through to a condescending, abrupt receptionist - please press 1.
To find out the results of your smear test - please press 2.
To check to see if we have your prescription or have lost it - please press 3.
To find out why your doctor can no longer make home visits - please press 4.
For any other enquiry, or if you would like to be placed on hold for 20 minutes in complete silence - please press 5.

We are sorry to keep you waiting. Your call is important to us …….


George Says:
July 26th, 2007 at 6:14 pm
This is immoral and unethical. It is a degradation of the medical profession and Hypocrates must be spinning in his grave. The grasping greedy extorting image that doctors are now creating is going to damage the profession for many years to come. If they want to use a non-geographic number then they should at least make their normal geographic number available to those patients who ask for it. Doctors should start putting their patients welfare first instead of robbing them through their phone calls. It is a disgrace.



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 26th, 2007 at 6:26pm
And now in the Norwich Evening News   http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/news/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=News&tBrand=ENOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=NOED26%20Jul%202007%2009%3A25%3A24%3A793  

GPs criticised for costly phone numbers


26 July 2007 09:23

Doctor's surgeries have been criticised by patients for switching their phone numbers to expensive 0844 dialling codes.

While the numbers are not premium rate, they can cost up to 5p per minute for people who have call plans which would otherwise allow them inexpensive or free local calls.

Campaigners have called for an end to the practice saying it is unfair. The specialist surgery telephone service is used by several medical centres in Norfolk, including Costessey Medical Practice and Acle Medical Centre and costs 5p per minute.

Today, Jan Hardinge, practice manager at Costessey, said: “The only place you would pay more is when you have got a supplier where you get local calls included and they don't pick it up as a local call. Suppliers of price plans need to recognise 0844 numbers are local and put them in all-inclusive calls.”

Grace Yorke, of Acle Medical Centre, said: “We can't take into consideration what some people may or may not have in their own personal arrangements. The fact is we wouldn't charge any more than a local call.”

Telephone service provider Network Europe Group (NEG) argues the 0844 numbers allow surgeries to queue calls and divert them to a number of extensions so that patients are not just stuck with an engaged tone.

However, Joyce Robins, co-director of Patient Concern, said: “It is quite ridiculous. People should not pay more for their calls to their GP. It can be very difficult to get through to your surgery in some cases and you can run up quite a bill.”

Ü What do you think of the 0844 numbers? Write to Evening News Letters, Prospect House, Rouen Road, Norwich, NR1 1RE, email eveningnewsletters@ archant.co.uk or visit www.evening news24.co.uk/forums

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 26th, 2007 at 6:31pm
There is a Petition on the No. 10 website which seeks to prevent the use of non-geographic numbers by GPs.

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/NGN-use-by-GPs/  Go here to vote now!!!

General Medical Practioners are being persuaded, by telephone equipment suppliers and service providers, to change from the use of local 01 and 02 geographic numbers to a non-geographic 0844 number to book an appointment and 0870 numbers for calls from overseas countries. The patient has to remember a 11 or 12 digit number as againt a 5 or 6 digit local call number. These numbers are also revenue sharing numbers and generate an income for the doctors surgery and/or the telephone service provider and encourage the queing of calls to generate extra revenue. It is not possible to make a 0870 call from most overseas counties and therefore you or a hospital will not be able to contact your doctor for information. After hours doctor services are also using the 0870 number for incoming calls This practice penalises the poor, elderly and other persons who do not have access to a home phone and must rely on a public phone box and is additional un-neccessary burden and cost on illness

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 26th, 2007 at 6:39pm

Quote:
Today, Jan Hardinge, practice manager at Costessey, said: “The only place you would pay more is when you have got a supplier where you get local calls included and they don't pick it up as a local call. Suppliers of price plans need to recognise 0844 numbers are local and put them in all-inclusive calls.”

What planet is Ms Hardinge living on?  ::)

Yes, of course. She expects telephone companies (who originate calls) to pick up the tab and make a loss or increase their prices because she has chosen a revenue generating number. Pure greed and stupidity on this pratice's part!!!


Quote:
Grace Yorke, of Acle Medical Centre, said: “We can't take into consideration what some people may or may not have in their own personal arrangements. The fact is we wouldn't charge any more than a local call.”

Err, so why have you moved from an 01/02 number? Did you do some research or did you let yourself be brainwashed by your service provider (NEG??) ?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 26th, 2007 at 7:03pm

loddon wrote on Jul 26th, 2007 at 6:26pm:
Telephone service provider Network Europe Group (NEG) argues the 0844 numbers allow surgeries to queue calls and divert them to a number of extensions so that patients are not just stuck with an engaged tone.


Not true.   It is the system that allows calls to be queued or diverted  --- NOT the number.   The system can just as easily perform these type of functions whatever the number, geographics included.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by KVSimons on Jul 26th, 2007 at 7:18pm
While yes the system located within the practice can queue calls, the 0844 allows something called Network Queuing. As most practices operate Advanced Access these days (ie book on the day appts) all patients tend to call at 8.30am when the practice opens. This usually results in a bottleneck as all the calls try to access the lines simultaneously. The 0844, or network, picks up each call (depending on the queue limit the PRACTICE has set) and feeds the calls to the practice as their lines become free. The number of calls in the queue is down to the practice and not down to NEG.  Some practices have an emergency option, ie 'Press 1 for an emergency' - meaning that these calls will get through straight away, whereas previously to Surgery Line the line would have been engaged as all lines were flooded with this bottleneck.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Jul 26th, 2007 at 7:31pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 26th, 2007 at 7:18pm:
Some practices have an emergency option, ie 'Press 1 for an emergency' - meaning that these calls will get through straight away, whereas previously to Surgery Line the line would have been engaged as all lines were flooded with this bottleneck.

No, 999 is the emergency number - throughout the whole UK (since being introduced in the 1930s, I believe).

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 26th, 2007 at 7:48pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 26th, 2007 at 7:18pm:
While yes the system located within the practice can queue calls, the 0844 allows something called Network Queuing. As most practices operate Advanced Access these days (ie book on the day appts) all patients tend to call at 8.30am when the practice opens. This usually results in a bottleneck as all the calls try to access the lines simultaneously. The 0844, or network, picks up each call (depending on the queue limit the PRACTICE has set) and feeds the calls to the practice as their lines become free. The number of calls in the queue is down to the practice and not down to NEG.  Some practices have an emergency option, ie 'Press 1 for an emergency' - meaning that these calls will get through straight away, whereas previously to Surgery Line the line would have been engaged as all lines were flooded with this bottleneck.


Miss Simmons,

Thank you for demonstrating to us that you do in fact have a reasonable technical mind and know full well how your system actually works.

People only became cross with you before when you tried to lie to deceive us by giving us the usual unbelievable NEG lie that 0844 was a local rate call.  I assume you have always known this lie to be untrue but as you have clearly managed to get away with it with the average non technically minded doctor or practice manager up to now you also thought you could pull the wool over our eyes?

Coming back to your helpful and unspun description of what your system is actually doing it is clear that all the system does is to provide a more egalitarian form of queuing that is less of a lottery but at the cost of patients paying more per minute, whereas engaged tones were previously free, even though redialling many times is undoubtedly frustrating.

Surely what patients actually want is a system where they can ring up any time after surgery has closed the previous evening and then enter a patient number via touch tones and be told by the IVR system  the appointment slot they have been allocated (or they could even request a slot and be told if it is still free and if not the nearest time to the requested time that is still free).  Also for all internet savvy customers its surely better to cut out the whole phone lark altogether and interact with a computerised doctors appointments diary.

However your system does not seem to be technologically advanced and still requires patients to interact with Beryl the receptionist with her biro who can only handle one call at a time and this ensures long queues at times which your company then directly or indirectly earns revenue share on.

Let me ask the following questions:-

1.  If we accept that small doctors practices are still in the dark ages and cannot yet allow direct interaction with their appointment diary online or they are worried that a computerised system would not prioritise patients in the greatest medical need then why did NEG not come up with a system using Voip 01/02 numbers which the doctor paid extra for to offer their patients a better system.  And if patients were actually allowed to shop around and choose the best doctor then they would choose one with a more modern and convenient interface and so doctors would be happy to pay the extra to have an increasing patient roll from which they make more money.

2.  Accepting that Beryl with the biro is disappointingly still the only one who can make the appointments then in order to offer patients the best service if the call queue is going to be over 1 minute then why don't you let the patient enter a phone number they can be called back on when call numbers have subsided and so they are left happy they did not have to queue any unreasonable length of time.

If Surgeryline actually cost patients no more than 01/02 calls but allowed the doctor to deliver a better service then everyone would be in favour but all it does is to accept the concept of a long queue without bringing in automation that could easily avoid it and also charges patients extra for the doctor's greater operational convenience

I must say you are a brave woman to come back to this thread in view of all that has been said about you and NEG, although like all good sales people you show yourself to have an incredibly thick hide and to never ever give up hope that you may wear a prospect down into submission if you spend long enough at it. ;) ::) :P

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Jul 26th, 2007 at 8:53pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 26th, 2007 at 7:18pm:
While yes the system located within the practice can queue calls, the 0844 allows something called Network Queuing. As most practices operate Advanced Access these days (ie book on the day appts) all patients tend to call at 8.30am when the practice opens. This usually results in a bottleneck as all the calls try to access the lines simultaneously. The 0844, or network, picks up each call (depending on the queue limit the PRACTICE has set) and feeds the calls to the practice as their lines become free. The number of calls in the queue is down to the practice and not down to NEG.  Some practices have an emergency option, ie 'Press 1 for an emergency' - meaning that these calls will get through straight away, whereas previously to Surgery Line the line would have been engaged as all lines were flooded with this bottleneck.
Ignoring the fact that calls to 0844 cost 2p/min more from a BT landline (possibly more from other providers and of course the fact that 0844 are excluded from inclusive packages), then can you explain why an 0844 would be cheaper for me?

My surgery uses a geographical and whilst they do have engaged tones I don't pay for this and I only pay when I actually get to speak to a human and then I'm on the call generally less than minute or two (max) to either book/cancel an appointment.

Now if my surgery adopts an 0844 numbers then I'd have to pay for being held in a queue before being answered by a human or worse pay whilst going through the endless IVR options that may be present before finally getting to speak to a human.

The 2p/min more expensive is based on calling from a BT landline on BT's lowest package.  However, there are many, many other providers out there that offer cheaper calls and cheaper inclusive packages to geographical numbers than BT so in most cases patients are probably using a cheaper alternative provider and/or on an inclusive package.

Some surgeries may try and say that its upto individual telephone companies (OCPs) whether they include calls to non-geographical numbers or not but in reality because of the high cost of carrying these calls, telephone companies dont include non-geographical numbers unless you pay a high monthly price and even then you only have a limited number of minutes (I'm referring to one of VirginMedia's telephone package).


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 26th, 2007 at 9:19pm

bbb_uk wrote on Jul 26th, 2007 at 8:53pm:
Now if my surgery adopts an 0844 numbers then I'd have to pay for being held in a queue before being answered by a human or worse pay whilst going through the endless IVR options that may be present before finally getting to speak to a human.

Indeed. Ms Simons admits that the 0844 queues calls on the network, which surely means callers pay more because they are waiting.

The reason we and patients are up in arms about this is because of the call charges. The system should be operating on a number which costs the caller no more than an 01/02 call.

Furthermore, either service providers are misleading surgeries and/or surgeries are under the impression that 0844 is "not much more expensive than" or the same as a "local" call. It is surely the provider's (eg NEG) duty to put them right on this and I refer you back to the article referred to here from the Norwich Evening News:


Quote:
Today, Jan Hardinge, practice manager at Costessey, said: “The only place you would pay more is when you have got a supplier where you get local calls included and they don't pick it up as a local call. Suppliers of price plans need to recognise 0844 numbers are local and put them in all-inclusive calls.”

Quite clearly Ms Hardinge:
1. has no idea of the real cost of a "local" call.
2. does not understand that 0844 numbers are revenue sharing (of which her surgery presumably shares in). Furthermore, she apparently expects other parties, namely originating communications providers, to fill the gap to pay for the revenue sharing! She does not have even a basic understanding of telecoms!!

I am glad that she doesn't run my GP's surgery as she clearly acts without finding out the facts.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by KVSimons on Jul 26th, 2007 at 10:15pm
I do not think for one min that I will convert you, I know when I am out numbered (!) - to quickly answer your questions (as I do actually have a life outside work), yes indeed patients can call their practice 265 24/7 and book, cancel and amend their appts if they wish. Hopefully this then means there are less patients then calling through at 8.30am the next day. The practice decides which appts to release to the automated system.
Surgery Line is VoIP ready and we have VoIP practices installed.
There are no practices using IVR as yet in the UK - if I am wrong let me know (!), this is a very very expensive option for primary care, so while it is being used by some NHS Trusts it isn't yet in General Practice. I think maybe you are confusing it with Auto Attendants.
I await your ever generous responses, they really do light up my day.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 26th, 2007 at 10:59pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 26th, 2007 at 10:15pm:
I do not think for one min that I will convert you, I know when I am out numbered (!)


It is good to know that deep below the oodles of spin much preferred by your company there is a person who is well aware of the real facts.  I do accept that there are probably endless doctors out there using hideously primitive PSTN phone systems that need upgrading but I don't see why the patients have to pay for this directly any more than they should have to pay directly for any new medical instruments or consultation couches the practice may acquire.

To be honest I think people are being a little too hard when they vent all their spleen on this matter on NEG.  The fact of the matter is that as long as a useless and hijacked regulator allows the clarity of the UK telephone numbering systems to be totally corrupted and allows lower cost premium rate numbers to mascarade as local rate, while doing nothing whatsoever to even make false claims they are local rate or low cost illegal, there will inevitably be an NEG that takes advantage of the situation.  And ditto NEG could not exist without the active connivance of the NHS who is prepared to allow hidden extra taxation on patients paying directly for their doctors new swithchboard equipment rather than saying no this is wrong and that doctors must pay directly for their own infrastructure investment out of their existing budgets.

I must admire your boldness in posting in this thread, which does at least suggest a certain belief on your part in the democratic process of open and healthy public debate.  I suspect you are probably the exception that proves the rule at NEG and that none of your colleagues would probably have any time at all for an activity which might distract them from signing up yet more unsuspecting practices and thus further stoking up the monthly sales commission rolling in to their bank accounts. ;) :P


Quote:
I await your ever generous responses, they really do light up my day.


An NEG employee with a sense of humour would horribly shatter our illusions about a typical member of NEG's staff. [smiley=lolk.gif]

But how do you square all this with your conscience when you think of poor 80 year old pensioners with no phone at home using a public payhone and having to pay 13 times as much to call an NEG doctor's surgery as they would if their doctor still used an 01/02 number.

Ah I was forgetting that a conscience is clearly a disqualifying factor for being allowed to work at NEG in the first place. :o

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 26th, 2007 at 11:09pm
A further question for Kath Simons.

So precisely just how many switchboard solutions installed in doctors practices by NEG actually utilise an 01/02 phone number for contact rather than an 0844 NGN then? ;) ::)

If you always give the doctors exactly what they want then surely at least some more discerning doctors surgeries will have selected the more expensive option of retaining their existing 01/02 numbers? :-/ ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 27th, 2007 at 1:39am

KVSimons wrote on Jul 26th, 2007 at 10:15pm:
I await your ever generous responses, they really do light up my day.
Your company exploits the public. It also lies regarding call costs. 'Nuff said.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 27th, 2007 at 12:08pm
http://www.pendletoday.co.uk/barnoldswick-earby-news?articleid=3065886

<<
Anger over doctors' surgery phone switch

By Alison King

THE Barnoldswick GP surgery's decision to switch to an 0844 phone number has provoked outrage among some of its patients.
But staff at the Park Road surgery insist the benefits of the new system are more significant than any minor inconveniences.

The surgery opted to change to the Surgery Line system, which has an 0844 number, last September after a survey identified telephone access as being a major problem.

Calls to the surgery are also no longer included in mobile phone networks' free minutes, and cannot be dialled from abroad.

Patients – particularly the elderly who regularly call the surgery – are struggling to remember the long number. One said: "We were all sent a letter telling us the new system would be brilliant, and cheaper than BT.

"This just isn't true. I've spoken to staff at the surgery and had letters back from them, but they're ignoring what I have to say. They simply haven't addressed the issues I've put to them regarding the difficulty of remembering the number plus the cost, including the fact they didn't add the VAT on to the cost of calls when they gave us an example.

"All they've said to me is that it's a better system, and we are now able to be held in a queue, but that's ridiculous. The old system worked fine and if it was engaged you just called back, instead of being charged to queue."

[...]

Network Europe Group, which supplies the Surgery Line system used at Barnoldswick, described the advantages the system brings to patients with a wide spectrum of medical issues.

Senior consultant Kath Simons said: "The benefits to patients are based around improved access. As the calls enter the practice in a more structured and controlled manner, this increases efficiency and productivity of the practice. Out of hours calls also go straight through to the local provider.

"There is a misconception that 0844 numbers are premium rate, but it costs the same as a BT local rate number."
>>

Ms Simons, you are a LIAR! When will you stop telling porkies, or is it simply not possible?! If telling lies is an obsessive and compulsive issue, then you need help girl. I can recommend a good doctor, and you won't have to call a premium number to make contact.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 27th, 2007 at 12:11pm

KVSimons wrote on Jul 26th, 2007 at 7:18pm:
While yes the system located within the practice can queue calls, the 0844 allows something called Network Queuing. As most practices operate Advanced Access these days (ie book on the day appts) all patients tend to call at 8.30am when the practice opens. This usually results in a bottleneck as all the calls try to access the lines simultaneously. The 0844, or network, picks up each call (depending on the queue limit the PRACTICE has set) and feeds the calls to the practice as their lines become free. The number of calls in the queue is down to the practice and not down to NEG.  Some practices have an emergency option, ie 'Press 1 for an emergency' - meaning that these calls will get through straight away, whereas previously to Surgery Line the line would have been engaged as all lines were flooded with this bottleneck.


To Ms Simons,
so the system in the practice can queue calls.  Then "the 0844, or network"  also sets up a queue.   What do you mean by "the network"?    Do you mean, you (NEG) have a server on which you store the calls and then forward them to the practice?   Is my understanding correct or does it work another way?
 
What is the point of having 2 queues?   One feeding the other, what is the benefit?

"...most practices operate Advanced Access these days (ie book on the day appts) ..."    Don't you mean time limited access?  or restricted access?    Old fashioned retarded access?    Surely Advanced Access would be booking in advance, say next day or next few days?  Or even better, on-line access to the doctor's appointments diary for on-line booking using advanced techniques, as some practices already do?     Your use of the word Advanced seems to be an abuse of the English language --- or is it just another of the NEG lies designed to mislead and confuse the public (and maybe the doctors?)?

"Some practices have an emergency option, ie 'Press 1 for an emergency' - meaning that these calls will get through straight away..."     Do you mean these calls simply jump to the front of the queue?    They still won't be answered if the receptionist/s are engaged.     This is still not a benefit or feature of 0844 ---- it is a very simple bit of programming in the "system".    

"The number of calls in the queue is down to the practice and not down to NEG."     Which queue are you talking about here?     Can the doctor set the limit for both queues?    

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 28th, 2007 at 12:35am
Early Day Motions tabled between
23 - 27 July 2007

24.7.07
1989
Mrs Sharon Hodgson
COST OF CALLING DOCTORS' SURGERIES

1989 COST OF CALLING DOCTORS' SURGERIES 24:7:07
Mrs Sharon Hodgson
Bob Spink
Andrew George
Bob Russell
Mr Andrew Dismore
Stephen Williams
* 27
Mr Gordon Marsden Chris McCafferty Mr Neil Gerrard
Philip Davies Peter Bottomley Mr Phil Willis
Mr Edward O'Hara Mrs Betty Williams Clive Efford
Mr Colin Breed Mrs Ann Cryer Sandra Gidley

That this House strongly deplores the practice of doctors' surgeries setting up more expensive telephone numbers with an 0844 prefix, which are up to four pence a minute more expensive to call from a standard BT landline, through which patients have to book appointments, although the telephone watchdog Ofcom is rightly critical of the idea; believes that this unfairly penalises the less well off; and urges the greater use of geographical telephone numbers for such purposes.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 28th, 2007 at 8:01am
Surely if the comparison includes mobile phones then it can be argued 0844 numbers are up to 30p per minute more expensive and the motion needs to condemn the sluggardly inaction of Ofcom over this issue rather than praising the evil conniving so and sos.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 28th, 2007 at 10:00am

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 28th, 2007 at 8:01am:
Surely if the comparison includes mobile phones then it can be argued 0844 numbers are up to 30p per minute more expensive and the motion needs to condemn the sluggardly inaction of Ofcom over this issue rather than praising the evil conniving so and sos.


Your comments are just too important to allow them to be wasted.   Why don't you contact or email Sharon Hodgson MP who tabled this motion, telling her that contributors on this site are fully supportive, and suggest how she could make this motion more telling, informative and effective?

This is massive progress in our campaign (I think we can now feel that we are beginning to get a campaign under way) and to get MPs to initiate action like this is surely one of our prime objectives.   Considering we have not yet met to formally plan a 'campaign' and indeed as far as I know we don't yet have a plan as such, we are making remarkable progress.   '0870' is already dead in the water and is now awaiting its inevitable demise February 08, so, one down 3 to go!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 28th, 2007 at 1:15pm

loddon wrote on Jul 28th, 2007 at 10:00am:
0870' is already dead in the water and is now awaiting its inevitable demise February 08, so, one down 3 to go!


But its deadly and more expensive sibling 0871 is waiting in the wings to almost fully replace it thanks to the connivance of double dealing, double talking Ofcom and ICSTIS. :o >:( :'(

And perhaps some like the BBC will instead go to 0844 at 5p per minute at all times where there is no ICSTIS control at all.  After all if doctors can use 0844 with the DH's approval then why not the BBC..................................

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 28th, 2007 at 3:21pm
The Oxford Times carried this story back in May : -----

http://www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/search/display.var.1414452.0.high_cost_calls_cause_concern.php

Here is the text : -------

High cost calls cause concern
By Victoria Owen

Watchdogs are concerned patients are being forced to use high cost phone lines to call their GP surgeries.

The Oxfordshire Primary Care Trust patient and public involvement forum (PPIF) said the use of 0844 numbers by family doctors was placing an "unfair financial burden" on pensioners, the chronically ill and the disabled.

Members have complained to the trust and Banbury MP Tony Baldry, has raised its concerns with Health Minister Rosie Winterton.

advertisement
In a letter to the trust, the forum said: "The use of these high cost phone numbers for patients to contact their surgery or health centre not only places an unfair financial burden on those least able to bear it, but is discriminatory in placing an unfair financial burden on people with the greatest number of health needs.

"People such as old age pensioners, chronically sick and disabled others and any persons on low incomes are most disadvantaged by enforced use of these numbers."

Earlier this year, the Oxford Mail highlighted the problem after pensioner William Hughes, 78, of Compton Drive, Abingdon, complained that a 14 minute call to his doctor at the Malthouse Surgery, had cost 63p.

Two years ago, the Government said 0844 numbers would replace premium and national rate numbers to ensure patients did not have to pay for expensive calls.

Mr Baldry said there was confusion about the price of calling the code, which while costing 5p a minute from a BT landline, could cost as much as 35p a minute from a mobile phone.

He claimed some people ended up paying more under the new scheme, which was unacceptable.

He said: "It's the Gov- ernment's responsibility to ensure this change is enacted, and if it hasn't happened then the Department of Health is failing patients.

"However, I think the problem may be unintentional but no less damaging for patients' pockets. I understand that 0844 numbers can be charged at different rates."

One 0844 provider, Network Europe Group, said calls from the code cost about the same as calling a local BT number and should not increase if a patient phoned from a mobile.

Spokesman Alastair Campbell said the main advantage of the system was people calling their GPs did not have to spend time redialling after getting an engaged tone.

He added: "Sometimes, there maybe 20 people calling at a time, and with a BT number a GP would have to have about 20 lines into the surgery to eradicate this, which would be too expensive. With 0844 numbers, you can have as many lines as you like, so the patient can choose to wait or dial again later if it's not urgent.

"Studies we've done show the average patient spends about 5p more a year as a result, which isn't very much for the service."

Alison Brumfitt of Oxfordshire PCT, said: "0844 numbers are lo-call numbers and are in line with the Government's policy that GPs shouldn't use high rate numbers. If any patient gets their bill and finds they've been charged a premium rate by their surgery, they should contact us and we will look into it."


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 28th, 2007 at 6:06pm

loddon wrote on Jul 28th, 2007 at 3:21pm:
One 0844 provider, Network Europe Group, said calls from the code cost about the same as calling a local BT number and should not increase if a patient phoned from a mobile.


A case of liars, damned liars and off the end of the scale NEG liars! >:( >:( >:(


Quote:
Spokesman Alastair Campbell said the main advantage of the system was people calling their GPs did not have to spend time redialling after getting an engaged tone.

He added: "Sometimes, there maybe 20 people calling at a time, and with a BT number a GP would have to have about 20 lines into the surgery to eradicate this, which would be too expensive. With 0844 numbers, you can have as many lines as you like, so the patient can choose to wait or dial again later if it's not urgent.


No Mr Alistair Top NEG Liar Campbell the main advantage of the new system is to you NEG because thousands of calls a week to every doctor's surgery that used to get the free engaged tone now all connect and earn you NEG and/or your doctor's practices revenue share money on every resulting connection charge, even if a huge percentage of patients then hang up before they speak to a receptionist.

As for only costing 5p per patient per year extra clearly that is just yet a further blatant bare faced lie but then NEG and its staff are all bare faced blatant wholly unprincpled liars who rely on selling their systems to imbecilic GP pratcice managers with a similar lack of conscience and principles who tell their GP bosses that they are getting something for nothing without mentioning that this involves stealing from the pockets of their patients every single time they call their doctor. :o >:( >:( >:(


Quote:
Alison Brumfitt of Oxfordshire PCT, said: "0844 numbers are lo-call numbers and are in line with the Government's policy that GPs shouldn't use high rate numbers. If any patient gets their bill and finds they've been charged a premium rate by their surgery, they should contact us and we will look into it."


Well according to the dictionary Ms Brumfitt calling an NEG doctor's surgery definitely involves a premium over normal 01/02 calls and BT call it a Special Rate Service number.  So do you still maintain these calls are only at lo-call rate?

Anyhow you are lieing on that too as the term "lo-call" was only ever relevant to 0845 numbers (which can be included in BT Friends and Family unlike 0844) and whilst now withdrawn by BT it was never ever able to be used for 0844 numbers, which have never had any connection with local call prices.

Does anyone notice a pattern here? It seems everyone who tries to defend NEG's ripoff service is forced to resort to bare faced lieing in order to do so. ;) :o >:( >:( >:(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 28th, 2007 at 9:10pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 28th, 2007 at 6:06pm:
Anyhow you are lieing on that too as the term "lo-call" was only ever relevant to 0845 numbers (which can be included in BT Friends and Family unlike 0844) and whilst now withdrawn by BT it was never ever able to be used for 0844 numbers, which have never had any connection with local call prices.

Indeed. 0844 and 0871 are referred to by BT as "ContactCall".

Details on how BT promotes 08xx numbers on its website here.

NEG mentions "lo-call" here, with respect to 0844 and, naturally, "national rate" with respect to 0870.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 28th, 2007 at 9:20pm

Dave wrote on Jul 28th, 2007 at 9:10pm:
Indeed. 0844 and 0871 are referred to by BT as "ContactCall".

BT's phone books for many years referred to all 084 and 087 numbers as "Special Rate Services".

Whatever they call them they are still a Premium Rate number that is simply using another name.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by mikeinnc on Jul 28th, 2007 at 10:00pm
 
Quote:
Details on how BT promotes 08xx numbers on its website here.


It is interesting that BT claim on their web site for 0844 that there is no revenue share with these numbers.

http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/btbusinessProducts/displayProduct.do?productId=BTB-6716


Quote:
Revenue share - No revenue share with this number


Does this actually mean that every 0844 surgery number is registered with NEG, who - of course - charge the full amount of 5p, making no co-payment themselves? They then - presumably - can determine if they give anything back to the surgery by way of rebate, or keep the entire call charge themselves


Quote:
Costs - Please note: If you decide to pay 1p per minute for the call, your customer will pay the remaining 4p per minute. If you pay 2p per minute, your customer will pay the remaining 3p and so on.


And...don't you just love the bare faced cheek of BT who really sit grinning like the cat that ate the cream. They can be seen to wash their hands of the whole scam - when, in fact, they are in it so far only the soles of their feet are showing! I've long maintained that this is where the REAL blame lies. Contact Call! Huh! Rip Off Call I'd term it.....

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 28th, 2007 at 11:19pm

mikeinnc wrote on Jul 28th, 2007 at 10:00pm:
And...don't you just love the bare faced cheek of BT who really sit grinning like the cat that ate the cream. They can be seen to wash their hands of the whole scam - when, in fact, they are in it so far only the soles of their feet are showing! I've long maintained that this is where the REAL blame lies. Contact Call! Huh! Rip Off Call I'd term it.....


Yes the real blame lies with BT and their major incumbent telco bretheren elsewhere in Europe who invented this ripoff revenue share concept and with the regulators OFTEL and now Ofcom who have consistently worked away in darkened smoke filled rooms (eg Ofcom NTS Focus Group) with the telco industry to widen and extend these abuses while tut-tutting and pretending that they are concerned about them to the citizen consumer.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Jul 29th, 2007 at 9:29am

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 28th, 2007 at 11:19pm:
Yes the real blame lies with BT and their major incumbent telco bretheren elsewhere in Europe who invented this ripoff revenue share
A few years back when an 0845/0870 cost the same as a local/national geo, did revenue share exist back then?  I'm sure that companies/gov depts had to contribute to the cost of the call (specifically for 0845 anyhow).  I realise that when different local/national rates were scrapped that meant more revenue for CPs which meant some of this revenue was then passed on to company/gov dept using the numbers and basically since then and the fact that CPs continued to market 08x as being local or national rate but with the added bonus of allowing revenue share to the company/gov dept then that's when nearly every company in the UK moved to an 08x.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by pw4 on Jul 29th, 2007 at 1:23pm

bbb_uk wrote on Jul 29th, 2007 at 9:29am:
A few years back when an 0845/0870 cost the same as a local/national geo, did revenue share exist back then?

It did for 0870.


Quote:
I'm sure that companies/gov depts had to contribute to the cost of the call (specifically for 0845 anyhow).

They had to pay the difference between local and national rate on non-local incoming calls on 0345 numbers.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 29th, 2007 at 1:31pm
Well, well, well.  Don't you seem to know rather a lot about this subject for somone who is allegedly only the director of a hospital radio station pw4. ;) ::) :P

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by pw4 on Jul 29th, 2007 at 5:14pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 29th, 2007 at 1:31pm:
Well, well, well.  Don't you seem to know rather a lot about this subject for somone who is allegedly only the director of a hospital radio station pw4. ;) ::) :P

I think you confuse me with someone else. I am involved in hospital broadcasting, but I am not a manager or 'director' of a station and have never claimed to be.  :-?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 29th, 2007 at 5:25pm

pw4 wrote on Jul 29th, 2007 at 5:14pm:
I think you confuse me with someone else. I am involved in hospital broadcasting, but I am not a manager or 'director' of a station and have never claimed to be.  :-?


I knew you were involved in hospital radio and may wrongly have thought you were the MD of such a station.

Perhaps in fact you are merely involved in hospital radio but also a director of another business in the telecoms industry as well? ;)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by pw4 on Jul 29th, 2007 at 5:40pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 29th, 2007 at 5:25pm:
I knew you were involved in hospital radio and may wrongly have thought you were the MD of such a station.

As I suspected: you were confusing me with DC.


Quote:
Perhaps in fact you are merely involved in hospital radio but also a director of another business in the telecoms industry as well? ;)

I've never been a director of anything. :(
My day job is in the broadcasting industry.
I worked for BT very briefly in the 1980s driving a yellow van, climbing up poles and putting A108s through people's letterboxes and such stuff.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 29th, 2007 at 5:47pm

pw4 wrote on Jul 29th, 2007 at 5:40pm:

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 29th, 2007 at 5:25pm:
Perhaps in fact you are merely involved in hospital radio but also a director of another business in the telecoms industry as well? ;)

As I suspected: you were confusing me with DC.
I've never been a director of anything. :(

My day job is in the broadcasting industry.

I worked for BT very briefly in the 1980s driving a yellow van, climbing up poles and putting A108s through people's letterboxes and such stuff.

Actually I had forgotten about DC altogether.  But perhaps you and he have become a sort of amalgam in my mind.  Apologies for any incorrect associations therefore.

What is an A108 though?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by pw4 on Jul 29th, 2007 at 6:18pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 29th, 2007 at 5:47pm:
Actually I had forgotten about DC altogether.  But perhaps you and he have become a sort of amalgam in my mind.  Apologies for any in correct associations therefore.

It's actually easy to distinguish us. I'm not going bald.


Quote:
What is an A108 though?

It was - possibly still is - a pre-printed postcard. The logo changed frequently, and the wording changed occasionally, but is along the lines of "I called. You weren't in. Tough.", with blank spaces for the technician's name, the date, and the time, which the technician would leave blank so that the subscriber couldn't point out that they were at home at the stated time but the technician hadn't rung the bell or knocked. The card quoted a number for the subscriber to call (from their phone that didn't work) to arrange an appoinment, and a different technician would be duly dispatched at a different time to that arranged and put another A108 through the letterbox.
Incidentaly, if the subscriber called to arrange an appointment from a payphone, the call would automatically cut off exactly five minutes after the ring tone started - whether or not it had been answered, but generally that was just as they were about to supply the convenient date and time for the appointment.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 30th, 2007 at 1:49pm
http://www.wigantoday.net/wigan-news?articleid=3069379

4 times dearer to call the doctor

By Andy Cooney

<<
Patients phoning the family doctor are being hit in the wallet as Wigan surgeries switch to a new call handling system.

The controversial new line, which can cost up to 400 per cent more than a standard landline call, has been adopted by at least three local clinics who have ditched the 01942 Wigan prefix in favour of an 0844 code.

Medicentre, on Wigan Road in Ashton, along with Hindley's Pennygate Medical Centre on Ladies' Lane, and Dr Burzar's surgery on Liverpool Road, have all adopted the higher price system.

Calls to the new 0844 number can cost patients up to 4p a minute more than calls to a standard BT landline and phoning the line from a mobile can cost as much as 35p per minute.

Callers pay a flat fee of 5p per minute from anywhere in the country rather than BT's local rate of 3p per minute at peak times and 1p per minute off peak under the Option 1 package.

None of the surgeries wished to comment but a spokesman for 0844 operator NEG, Alistair Campbell, contacted the Evening Post.

He said: "There are situations where the old system is cheaper but there are situations where we are cheaper, like if you call from outside the Wigan area for example.

"Callers to our lines tend not to spend as long on the phone and end up spending less overall.
[...]
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 30th, 2007 at 2:15pm

idb wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 1:49pm:
None of the surgeries wished to comment but a spokesman for 0844 operator NEG, Alistair Campbell, contacted the Evening Post.

He said: "There are situations where the old system is cheaper but there are situations where we are cheaper, like if you call from outside the Wigan area for example.

"Callers to our lines tend not to spend as long on the phone and end up spending less overall..>


Mr Campbelll you are a bare faced liar.  It will always cost more to call an NEG Surgeryline number at 5p per minute than a national rate 01/02 number at 3p per minute on BT Option 1 from anywhere in the UK to anywhere in the UK.

Your whole business at NEG is based on telling disgusting lies to patients and doctors in order to con them in to believing it is not the ripoff that it in fact is.

You should be ashamed of yourself. :o >:( >:( >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]  [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 30th, 2007 at 2:21pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 2:15pm:
Mr Campbelll you are a bare faced liar.  

Your whole business at NEG is based on telling disgusting lies to patients and doctors in order to con them in to believing it is not the ripoff that it in fact is.
NEG can lie as much as it wants as it knows that no action will ever be taken. Ofcom, HMG, ASA, DH, COI - all these bodies do not give a toss about how both surgeries and patients are being deceived despite each one having the authority to do something to stop these lies. NEG could probably even get away with referring to 0844 as free.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 30th, 2007 at 2:28pm
I think I need to contact the Evening Post to set the record straight with them on the cost of 0844 phone calls.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 30th, 2007 at 9:51pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 2:15pm:

idb wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 1:49pm:
He said: "There are situations where the old system is cheaper but there are situations where we are cheaper, like if you call from outside the Wigan area for example.


Mr Campbelll you are a bare faced liar. …

Notice that the article mentions that it's cheaper to call at "BT local rate" of 3p/min than 0844. Mr Campbell was probably expecting to say that 0844 is BT local rate. Not phased by this, he pulls another mistruth (lie) out of his hat. The old chestnut about it being cheaper to call within the local area. He is clearly aware that the majority of residential tariffs do not distinuish between local and national calls and that most people are calling from within the local area anyway. Indeed, if they are calling from outside the area, they are likely to be away from home and therefore on their mobiles.

Perhaps NEG should change it's logo to something like this:

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 30th, 2007 at 9:55pm

Dave wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 9:51pm:
Notice that the article mentions that it's cheaper to call at "BT local rate" of 3p/min than 0844. Mr Campbell was probably expecting to say that 0844 is BT local rate. Not phased by this, he pulls another mistruth (lie) out of his hat. The old chestnut about it being cheaper to call within the local area. He is clearly aware that the majority of residential tariffs do not distinuish between local and national calls and that most people are calling from within the local area anyway. Indeed, if they are calling from outside the area, they are likely to be away from home and therefore on their mobiles.

Perhaps NEG should change it's logo to something like this:


Does BT Light User Scheme and In Contact Plus still exist and if so do they still charge 7p or 8p per minute for a national call peak rather than 3p per minute?

If so then I suppose that is the straw at which Mr Campbell is desperately clutching, even though only about 0.1% of callers in the weekday daytime could possibly be using this tariff.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Jul 30th, 2007 at 10:26pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 9:55pm:
Does BT Light User Scheme and In Contact Plus still exist and if so do they still charge 7p or 8p per minute for a national call peak rather than 3p per minute?
They still exist. There were rumours that BT Basic is to replace both ICP and LUS.  As for prices I'm not sure as it's very difficult getting pricing information from BT's website except for calls to geographical and mobiles.  It's difficult enough just finding webpages on ICP and LUS.  Personally, I'd say for LUS the prices are about 10p/min to geographical now but this is just a guess.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 30th, 2007 at 10:44pm

bbb_uk wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 10:26pm:
… It's difficult enough just finding webpages on ICP and LUS. …

From the BT Price List, Light User Scheme is covered here and In Contact Plus is here.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jul 30th, 2007 at 11:49pm

Dave wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 10:44pm:

bbb_uk wrote on Jul 30th, 2007 at 10:26pm:
… It's difficult enough just finding webpages on ICP and LUS. …

From the BT Price List, Light User Scheme is covered here and In Contact Plus is here.


But that means now NEG will have them too. :o :( :'(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 2:24am
http://www.wales.nhs.uk/sites3/Documents/222/14%20Sept.05%20-%20Joint%20meeting%20DLHB.doc

Joint Meeting

CLWYD COMMUNITY HEALTH COUNCIL
and
DENBIGHSHIRE LOCAL HEALTH BOARD

held on

Wednesday, 14 September 2005
Naylor Leyland Centre, Well Street, Ruthin


Most Recent Out of Hours Monitoring

The Director of Development and Performance Management tabled a summary report on the latest position.  She explained that the full monitoring document was very long but available to members should they request it.

There was still significant demand for the service.  Total contacts in July 2005 were 5029 and in June around 4000.  A number of callers were now hanging up when getting the recorded message that it was an emergency service; this lessened one of the problems previously encountered.  The new systems in place at the Out of Hours centre were working very well and the number of “ineffective calls” had dropped considerably.  Denbighshire appeared to have more patients attending face-to-face than other areas and this was probably due to the proximity of the centre permitting easier access.  

An important point to report was that Morfa-Doc had changed the contact telephone number because of increasing concern of the cost of the call which was significant to patients.  The new number was an 0844 number which mean it was a local-call charge.  It would cost the service more but the patients would have cheaper access.  At present anyone dialling the old number would be diverted to the new one.  All the latest patient information contained the new number.  The change had taken effect from 1 September 2005 and no problems had been reported to date.  The CHC were asked to let the LHB know if they received any such reports. The LHB Chair said this was good news as there had been concerns about the use of premium numbers in some parts of the country.  It was good to know that Denbighshire had a “low-cost” number.  There was a point raised over the use of mobile phones as it was believed “low-cost” calls were charged at the normal rate.  This would be looked into.

The Chief Executive confirmed that a statement would be made in County Voice and the local press at the end of September.  The CHC queried whether it was going into Talking News and the Chief Executive said he would check that point

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 2:27am
http://www.wales.nhs.uk/sites3/Documents/201/PCSGMeeting-7October2005.pdf

Unconfirmed Minutes of the
Primary Care Steering Group
Meeting held on the 7th October 2005 at 10.30am
in the CHC Office.

7: 0870 & 0844 Telephone Numbers in General Practice
There were currently three practices using the above telephone systems; The DOH in
England has issued regulations to stop practices transferring to this system, the CHC has
contacted WAG and they are currently working on regulations and advice to LHBs was to
not allow practices to use these systems however, these regulations will be issued however
no timescale has been identified.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 2:48am
http://www.hastingsandrotherpct.nhs.uk/pct_documents/2006_documents/2006-01-26_mins.pdf

HASTINGS AND ST LEONARDS PRIMARY CARE TRUST AND
BEXHILL AND ROTHER PRIMARY CARE TRUST
JOINT BOARD MEETING
Minutes of the meeting on Thursday 26th January 2006
at Battle Memorial Hall

7.6. Questions from the Public: The following questions were received from the
public:

2. Can the Board tell this meeting what percentage of GP Practices in
Hastings and St Leonards have opted to use 0844 telephone number for their
surgeries? How does that compare with the national take up? What is the
percentage for Bexhill?
The Chair responded: None of the GP Practices in Hastings and St Leonards
use 0844 numbers, in Bexhill and Rother three of the eleven practices now
have an 0844 telephone number which equates to just over 27%. We have
asked the Department of Health for the national take up figures, but as yet,
they have not been able to supply us with this information.
3. Given that submissions made by the practices that they have converted to
0844 numbers included the claim that they would be able to fund additional
nursing staff from the additional revenue, how many additional nursing staff
are employed by those practices?
The Chair responded: The claim that revenue generated from a telephone
system would be used to fund additional nursing staff was made by one
practice who originally installed an 0870 national rate number. Shortly
afterwards they changed to an 0844 number, which as a low-call number,
does not generate the same revenue and would not be enough to fund
additional nursing staff.
4. Given the mobility of many patients, what information is provided to holiday
makers and long term vacationers to contact their practices should the need
arise, from outside the UK?
Of the three practices in Bexhill and Rother with 0844 telephone numbers, all
are amending their practice leaflets to include the number to telephone from
abroad. Practice websites are also being updated and one practice has
displayed the information on posters at the surgery.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 5:38pm
NEG got around the criticim that GPs cannot be called from abroad on their 0844 numbers by allocating 0870 numbers to the practices they managed to con into contracting with them.

For instance my GP group practice now gives out the following numbers:

Tel: 0844 xxx xxxx    
Out of Hours: 020 xxxx xxxx    
From Overseas: +44 870 xxx xxxx
Fax: 0871 xxx xxxx  
Repeat Presription Fax: 0845 xxx xxxx  
NHS Direct: 0845 46 47




Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 5:42pm

lompos wrote on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 5:38pm:
Out of Hours: 020 xxxx xxxx    

I'm amazed your out of hours uses a geographic number - the one in my area uses an 0845 number unfortunately :(.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 6:10pm

Quote:
I'm amazed your out of hours uses a geographic number


Out of hours services are usually provided by agencies and it is unlikely that your agency got its 0845 number from NEG. If you posted the details a search may come up with their geog number.   ;)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 6:42pm

lompos wrote on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 6:10pm:

Quote:
I'm amazed your out of hours uses a geographic number


Out of hours services are usually provided by agencies and it is unlikely that your agency got its 0845 number from NEG. If you posted the details a search may come up with their geog number.   ;)

The number is 0845 120 3161. This document (http://www.bradfordairedale-pct.nhs.uk/NR/rdonlyres/32DA787D-A978-4625-8D89-08DFDF13E833/0/Publication1_2.pdf) seems to suggest it is via NHS Direct, so I doubt a geographic number could be found. However, it is run by a company called Local Care Direct - their website suggests their three call centres are in Bradley, Leeds and Wakefield, and that the centres are linked (the 0845 number probably works as their call management system - redirecting calls if the line is busy).

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 9:46pm

Quote:
The number is 0845 120 3161 ....  so I doubt a geographic number could be found. However, it is run by a company called Local Care Direct


If you ring a GP surgery out of hours in the Bradford and Airedale PCT area they are supposed to transfer you automatically to the Local Care Direct out of hours service.  However, this is not true for all GPs, but I found one which transfers automatically;

01274 637 115

If you ring this number out of hours Local Care Direct answers and it starts with a menu asking you to give your location, e.g. Leeds, Bradford, Wakefield, etc.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Aug 3rd, 2007 at 10:20pm
That's useful to know - thanks :). Do you think that would be worth adding to the database?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Aug 4th, 2007 at 8:10am
I have added Local Care Direct to the database with a note that the geog number should only be used out of hours.  :)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 12th, 2007 at 10:01pm
--Admin edit 13/08/07 18:52 - Posts by Simmond001 also removed in reply to this misunderstanding.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Stoday on Aug 13th, 2007 at 2:40am

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 12th, 2007 at 10:01pm:
 
The notorious Kath Simonds from NEG ... is now accusing me of libelling her company.


Well, let's hope she does so.

It's some time now since I've enjoyed following the McLibel trial which lasted 2 1/2 years so another with a similar result would mean I can stop watching BB.  ;D

http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/index.html

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by KVSimons on Aug 13th, 2007 at 3:54pm
No, it's NOT me or any relation, colleague or otherwise!! I don't really appreciate the accusasions, maybe next time facts should checked?! But why am I surprised when you have never made contact with me or NEG to get the facts on NEG and Surgery Line?!!!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 13th, 2007 at 4:14pm

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 3:54pm:
No, it's NOT me or any relation, colleague or otherwise!! I don't really appreciate the accusasions, maybe next time facts should checked?! But why am I surprised when you have never made contact with me or NEG to get the facts on NEG and Surgery Line?!!!


Apologies for the confusion on the identity question caused by the remarkable coincidence of the poster in the Petrolheads forum with a similar surname going to such lengths to defend NEG's commercial position.

As to the facts I think we know what they are other than the question of the economics of where the revenue share from the 5p per minute goes and who gets what cut out of it.

If you can enlighten us further on that point it would certainly be of great assistance.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by KVSimons on Aug 13th, 2007 at 4:24pm
A proportion of it is retained by the carrier, the remainder of it is given to the practice. However, this amount can only be enough to pay for the actual service itself, as the practice can not make a profit. I am being guarded as to how much we give back as we are not the only 0844 providers to surgeries, many other companies in the UK now mimic Surgery Line, as it has been so successful  - we are installing 30 a month - so I can't disclose too much financial info.

 

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 13th, 2007 at 4:39pm

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 4:24pm:
A proportion of it is retained by the carrier, the remainder of it is given to the practice. However, this amount can only be enough to pay for the actual service itself, as the practice can not make a profit. I am being guarded as to how much we give back as we are not the only 0844 providers to surgeries, many other companies in the UK now mimic Surgery Line, as it has been so successful  - we are installing 30 a month - so I can't disclose too much financial info.


So of the 1200+ surgeries using 0844 numbers by no means all of these use NEG Surgeryline?  Or do NEG have 1200 and then more still use clone services of Surgeryline?

I can't imagine that the telco would need more than 1p a minute based on revenue share also being a viable possibility for internet service providers using 0845 numbers.  They probably only take 0.5p per minute.

Ms Simons you obviously understand perfectly well how this model works.  Whilst clearly one discussion to be had is as to whether it is ethical for doctors to be able to use a call rate above 01/02 geographic rates (and which mobile phone companies and BT Payphones division then seem to use as an excuse for adding a far bigger surcharge still on the basis that they seem to believe callers of these numbers are locked in to the service and have no alternative), the other matter which we find totally objectionable is NEG personnel (including yourself) actually going out of their way to misleadingly claim that an 0844 number is only a local, lo-call or low cost call.

What do you have to say for yourself in that regard given that on your own admission you are an intelligent woman with a masters degree who clearly understands perfectly well the real situation regarding the cost of these calls to doctors patients.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by KVSimons on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:11pm
Yes, there are 1200 practices using Surgery Line and this number is on the increase. They do not have to use 0844, however they choose to so that the vast majority of the system is paid for.

It is classed as a lo-call rate (the 0844) as you know. We did not make this up, it's the way it is.  

I am also a patient using a 0844 surgery number; I actually have to pay for the call due to my free call package at home. This will cost me probably less than £1 a year, and for this it means that I can get through to my dr.

My father is driven potty with his dr as he can't get through, and when he does all the appts have gone. So now he gets into his car and drives to the surgery.

I know which method I, and to be fair, the majority of the public would prefer.

Of course, you are perfectly entitled to your opinion and I respect that, nor do I expect to change it.

We are aware of the arguments for and against 0844, which is why to avoid placing all our eggs in one basket we are becoming more diverse with our products, meaning 0844 is not compulsory for practices or PCTs.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:36pm

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:11pm:
They do not have to use 0844, however they choose to so that the vast majority of the system is paid for.


They don't have to use 0844, but I wouldn't be surprised if you make it seem more attractive if they use an 0844 number. Ofcourse they are going to flock to 0844 if they don't have to pay NEG any more money (and I suspect your 01/02 rates aren't exactly "BT standard rate")...


KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:11pm:
It is classed as a lo-call rate (the 0844) as you know. We did not make this up, it's the way it is.


No it isn't - according to BT, it is actually called Contactcall - http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/btbusinessProducts/displayProduct.do?productId=BTB-6716.


KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:11pm:
I know which method I, and to be fair, the majority of the public would prefer.


Do you have any statistics to back up your claim that "the majority" would prefer an 0844 number? I've always been told that you should never say "the majority" if you can't back up your claim. You may prefer an 0844 number, but from what I've seen, my "majority" would prefer a normal geographic number that costs nothing extra to them.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:56pm

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:11pm:
They do not have to use 0844, however they choose to so that the vast majority of the system is paid for.


But what they are not told is that their patients pay many times the value of their so called "free" system in extra revenue share on the calls going direct to NEG and its telecoms supplier.


Quote:
It is classed as a lo-call rate (the 0844) as you know. We did not make this up, it's the way it is.


No "Lo-Call" is a very specific brand only ever used for 0845 numbers by BT and now not used even for those (as it is NOT TRUE).  As you know full well 0844 and 0871 numbers were introduced much later as further more granularly priced "revenue share" numbers by Ofcom with prices between 1p and 5p and 6p and 10p per minute at all times.  Unfortunately ue to the infiltration of the regulator with lots of former employees of companies vending these kinds of services they disgracefully then allowed the 0844 and 0871 number codes to be used to try and confuse customers that there was a connection with local and national rate - they should have mandated the use of 9 numbers.  And you and your unscrupulous and dishonest colleagues at NEG have continually sought to exploit this confusion and the weakness of Trading Standards in failing to take legal action against your company over this matter.  You also exploit the fact that the ASA does not govern the signs doctors put up in their surgeries that you give them apparently saying your 0844 number is a "low cost call".  13 times as much to call from a BT Payphone as an 01/02 number - I think not.

Remember who we are Ms Simons and that there is no point in telling us the lies you clearly habitually tell to doctors and practice managers.  Your company is ripe for investigation by the BT Whistleblower or File on Four program in terms of its selling methods.  A hidden cam from an undercover reporter accompanying you on sales visits during their training would I am sure be fascinating.


Quote:
I am also a patient using a 0844 surgery number; I actually have to pay for the call due to my free call package at home. This will cost me probably less than £1 a year, and for this it means that I can get through to my dr.


£1 here, £1 there and before you know it 35% of all your calls are to 084/7 numbers and £150 or more a year has been  added to your phone bill that ought to have been covered by your 01/02 calls plan.  How do you sleep at nights I wonder thinking of the trail of over priced phone calling you are personally responsible for leaving in your wake.


Quote:
We are aware of the arguments for and against 0844, which is why to avoid placing all our eggs in one basket we are becoming more diverse with our products, meaning 0844 is not compulsory for practices or PCTs.


Of course you are which is why it drives us completely mad when you try to lie to us by telling us that 0844 is "lo-call".  You may get away with that lie with your doctor clients or the dimbo personell of NHS health trusts but you won't get away with it in this forum.

A lie remains just that - a lie! :o >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:59pm
Just thought I would point out that the total signatures at http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/NGN-use-by-GPs/ has now reached 2,723.  Up about 300 since this time yesterday.

At this rate it won't be long before it is on Page 1 by size of the 10 Downing Street petitions website. ;) :P [smiley=thumbsup.gif] [smiley=thumbsup.gif] [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:06pm

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:11pm:
… They do not have to use 0844, however they choose to so that the vast majority of the system is paid for.

That is most interesting. So the NEG salesperson explains the pros and cons of each then?


KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:11pm:
It is classed as a lo-call rate (the 0844) as you know. We did not make this up, it's the way it is.

It is referred to, by Ofcom, as a "Special Services" number. As jgxenite points out, BT market 0844 as Contactcall. I think I have mentioned this before on this thread, so it might fall on deaf ears, but BT now refer to 0845 (when marketing it to companies) as BT0845. It used to be called 'lo-call' and this term was used on some BBC charity shows such as Comic Relief and Children in Need.

The fact of the matter is that NEG is not being forced to use the "lo-call" term, but it does so of its own choosing. In much the same way as NEG's website mentions "national rate" with regards to 0870 numbers.

We have also seen various spurious comments made by both NEG representatives and practice's management about these 5p/min 0844s being no more than a "local call" rate.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by KVSimons on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:25pm
My goodness you really are very suspicious!! As I said, you are entitled to your own opinion and there aren't enough hours in the day for me to even attempt change your mind, or even for me to attempt make you listen to another side of the argument.

Yes we do have stats by the way; we recently had a 3rd party company carry out a survey on the pulbic to get a feel for 0844 numbers and queue systems. 71% said they'd prefer to be placed in a queue, and 82% agreed that the average cost of a 0844 call was a reasonable amount if it meant being able to get through.

Surgery Line gives surgeries a state of the art phone system and improves patient access. Patients were asked whether Doctors should use the latest technology to improve the experience of patients 89% agreed, that they should.

The Survey was conducted by IMC research between July 16th and July 20th 2007 across a 4 English cities representing a spread of backgrounds, ages, ethnic diversity etc. Three hundred people were polled in total.

Don't forget the majority of our work is done through referrals, practices recommending other practices. If patients were so unhappy, and therefore the practices then this wouldn't be the case. Many, many practices comment to us how their survey's show a marked improvement on telephone access since the introduction of Surgery Line.

I will leave it there for now, sleep well.





Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:44pm

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:11pm:
It is classed as a lo-call rate (the 0844) as you know. We did not make this up, it's the way it is.
BT, Ofcom and the ASA don't class them as lo-call.  Only Communication Providers use this term because it implies it's a low cost call.

You should be aware that I've actually made an official complaint to Trading Standards over your claims that 0844 is lo-call even though BT, Ofcom and the ASA disagree with this.

Using logic, the term 'lo-call' implies the cost of the call is low but as a geographical call can be made for around 3p/min from a landline (less on some other landline providers) but yet your 0844 numbers cost 5p/min from BT landline but upto 40p/min from a mobile so surely you can see for yourself that NEG are incorrectly describing 084x numbers and this is what I mentioned to Trading Standards and why they are investigating it.

I believe the reason for Communication Providers (CP) such as NEG to continue these lies is that it's good selling practice.  You would have major trouble selling these numbers by saying "they cost more than a local/national call" even though this is the truth - instead you tell potential customers (ie surgeries) that they can get a brand new system for free (self funding) and all their patients pay is a lo-call (or local/national as you've used in the past)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:51pm

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:25pm:
If patients were so unhappy, and therefore the practices then this wouldn't be the case.


Have you read other posts on this subject? Patients who complain about your 0844 numbers, or call charges, either get it shrugged off or removed from the patient list of that surgery!

Why can you not provide the underlying geographic number for surgeries? That would give people the choice of calling the 0844 number or the normal geographic number. It would also mean the surgery and NEG would lose out on the profit for that call, but if 82% agree that the call charge is OK, you shouldn't be too out of pocket  ::).

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:53pm

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:25pm:
My goodness you really are very suspicious!! As I said, you are entitled to your own opinion and there aren't enough hours in the day for me to even attempt change your mind, or even for me to attempt make you listen to another side of the argument.


Of course we are suspicious when you can only succeed in selling your rotten product by lieing to doctors and to the NHS about the real cost of 5p per minute 0844 calls and the fact that they are actually covert premium rate calls with a small p (see the dictionary definition of the word premium).  Most despicable is the fact that you could probably at least have used an 0845 number at 3p per minute and the economic model would still have worked but the greed of NEG's directors stopped it from doing so.  Instead you take many multiples of the amount the doctors receive to pay for their overpriced "free" switchboard" which their patients have to pay for 5 or 6 times over in extra priced covert premium rate phone call costs.


Quote:
Yes we do have stats by the way; we recently had a 3rd party company carry out a survey on the pulbic to get a feel for 0844 numbers and queue systems. 71% said they'd prefer to be placed in a queue, and 82% agreed that the average cost of a 0844 call was a reasonable amount if it meant being able to get through.


My brother in law worked for a couple of years at a so called market research company of the kind you mention. He left in a disgust after a couple of years to retrain as a teacher due to his unhappiness at the way he was constantly asked to fiddle the research to produce the results his clients wanted.  We all know what the answer would be if 1,000 patients were asked if they wanted to call a normal priced 01 or 02 number or a higher priced covert preium rate 0844 number costing up to 40p from mobiles and uncontactable from overseas!

Ms Simons you are the last of the bouncy unstoppable sales people who simply keep up on springing up with the same misleading message no matter how often you are knocked down because you have no conscience and no principles that prevent you from doing so.

What did you sell before this.  Double glazing or timeshares perhaps?

Title: Re: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:17pm
[edit]by bbb_uk: The next few posts were split off from this thread and merged with this thread[/edit]



NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:03pm:

Dave wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:41pm:
Did the nice salesman from the telephone company not explain this to you?  ::)


How do we know that NEG doen't act as its own telecoms company given the number of UK calls it now generates?

If not which bunch of unprincipled so and sos is it currently in bed with?


Why have you highlighted NEG again? BT are the biggest provider of NGN's in the UK.

What is unpricipled?

Why don't you use your own name, and advise what business you are in.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:25pm

simond001 wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:13pm:
I welcome some of the cost saving benefits that sites like moneysaver.com promote, where they are a true value for consumers, and the number search side of this website (that i have used previously and promoted to my clients).


Since you apparently and remarkably welcome the 01/02 alternatives number search side of this website could you possibly be good enough to provide us with a spreadsheet of the geographic 01/02 alternatives for all of NEG's Surgeryline practices? ;) ::) :P

Then patients could take a view as to whether the so called enhanced networking queuing features of your 0844 product are actually worth paying for or whether they would rather take their chances with an old fashioned 01/02 number and the engaged tone. :-/

How you can possibly, and with a clear conscience, subscribe to your own fixed price 01/02 calls plans on your home landline and then use this website to avoid as many other 084/7 numbers as possible yourself, while then spending all your time converting doctors surgeries to 0844 numbers for which NEG withholds the alternative numbers, is utterly beyond me. :o :o :o [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Clearly you seem to lack an ability to focus on what is morally consistent or principled and instead seem to focus only on what brings you in a large salary to fund your own probably quite unnecessarily high spending lifestyle.



Edited by bbb_uk: This post was split off from this thread and merged with this thread.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:35pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:25pm:

simond001 wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 6:13pm:
I welcome some of the cost saving benefits that sites like moneysaver.com promote, where they are a true value for consumers, and the number search side of this website (that i have used previously and promoted to my clients).


Since you apparently and remarkably welcome the 01/02 alternatives number search side of this website could you possibly be good enough to provide us with a spreadsheet of the geographic 01/02 alternatives for all of NEG's Surgeryline practices? ;) ::) :P.
 

No, as i keep teling you i dont work for them (or with them, nor had i heard of them prior to today)



How you can possibly, and with a clear conscience, subscribe to your own fixed price 01/02 calls plans on your home landline and then use this website to avoid as many other 084/7 numbers as possible yourself, while then spending all your time converting doctors surgeries to 0844 numbers for which NEG withholds the alternative numbers, is utterly beyond me. :o :o :o [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Again, I dont work for them, with them etc etc...

"Clearly you seem to lack an ability to focus on what is morally consistent or principled and instead seem to focus only on what brings you in a large salary to fund your own probably quite unnecessarily high spending lifestyle."


How is my lifestyle relevant. Nor do you know my lifestyle. This is just a prejudiced opinion as you know i have a few cars.  This is exactly the bigotted comments that i have just written about.  Again. If you wish to converse pleas euse your own name and stand up for yourself.


Edited by bbb_uk: This post was split off from this thread and merged with this thread.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 13th, 2007 at 7:08pm
Oops sorry.

I confused your post with one from KVSimons who has just made several posts in another this thread.

Sorry I didn't mean to do that

But as to why NEG's scheme is worse than others its because it involves scamming elderly and sick doctors patients who have little choice but to call the 0844 number and usually little alternate choice of doctor's surgery if they do not drive.


Edited by bbb_uk: This post was split off from this thread and merged with this thread.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Aug 14th, 2007 at 12:26am

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 3:54pm:
No, it's NOT me or any relation, colleague or otherwise!! I don't really appreciate the accusasions, maybe next time facts should checked?! But why am I surprised when you have never made contact with me or NEG to get the facts on NEG and Surgery Line?!!!
You are joking aren't you?! The accusations occur as you, and your wretched organization are LIARS. The NEG 0844 scam is one big public swindle (not my words, but that of The Sun, which doesn't normally mince its words:

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2007370302,00.html

Doctors' call line cash swindle

DOCTORS have been accused of using “rip-off” telephone lines to cash in on their patients.

More than 1,000 medical practices now use profitable 0844 numbers.

Calls made from a mobile cost 40p a minute and landline calls are 4p more a minute than ringing standard numbers.

Doctors claim the system saves time and people redialling.

Watchdog Oftel wants the British Medical Association to ban the system and pressure group Say No to 0870 called it a “national scandal”.

The NHS and GPs have already been banned from using 0870 numbers.


You know full well that 0844 numbers are not, and never have been, described as 'local' or 'lo-call' or 'low-call' or any other permutation designed to deceive, yet you and your organization constantly spout this description in either this forum or in comments to the media.

You know full well that, at the moment, you can get away with describing 0844 numbers in whatever misleading manner you desire as you know that no regulator gives a flying whatsit, and you have carte blanche to rip-off patients.

Enjoy while it lasts, because at some future time, the lies WILL catch up with you, and eventually, some action will be taken to stop your LIES.

You and your organization are morally bankrupt - you simply do not give a toss that some callers to 0844 surgeries have to pay, in my money, nearly a dollar a minute just to make an appointment. Now tell me, without telling LIES, that a buck a minute is lo-call.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Aug 14th, 2007 at 4:14am

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:11pm:
It is classed as a lo-call rate (the 0844) as you know. We did not make this up, it's the way it is.  
No it isn't. You are a LIAR. You use these lies to exploit the patient. Don't let the FACTS get in the way of a good LIE.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Aug 14th, 2007 at 8:16am
Quote from KV Simons

Quote:
Surgery Line gives surgeries a state of the art phone system and improves patient access


Does it improve patient access?  I don't think so. Patient access depends on how many receptionists there are to answer the phone.  If there aren't enough no telephone system in the world is going to alter that. Hanging on and paying for the privilege is no improvement. In most cases it would be cheaper to use BT's automated fixed charge call back service rather than pay for holding on.

Quote from KV Simons

Quote:
Patients were asked whether Doctors should use the latest technology to improve the experience of patients 89% agreed, that they should.


Lies, damned lies ... and statistics. Did the so called "survey" ask whether patients wanted to fund the installation of the latest technology? Of course not. Using the NEG logic why not ask patients to pay for the latest blood pressure meter, surgical instrument or computer system for the surgery? GPs are self employed business people who pay their business expenses themselves which are then amply and generously refunded by the NHS. Remember recent income hikes for GPs - they now earn £100,000+.  No need to feel sorry for them.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 14th, 2007 at 11:11am
From watching this debate, I see two separate issues being discussed.


The first is the question of whether NHS GPs should use "state of the art technology" to provide the best service to patients, at a price which those responsible for managing NHS budgets find reasonable. I cannot see the problem, nor understand what legitimate interest NEG could have beyond this point.

The second is the contentious political issue of NHS funding - is this about the quality of service that NHS GPs provide to their paying customers?


As citizens we may all express personal views on this subject. I cannot see why a company, or someone speaking as its representative rather than as a citizen, would wish to get drawn into a political debate. Perhaps the NEG representative could explain this to me, either directly or through the forum.


I offer thoughts on the second issue, as a citizen.


We have become trained to see ourselves as consumers of services provided to the public. We behave accordingly, demanding "value for money" and "choice". It is therefore natural that many reject the principle of funding NHS services through taxation.


It is absurd to offer "value for money" by providing the most health care to those who pay the most tax, as they may not want it. "Value for money" is only delivered if those who use NHS services the most are those who pay the most.

Unless some options are inferior, there is no meaningful "choice". "Value for money" demands that we pay less for an inferior service (e.g. a doctor using an inadequate telephone system for booking appointments).


Charging fees for booking appointments can help meet the objective of ensuring that people only see their doctor when they really need to. For a serious "choice" to be made when considering booking an appointment, some alternative potential expenditure must have to be sacrificed.

This does not work when the level of the fee is insignificant. The NEG survey referred to in this thread shows that only 18% are sufficiently poor or miserly to be put off from using their doctor with the fees for calling 0844 numbers at their present level.

The NEG representative admits that the fee is too low to affect their own behaviour. The 18% reduction in those competing for the doctor's time actually helps to make it even easier for them to get through to book an unnecessary appointment.

The market is not working properly, as a considerable amount of resource may be being wasted.


To be properly effective, the appointment booking fee would need to be set at a level where all but the very rich (immune to any effect on behaviour by financial imposition) were discouraged from wasting money on unnecessary appointments.

This would also provide an additional benefit by placing doctors under pressure to deliver "value for money" to their customers. If the customer only pays the doctor a few pence for the appointment, demanding "value for money" does not compel the highest standards of care.


If a practice set its charges at an appropriate level it would probably get rid of some patients altogether, which would naturally improve the quality of its services still further. The principle of "choice" would not be lost for the poor and miserly as the demand in the market would doubtless be met by the charitable sector, or private social entrepreneurs, staring up alternative "free to use" services outside the administrative constraints of the NHS.


As NEG appears to wish to claim credit for having helped bring financial pressure to bear on as many as 18% of potential time-wasters, then it is perhaps to be congratulated on this modest achievement.

NEG is a business that is responding to the consumer society. It operates in a free market providing services that its customers choose to buy.

One must assume that NEG is sufficiently open and honest about the prices of its services to its customers to remain within the law. These customers fail to declare the prices they charge to those who become their own customers, or even fail to disclose the fact that they are making any charge. That is however not NEG's responsibility, unless it wishes to admit complicity in this fraud.


Picking a fight over unexceptional levels of hyperbole and misrepresentation in marketing, when NEG has what is seen as convincing consumer research to show the effectiveness of its solution, seems to be a rather fruitless exercise in a consumer society.


If PCTs and other NHS commissioning bodies allow GPs to raise revenue by charging fees, then it is for them to defend this decision against any challenge, through their own channels of accountability. NEG is only accountable through the market, to its potential future customers.

Let the government and the NHS organisation openly declare adoption of consumerism in the NHS. Let them confirm and salute the consumerist definition of "democracy" which proudly allows the preferences of the majority to override the interests of a minority as significant as 18%.

Let us decide whether we wish to be regarded as citizens or consumers in our relationship with the NHS and other public bodies. As with Ofcom's statutory principal duties (repeatedly referred to in this thread), these are distinct roles that may conflict.

(As I am formally retired from campaigning efforts, I cannot conduct extended discussion of these points in this public thread. I can be contacted by email.)

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 14th, 2007 at 11:37am
SilentCallsVictim,

You enter in to a long academic treatise about the rights and wrongs of charging for doctors appointments and whether charging a significant fee should be used to deter what you characterise as timewasters.  Of course in political terms many of the worst "timewasters" like widows over 70 and the long term chronically sick and disabled would have to be exempted from such charges in the same way as they are already exempt from prescription charges.

Wether or not people should pay significant fees to visit their doctor falls outside the scope of this campaign and website and this discussion forum.  The objection of this website and this campaign to doctors using 0844 numbers is that they are a non standard call rate number that are a form of premium rate number that is not being adequately disclosed to consumers.  The construction of the product by NEG and their selling methods are precisely the reason why that extra charge to callers is deliberately hidden and both many doctors and their patients are being hoodwinked in to not realising it exists.

The objection of this website and its members is of the totality of the impact of those 084/7 charges on phone bills in often adding £30 to £50 a quarter on to the phone bills of retired and chronically sick people on low income who cannot afford it and that the charges are anti competitive as unlike 09 calls the existence of the charge is repeatedly hidden from callers.

You campaigned againt Silent Calls which you had a bee in your bonnet about.  Personally I found them happening only very occasionally and a much greater nuisance was voice calls and voice synthesised automated calls from organisations trying to sell me things despite my TPS registration.  I would have thought your Silent Calls campaign ought to also have also encompassed dealing with those nuisance calls as well.

SilentCallsVictim when you suggest the main debate here is about people having to pay a fee to access their doctor you are mistaken. The debate instead is about any service using a non standard priced phone number on which it earns directly or indirectly revenue and then trying to hide the fact that these numbers are not standard rate from their customers.  You will note that members of this site do not normally campaign against 09 numbers, the charges for which are obvious and appreciated by most callers.

So SilentCallsVictim are you with us or against us as from your post I am confused as to your motivations in becoming a member of this website.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Barbara on Aug 14th, 2007 at 12:36pm
Here! Here! NGM's Ghost!   A couple of points to the preceding post by Silentcallervictim - 1) It is NOT miserly to resent being charged twice for the same service ie by call package charge and then being charged again for a particular call, especially when this is for an essential service where one may have no real choice of provider.   2)   The point about NEG providing services in a free market to those who are prepared to pay is nonsense - those who are paying are PATIENTS WITH NO CHOICE!   If the doctors were paying for the systems, yes, that is up to them but that is not the case here, they are choosing to buy the system, their patients are paying for it.   3) Why this reference to a "majority" and an 18% minority being insignificant - these figures produced by NEG were based on a sample of a few hundred and cannot legitimately be translated for represent the views of nearly 60 million people!   (yes, they are ALL patients, as you don't have to be an elector participating in democracy to be affected, babies are!)  Also, does anyone on this forum know anyone who was surveyed on behalf of NEG for this poll - I wasn't and I don't?   The question was also so slanted, most people, when asked the question about should doctors used latest technology would think of medical equipment NOT phone systems!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 14th, 2007 at 12:45pm
I believe that I share many views in common with NGMsGhost, although we have our differences, notably my distaste for ad hominem argument.

My personal approach to citizens campaigning is to focus on a simple point that is easy to communicate and hard to oppose, and therefore likely to achieve results from the efforts which a small number of people (perhaps only one) can contribute. I offer this brief response here to the point about the campaign which led to me adopting a typically silly alias for forum postings. I would see it as seriously off-topic to discuss that campaign any further, although I see an opportunity for a similar approach (narrowing the issues) to be used to good effect if seeking progress with this particular matter.

If I have misunderstood the membership criteria for this forum, please accept my apologies.

I had noted the issue of whether or not people should pay fees to make an appointkment to visit their doctor (i.e. the revenue sharing issue raised by use of 0844 numbers, as distinct from other NGNs) being discussed in this thread. I see that point as most significant and I aimed to develop it in my contribution with the intention of helping members to focus their thoughts. I am very sorry to find that a leading contributor not only disagrees with me, but rules my contribution to be invalid.

There is also much technical (if not "academic") discussion of the wording used in marketing material aimed at GPs. I see that as being of no great significance in the public domain. I see the way in which NHS GPs react, and are permitted to do so by those who commission their services, as the issue which is of significance for citizens. I do not believe that this central issue is affected to any degree by whether NEG is a bunch of crooks or an honest business with sound prinicples.


If these views, unlike those of representatives of NEG, disqualify me from participation in this forum, then I will reluctantly withdraw altogether, having expressed them once more and offering any necessary apology in advance of a predictable response.

David


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 14th, 2007 at 1:05pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 14th, 2007 at 12:45pm:
If these views, unlike those of representatives of NEG, disqualify me from participation in this forum, then I will reluctantly withdraw altogether, having expressed them once more and offering any necessary apology in advance of a predictable response.


SilentCallsVictim,

Anyone is allowed to express their views in this forum, including those from the opposition such as employees of NEG or other NGN number vending and installing organisations.  This is not a forum of the moderator on drugs who regularly closes threads just because the discussion goes in a direction that disagrees with their personal opinions.

However I find it very hard to comprehend that anyone who is opposed to large faceless marketing organisations randomly making unidentified calls to private residences does not also have a problem with a company that has persuaded endless doctors surgeries to change to using a covert premium rate number (see the dictionary definition of premium) covertly.

You even seem to also fall for the "its only a few pence per call extra for this call so what are you complaining about" argument, which seems to show a total lack of appreciation of the scale of the covert premium rate 084/7 abuses in the UK and the £100 to £200 per annum that they add to most UK domestic phone bills that would not be there if the calls were not at a normal price.

Patients of doctors do not pay a price for the service and cannot easily shop around and anyone who tries to move doctors without having also moved addresses is usually regarded with suspicion by the doctor they want to move to as probably being a troublemaker.  This indicates that GP services have all the hallmarks of a state controlled, state run system as in the private sector businesses are nearly always happy and faling over themselves to see new customers.

I applaud and support your succes on your Silent Calls campaign but I am puzzled that you now of your own volition bring yourself to this site and yet do not seem to properly embrace our opposition to all premium rate services operated by private businesses which are covert (by using 084 and 087 numbers) and to all premium rate services operated by any sector of government or any government agencies be they covert or overt.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Aug 14th, 2007 at 2:43pm

KVSimons wrote on Aug 13th, 2007 at 5:11pm:
It is classed as a lo-call rate (the 0844) as you know. We did not make this up, it's the way it is.  



LO-CALL is a trade mark of BT! do you have the authority to use it?

BT, the Piper Device, CONCERT, It's good to talk, BESTFRIEND, BT FREEFONE and LO-CALL are trademarks of British Telecommunications plc. All other third party trademark rights are hereby acknowledged.

From the bottom of this page:- http://www.btplc.com/report/1997-98/shareholdernoflash.html

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 14th, 2007 at 4:03pm
NGMsGhost

My dear friend, we doubtless agree on far more than you may believe. Please contact me off-line if you wish to continue these personal exchanges, as they do little to advance the debate for others.

I seek only for campaigning to be effective. There may be 100 perfectly valid points, but if only 5 of them are likely to enable progress, then I may be ready to bite my lip on the 95, even if that number includes those about which I feel most passionately. This may enable me to work together very closely with anyone who shares the 5, even if we disagree profoundly on all of the 95.

I see the underlying issue across this matter and many others as being our willingness to adopt the role of individual consumers on matters where we should be fighting together as citizens. Those who believe in freedom must accept that there is a place for markets and consumerism, with both the good and ill that results.

I would not disagree with anyone who chooses to describe "faceless marketing" (along with administration, computers, HR departments and commercial lawyers) as a necessary evil arising from business. Marketing inevitably includes making unwanted approaches and lying, just as all the other items listed have their flaws. Within the limits imposed by law and regulation, one must rely on those who participate in the market to sort this out.

There is however such a thing as society, so we must draw a clear line around those aspects of public life where consumerism is simply unacceptable. Each consumer or stakeholder has a value proportionate to their spending power or capacity to influence other consumers. Each citizen must have an equal value, although we recognise both their capacity to contribute to society and what they need from it.

I see both "Silent Calls" and the relationship with NHS GPs as issues for "citizens".

I hope this exposition of my personal position may be helpful to those who have reacted to the points raised in my earlier contribution. THis was intended to promote thought, easpecially from those who are content to see themselves as consumers of NHS services.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Aug 14th, 2007 at 4:24pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 14th, 2007 at 11:11am:
Let us decide whether we wish to be regarded as citizens or consumers in our relationship with the NHS and other public bodies. As with Ofcom's statutory principal duties (repeatedly referred to in this thread), these are distinct roles that may conflict.

SilentCallsVictim, you make some interesting points. It's food for thought.

The views about whether it's right to charge 5p/min to book to see your doctor expressed by the two members who posted in reply to yours are subjective ones. Some may deem it misery, some may see it as acceptable and not bat an eyelid.

I quote my post previously and NGMsGhost's reply:


NGMsGhost wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 8:57am:

Dave wrote on Jul 24th, 2007 at 7:55am:
There are really two aspects that must be reported:

1. Cost to callers, whether they be UK landline, mobile or public phone box.
2. Difficulty for calls to be made from overseas.


and also

3. Exclusion from 0844 SurgeryLine numbers from Inclusive Call Packages to all 01 and 02 numbers such as BT Option 3 that cost only between £4 and £8 per month these days

4. 0844 doctors calls therefore being part of a class of stealth premium rate business phone calls that are putting an extra £200 or more per annum on most domestic phone bills and/or mobile bills that should not be there.

5. That the regulator Ofcom is failing in its primary duty under the Communications Act 2003 to protect the UK citizen consumer by not using its backstop powers under the Communications Act 2003 to impose big penalties on businesses that middescribe these numbers as local or national call or low cost call like NEG.

6. That the regulator is failing in its primary duty under the Communications Act 2003 to protect the UK citizens consumer by not using its backstop powers under the Communications Act 2003 to prevent public sector contact centres using anything other than an 01 02 or 03 phone number for customer contact.

7. That the failure of the regular to adequately fulfil its primary duty under the Communications Act 2003 should be the subject of appropriate investigate by the relevant Parliamentary Select committee and/or by the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

8. That It appears that like the BBC, which Ofcom has so cheekily complained about over Premium Rate numbers that it allowed to exist, that Ofcom has entirely forgotten who it owes its primary duty to and that this primary duty is to the protection of the UK citizen consumer and not the profitability of UK businesses.


As you can see, points 3 to 8 are most probably not likely to get reported in newspapers anytime soon. That does not mean that they are any less valid discussion topics on here or that 1 and 2 will get media coverage.

But I agree with you in that to take Say No To 0870 forward, we need to focus on the bits that people associate with. This may be the cost of 084/087 calls versus 01/02 ones and the potential for companies using them to earn revenue; or it may be the charges made by GPs to book an appointment. Or is there another way of promoting it?  :-?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 14th, 2007 at 4:31pm
My Dear David,

I feel unable to draw any significant distinction between the role of citizens and the role of consumers in this matter in the way that appears to be important to you.  Indeed I would say that all adult citizens are normally consumers (unless they are in prison or a mental institution and even then they consume a limited range of services over which they may have some choice) and all consumers are always citizens depending on whom you define as a citizen.

Parliament seems to have had the same problem in differentiating meaningully between the duties of Ofcom to citizens rather than consumers under Section 3(i) of the Communications Act 2003.  It appears to express its duties to the two groups as amounting to the same thing.

I think to win this argument we have to keep it at The Sun speak or least Daily Mail speak level and I fear that in the rather esoteric and subtle distinctions you have tried to draw here that we are being sidetracked away from the main issue of people paying too much for their phone calls.

Some of your arguments seem to suggest that you think it is actually ok for people to have to pay extra to call their doctor for an appointment, as in your view many of them do so for frivolous reasons?

Also NHS doctors patients are not consumers in the conventional sense as they do not enjoy a meaningful choice of doctors and are not able to easily choose between them based on either price or quality of service.  Also due to imperfections in the market the actual process of switching doctors whilst living at the same address creates many impediments that deters most normal rational citizens and consumers from making such a change.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 14th, 2007 at 4:35pm

Dave wrote on Aug 14th, 2007 at 4:24pm:
As you can see, points 3 to 8 are most probably not likely to get reported in newspapers anytime soon.


I would have thought that Point 3 was an entirely newsworthy point, especially for a newspaper's personal finance and/or consumer affairs reporters.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Aug 14th, 2007 at 4:48pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 14th, 2007 at 4:35pm:
I would have thought that Point 3 was an entirely newsworthy point, especially for a newspaper's personal finance and/or consumer affairs reporters.

NGMsGhost, I think you're splitting hairs here. I agree, but it is covered by my first point: call costs.

The reason for me referring back was to illustrate that the media doesn't tend to report on (not at first, at least) the in depth ins and outs of a subject which has had little coverage to date. If it catches the public's interest, then perhaps they will go into more detail, covering other points you make.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Aug 14th, 2007 at 6:06pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 14th, 2007 at 5:31pm:
I'm not splitting nearly as many as SilentCallsVictim in terms of the difference between citizens and consumers and their relationship with their doctors. ;)

I think he has a point. The fact is that the DOH says that 0844s are acceptable.

We are told that we must have choice in everything. You only have to visit the NHS homepage and you are bombarded with "NHS choices", note the lower case 'c' in the logo, probably cost hundreds of thousands that.  ::)

Choice means that, whatever the providers are providing, they must set themselves apart from one another. In this case, GPs are operating within the boundaries which the DOH set; that is that they allow 0844 numbers.

Some people don't like them, and as SilentCallsVictim has pointed out, people who object are in the minority. I do not read into that that he is justifying the GP/0844 cartel. He is pointing out that as patients get choice, so too do GPs and they are exercising their freedom (within the rules).

So, on the one hand you expect choice (consumerism) where you may leave one doctor for another if you consider that one is better than the other. In which case what I think SilentCallsVictim is saying is that it is the rules that need changing and thus he is really on our side.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 14th, 2007 at 6:22pm

Dave wrote on Aug 14th, 2007 at 6:06pm:
So, on the one hand you expect choice (consumerism) where you may leave one doctor for another if you consider that one is better than the other. In which case what I think SilentCallsVictim is saying is that it is the rules that need changing and thus he is really on our side.


Well I wish he would say what he actually meant rather than approaching this as a game of forum chess.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 15th, 2007 at 7:15pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 15th, 2007 at 6:35pm:
I find it totally unacceptable for GPs to use revenue sharing numbers.


Well that is what 0844 numbers supplied by NEG are - revenue sharing numbers - so surely you oppose them then?

The revenue share is used to covertly pay for the free doctors switchboard and a far larger amount of the revenue share goes to line the pockets of the directors of NEG and their staff for the supposedly highly skilled task of selling and installing these systems in doctors surgeries.

If you do not like "ad hominem" argument then I regret this is not the place for you since the style of most campaigning against 084/7 numbers is distinctly "ad hominem" in approach in usually directing the attacks on to those we see as being primarily guilty for the decisions taken to swithch to using these numbers.  "Ad hominem" argument is in fact frequently used to great effect in political circles but I find it is eschewed by those who might be characterised as lofty eggheads or as overpaid civil servant such as Mr Matt Peacock from Ofcom who found it unacceptable that he should be attacked for continuing to work at a body where commitments he had personally given on BBC Radio 4 about providing alternatives to 084/7 numbers were not then honoured by Ofcom.

You may have been able to conduct your previous campaign on a basis that avoided an "ad hominem" approach because almost everyone actually supported the point you were making and all that was required was a sligh technical enhancment in databases and caling systems.  But no one in the call industry lost any serious money as a result.

But this campaign involves fighting tooth and nail against ruthles entrenched 084/7 interests who will stop at nothing to lie and cheat and mislead about the reals cost of 084/7 calls in order to protect their hidden billion pound a year industry.  Often such campaigning seems to require an "ad hominem" approach to make its point.

The fact that you even seem to feel guilty about using the list of 084/7 alternative numbers as though it was somehow illegal suggests to me that you also lack the ability to see it as being immoral that the regulator repeatedly allows more and more normal priced numbers to be turned in to covert premium rate numbers, in the processing wiping out most of the so called efforts made by Ofcom to increase competition in the telecoms market over the last few years.

I have no wish to disgaree with someone who has done such good work on combatting another telecoms menace but it does seem clear to me from the comments you have posted on the forum that you are not by nature really a saynot0870er.  Ever since I came to this website and this discussion forum around three years ago I have always found one of its most attractive features to be the almost complete synergy of mindset about this issue that exists between virtually all of the most longstanding campaigners.

Once you start saying that you think it is alright for some services to charge the caller through hidden call charges as you do then the logical consistency of your being able to object to any 084/7 number conversions begins to be almost totally undermined.

If of course you can offer us valuable advice on campaigning, even whilst not shaing all our objectives, then it would certainly be welcome to hear from you about that.

Although you say you are not comfortable posting your views on this forum as things stand virtually the only way members of this campaign to communicate with one another is through the forum.  So if you are not comfortable with that this is another stumbling block to you being an active part of this campaign....................

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Aug 17th, 2007 at 2:13am
http://www.stamfordtoday.co.uk/news?articleid=3116459

Published Date: 17 August 2007
Source: Stamford Mercury
Location: Stamford

GP surgeries defend phone number move

<<
GP surgeries have defended their decision to switch to a new and more expensive phone number.
The 0844 code, which is being used by more and more surgeries in the country, has been criticised for being too expensive.

But practices in Stamford, Billingborough and Rippingale, which switched to the number this year, have insisted the change is necessary to improve the service patients receive.

Nikki Kelley, practice manager of the Sheepmarket surgery in Stamford, said: “We moved to the new number after a customer satisfaction survey we are obliged to do each year.

“One of the emerging concerns was that people couldn’t always get through to the surgery so we made it a priority to do something about it.”

The new number was implemented by the surgery two months ago and Mrs Kelley admits there were complaints.

She said: “We did have some bad comments and there were a few problems with the changeover in the beginning but these were quickly ironed out. We are now getting a lot of comments from people who are very pleased with the new system.”

A spokesman for the New Springwell surgeries in Billingborough and Rippingale, which have been using the new number since February, has also defended the move.

She said: “Our main priority is to give better access to our doctors for our for patients. On the old system you could be waiting to speak to the one or two person on reception but with the new system you have options to go straight to who you need to speak too. Patients will end up spending a lot less time on the phones with the new system.”

The main complaint with the switch to the 0844 number has been the cost.

Mrs Kelley said the company which implemented the phone number in Stamford said all calls would cost 3.7p per minute. This was also agreed by the New Springwell practices.

In comparison, on the BT Option 1 landline, a local rate call at peak times is 3p a minute and 1p a minute during off-peak times.

Critics of the system say 0844, 0845, 0870, and 0871 numbers are often not included in the free minutes allocation of many call packages, where they are classed as premium rate numbers.

And despite the new numbers being endorsed by the Department of Health, telecoms industry regulator Ofcom has expressed its concern, claiming it is “not appropriate” for public bodies to use an 0844 number because of a “lack of transparency”.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 17th, 2007 at 9:48am

idb wrote on Aug 17th, 2007 at 2:13am:
http://www.stamfordtoday.co.uk/news?articleid=3116459
<<

Nikki Kelley, practice manager of the Sheepmarket surgery in Stamford, said: “We moved to the new number after a customer satisfaction survey we are obliged to do each year.

>>

Since when has Ms Keeley had paying customers?

Did this only start when they indicated a preference to opt out of the NHS in a satisfaction survey?

What other services would they prefer to obtain on a private basis?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Aug 17th, 2007 at 11:03am

Quote:
Nikki Kelley, practice manager of the Sheepmarket surgery in Stamford, said: “We moved to the new number after a customer satisfaction survey we are obliged to do each year.

She said: “Our main priority is to give better access to our doctors for our for patients. On the old system you could be waiting to speak to the one or two person on reception but with the new system you have options to go straight to who you need to speak to. Patients will end up spending a lot less time on the phones with the new system.”

The main complaint with the switch to the 0844 number has been the cost.

Mrs Kelley said the company which implemented the phone number in Stamford said all calls would cost 3.7p per minute. This was also agreed by the New Springwell practices.

In comparison, on the BT Option 1 landline, a local rate call at peak times is 3p a minute and 1p a minute during off-peak times.

I like the idea of "options to go straight to who you need to speak to" when I call.  I'll speak to my doctor personally every time in future then and not have to deal with the jobsworths I usually get!  Hang on though, at 8.30am, when I ring to make an appointment, I need to speak to those same one (or two?) people - so what good is that?  

It's interesting to note that surgeries have to run " a customer satisfaction survey we are obliged to do each year".  So, when next year's survey reveals multiple complaints about the high cost of calling the surgery since the change, they'll change back to geographical numbers, won't they?  

Oh dear, there's that quoting call prices without VAT trick again!  Clever - 3.7p per minute sounds so much less. Wait a minute though, they've even lied about that.  5p/minute would be 4.2553p/minute without VAT (the 3.7p quoted would be 4.3475p after VAT has been added - and there's no such charging range in the 0844 numbering scheme).  It's still vastly more than the 'free' calls people with inclusive calls packages can make though.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Aug 17th, 2007 at 11:23am

idb wrote on Aug 17th, 2007 at 2:13am:
Mrs Kelley said the company which implemented the phone number in Stamford said all calls would cost 3.7p per minute. This was also agreed by the New Springwell practices.
I'm sure they cant display costs without VAT included if its aimed at normal consumers, etc.

Besides 3.7p/min without VAT still doesn't come close to the 5p/min (inc VAT) it actually costs.  I think it should be around 4.2p/min without VAT.

I bet you Mrs Kelly and the surgery have been telling their patients that to make it look like they're paying less than a penny a minute more.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Aug 17th, 2007 at 11:34am
OK I am puzzled now in relation to 0845 numbers and why they cannot be included in all phone packages?
Because from the 1st August 2007 BT reduced the cost of 0845 to 2p per minute daytime, and increased calls to 01/02 numbers to 3.25p per minute,(62.5% more than an 0845), now as calls to 0845 cost less than calls to 01/02, why are they not being included in phone packages?

I know the evening rate is different, but 0845 are only 0.5p per minute, so revenue share cannot be available on that cost!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 17th, 2007 at 11:52am

derrick wrote on Aug 17th, 2007 at 11:34am:
Because from the 1st August 2007 BT reduced the cost of 0845 to 2p per minute daytime, and increased calls to 01/02 numbers to 3.25p per minute,(62.5% more than an 0845), now as calls to 0845 cost less than calls to 01/02, why are they not being included in phone packages?

I know the evening rate is different, but 0845 are only 0.5p per minute, so revenue share cannot be available on that cost!


This is obviously being done in anticipation of 1st Feb 2008 so that 0845 number users can still turn round and say they are giving theit customers a cheaper deal with BT than if they had an 01/02 number .  It is clearly an attempt to reverse out the tactical marketing error made on 1st July 2005 when national calls became the same as local calls on BT Option 1.  I expect it has even been demanded by some of the major 0845 users like HMRC to justify them not changing to 03.  It is clearly an attempt to defeat pressure on 0845 users to switch to 03.  It will also be used to try and defeat any claims that 0845 are not lo-call or local rate.

BT can afford to do this from the increased connection charge and by slightly cutting their own revenue share on these calls while leaving most of the revenue sharers money intact.

Clearly it is all part of a cunning attempt by the NGN industry and BT (who provide the largest proportion of these numbers) to try to undermine the ability of our campaign to launch an onslaught on 0845 being the new covert premium rate come 1st Feb 2008.

The connection charge and per minute charging is all part of a massive hidden price rise that Ofcom has sanctioned and is now being used to support these phoney call price cuts.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 17th, 2007 at 11:59am

derrick wrote on Aug 17th, 2007 at 11:34am:
OK I am puzzled now in relation to 0845 numbers and why they cannot be included in all phone packages?
Because from the 1st August 2007 BT reduced the cost of 0845 to 2p per minute daytime, and increased calls to 01/02 numbers to 3.25p per minute,(62.5% more than an 0845), now as calls to 0845 cost less than calls to 01/02, why are they not being included in phone packages?

I know the evening rate is different, but 0845 are only 0.5p per minute, so revenue share cannot be available on that cost!


Bt could easily include 0845's in call packages. There is a minimal rebate available daytime to carriers, but a cost is incurred by carriers evenings and weekends. There is no justification for not including them as a non Bt ngn is terminated at a telehouse, which saves the egress charge. For Bt originated NGN's they have an ingress and egress charge, and a cost associated with the IN platform. On the basis that a Geo ingress and egress makes money, there is no reason for and NGN not to.

We also have the added implication that early next year rebates will not be paid to carriers for 087 ranges. This means that Bt will charge 087 at their National rate applicable to each client. Obviously for corporate acounts this will be significantly less than for domestic accounts.  This will have the added burdon on businesses that they will be charged a fee (similar to the 0800 fee) by the carrier to recieve 087 calls.

A large portion of the cost of a phone call cost is retained by BT and not passd on to the carrier. we need to remember that BT have employed  360,000 people, half of which are now drawing a BT pension. This has to be paid for.

My advise is simple. get a job where you work 8am - 6pm. You wont ever pay daytime call rates. G ;)et a job with a Gov pension and you will work 4 years and retire on 80% final salary indexed linked
(or complain about phone companies who dont make the rules and have to compete with a monopolistic marketplace.)



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 17th, 2007 at 8:53pm
Just to point out that the petition against 0844 doctors surgery numbers on the 10 Downing Street website now has over 3600 signatures and is shortly about to make it on to page 1 (top 50 petitions) of the 10 Downing street website ordered by size.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Aug 17th, 2007 at 11:38pm

derrick wrote on Aug 17th, 2007 at 11:34am:
OK I am puzzled now in relation to 0845 numbers and why they cannot be included in all phone packages?

Clearly, the overall charge for inclusive call packages is enough for telcos to pay the termination charges for all calls to 01/02 numbers for people on those tariffs. I accept that tariffs where 01/02 numbers are chargeable may subsidise inclusive ones.

The point is that if an NGN of some description is also included, and this particular number has a higher termination rate, then, in theory, it will push up the price of the inclusive package and/or any 01/02 calls which are subsidising it.

If this were to happen, then we would end up paying 'inflated' call charges as we do now. Thus, the only solution is to make the termination rate for 03 and any other prefix which is to be included the same as that for 01/02.

PS. Send Mrs Kelley an email to nikki {at} sheepmarketsurgery {dot} co {dot} uk  ;)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Aug 18th, 2007 at 1:42am
Normally posted in the 'parliamentary update' thread, but perhaps more relevant here:

House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 26 Jun 2007 (pt 0002)

NHS: Non-geographic Numbers

Mr. Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer to question 138605, whether national health service organisations using 09 or 087 numbers established before April 2005 are still able to use them. [144976]

Andy Burnham: Regulations came into force in April 2005 which prevented national health service dentists, NHS opticians, general practitioner practices and out of hours providers from establishing new premium rate telephone numbers for patients seeking to contact services. Existing numbers were not affected. Ministers decided not to issue directions to enforce a migration of existing numbers to low-cost alternatives such as 0844 or 0845 in the light of Ofcom's decision to review its numbering system. Ofcom has now created a new country-wide number range 03 for public and not for profit bodies, which are charged to the consumer at the local rate, and has now started allocating numbers using the 03 prefix.

The Department expects decisions on telephone numbers in primary care to be based on what is in the
best interests of patients taking account of the Central Office of Information guidance on cost to the citizen.

NHS trusts and foundation trusts are not affected by the aforementioned regulations.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 18th, 2007 at 6:46am

idb wrote on Aug 18th, 2007 at 1:42am:
Ofcom has now created a new country-wide number range 03 for public and not for profit bodies, which are charged to the consumer at the local rate, and has now started allocating numbers using the 03 prefix.

The Department expects decisions on telephone numbers in primary care to be based on what is in the
best interests of patients taking account of the Central Office of Information guidance on cost to the citizen.


So does that not clearly demand that all NEG Surgeryline number now move to the 03 area code where the doctors pay for their extra convenience and are in a position to drive down the contract cost with NEG or take their business elsewhere.

Or have I missed something obvious?  I am sure there is a get out somewhere that will allow the scammers like the annoying simmond001 to continue on with their work.  Speaking of which I really wish he would push off back to the Petrolheads forum where he clearly belongs.

And what of Patientline numbers.  Are they not telephone numbers used in primary care? ;) :-/ ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 18th, 2007 at 11:29am
03 numbers lie at the heart of the NEG issue and many related matters introduced to this thread.

Ofom has proposed this as a solution for the public and not-for-profit sectors, but both we and Ofcom have yet to see just how it will work, and therefore how effective a solution it will be. That is why 084 has been left in a mess. We may be cynical and pessimistic, as history provides us with strong justification for such views. We must however wait, and do all we can to ensure the best possible outcome.

We cannot however wait for totally unacceptable behaviour to be ceased. Patients paying providers for NHS services is so clearly unacceptable that this must be treated as a separate issue in its own right. The effect of high third-party costs incurred in accessing services is perhaps identical, but the issue is separate.

It may take a little time in sorting out what to do with those already signed-up, but there must be no more such contracts (or renewal of existing contracts) and the illegitimacy of what is happening must be clearly recognised.



Ben Bradshaw, Andy Burnham's successor, is engaged in correspondence on this issue and has so far repeated the same line, which fails to recognise the significance of the revenue-sharing feature of 0844. The correspondence continues and we hope that the key point will be recognised and lead to necessary action.

Members may wish to add weight to this by getting more MPs engaged.



I note the suggestion to contact practice managers of those using 0844 numbers. It may be better to contact the relevant PCTs. The PCT is a public body with a duty to serve the public interest, rather than the narrow duty to what a practice manager may see as a group of customers who are happy to pay for the service being delivered by a private body under contract to the PCT.



Members better acquainted with the detail of these matters and Ofcom's proposals for 03 may be able to help us understand an important issue for the medium term future.

03 is intended to enable NGNs to be used with the same call charges as 01/02. Where special features, such as network queueing, are presently paid for by higher call charges, this obviously cannot be done with 03 numbers. Forcing up the cost of calls to 01/02 to cover this by cross-subsidy cannot be part of Ofcom's proposal as this would be found to be totally unacceptable. Surely, where such features are to be deployed on 03 numbers, they must be paid for by the renter of the number either as used, or by an adjusted rental charge. One must assume that this is what Ofcom has proposed

I would be grateful if someone could help throw more light on this important aspect of what will be happening. It may be that we need to take advantage of the delay in introducing 03 to ensure that it happens properly.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Aug 21st, 2007 at 12:46am
http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/wnnewslatest/display.var.1628840.0.doctors_cash_in_on_phone_rip_off.php

Doctors cash in on phone rip off
By James Connell


<<
DOCTORS have been accused of cashing in on their patients after switching to high rate telephone lines.

At least two practices in and around Worcester have switched to 0844 numbers.

More than 1,000 medical practices now use profitable 0844 numbers, including St John's House Surgery in Bromyard Road, Worcester, and Ombersley Medical Centre.

Both practices declined to discuss the adoption of the number which can cost 40p minute from a mobile and 4p more a minute than an ordinary landline number.

But Watchdog Oftel has called on the British Medical Association to ban the system.

Malcolm Cooper, a former chairman of the North Worcestershire Health Authority, said: "I think it's really unfair of any health professionals to try to increase their income at the expense of patients.

"I would have thought there were plenty of opportunities for low cost telephone landlines to be able to give benefit to service users. There's no need for the health service to make a profit out of people's misfortune and illness."

All three St John's ward councillors - David Candler, Margaret Layland and Samuel Arnold were against patients being forced to make premium rate calls.

Coun David Candler, who represents St John's ward, said: "It's unfortunate that general practioners feel the need to exploit their patients in this fashion. They should bear in mind that the income levels of people in St John's are well below the national average and for them to pay this sort of additional charge is quite extraordinary and regrettable."

Coun Layland, a former patient at the practice, said: "Particularly at a time when you're vulnerable when you're ringing a doctor, the last thing you want is to be charged a high rate for your phone call."

One patient, who uses the surgery but declined to be named, said: "It's a bit of a stealth task in a way. There's nothing on the recorded message that indicates what the cost of the calls are going to be. The fact that it's an 0844 looks similar to the local rate 0845 number misled me."

Janie Thomas, chairman of the Worcestershire Primary Care Trust Patient's Forum, said surgeries were trying to reduce the time it takes to get through to on the phone, "I don't think they have necessarily thought about the cost," she said. "But the cost is a problem, there's no two ways about it."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by mikeinnc on Aug 21st, 2007 at 1:59am

Quote:
Janie Thomas, chairman of the Worcestershire Primary Care Trust Patient's Forum, said surgeries were trying to reduce the time it takes to get through to on the phone, "I don't think they have necessarily thought about the cost," she said. "But the cost is a problem, there's no two ways about it."


You bet your sweet a**s they have thought about the cost!! That's why they have done it!  >:(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 21st, 2007 at 8:55am
Just thought, being new to this forum, that I would kick off by saying that the doctor's surgeries down here in West Sussex have followed this appalling trend of using these numbers.  >:(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 21st, 2007 at 9:11am

sherbert wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 8:55am:
Just thought, being new to this forum, that I would kick off by saying that the doctor's surgeries down here in West Sussex have followed this appalling trend of using these numbers.  >:(


Welcome to the forum sherbert.

Can I trust that you have signed the petition against these ripoff 0844 doctors numbers at http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/NGN-use-by-GPs/ and will be advising anyone else you know who uses this doctor's surgery to also do so.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 21st, 2007 at 9:19am
Ok, will do.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 21st, 2007 at 10:35am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 18th, 2007 at 11:29am:
Patients paying providers for NHS services is so clearly unacceptable that this must be treated as a separate issue in its own right. The effect of high third-party costs incurred in accessing services is perhaps identical, but the issue is separate.

It may take a little time in sorting out what to do with those already signed-up, but there must be no more such contracts (or renewal of existing contracts) and the illegitimacy of what is happening must be clearly recognised.


A doctors practice is not a charity. It is not a department of the NHS. It is not public purse funded.

The doctors are paid to provide a service. They have to provide their own premises, equiptment, staff, pensions etc.. the same as all other private businesses.    

Unless they are offered subsidised services and premises by the government or by the NHS, why should either party dictate what business model they decide upon.  

When doctors were given the option to opt out of certain services,and paid extra for others it llowed the practice to decide the future of their own business. Increasingle the practice manager will have commercial skills in line with running a business.

I also read a post discusing how this would not be allowed in USA. That is correct, but in the USA that average visit to a doctors is $63 for non emergency. For emergency teladoc (a telephone based out of hours service) it is $80.

5pence per minute sounds cheap to me! (but then, I see the benfefit of instant access, auto appointment booking and call forwarding out of hours).


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 21st, 2007 at 10:55am

simond001 wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 10:35am:
The doctors are paid to provide a service. They have to provide their own premises, equiptment, staff, pensions etc.. the same as all other private businesses.


And are they allowed to charge their patients directly for their premises or staff, pensions etc?  No of couse not, they are meant to pay for it out of what they get paid to operate the surgery.  The same thing goes for their phone systems which is why they should not be able to pass on the costs of running and buying them to patients.

If we follow your logic then it will be 5p per minute for the phone call this year and 50p per minute in 5 years time.............


Quote:
5pence per minute sounds cheap to me! (but then, I see the benfefit of instant access, auto appointment booking and call forwarding out of hours).


No I think that you and your chums who make a living out of vending services that use NGNs actualy see the benefits to your personal bank balance which in turn allows you to drive the sporty little numbers that you then like to discuss over at www.petrolheads.com/gassing/

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Aug 21st, 2007 at 11:05am
Quote from simond001

Quote:
The doctors are paid to provide a service. They have to provide their own premises, equiptment, staff, pensions etc.. the same as all other private businesses.


PRECISELY. See my post No. 189 on this thread:


Quote:
Using the NEG logic why not ask patients to pay for the latest blood pressure meter, surgical instrument or computer system for the surgery? GPs are self employed business people who pay their business expenses themselves which are then amply and generously refunded by the NHS. Remember recent income hikes for GPs - they now earn £100,000+.  No need to feel sorry for them.


or, indeed, should patients contribute to the redecoration of the surgery, cleaning costs and the cost of paperclips?

Remember that NHS services are supposed to be free at the point of use.  Doctors should be prohibited from introducing hidden charges to patients, such as 0844 telephone costs.

We are paying for the health service through our NI contributions.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 21st, 2007 at 11:06am
Of course doctor's surgeries are funded pubicly, that is why doctors get paid by the goverement as do the practice nurses and they get a sum of money for every patient on their books, I believe. When they do minor surgeries at the surgery they get the money back from the NHS.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 21st, 2007 at 12:33pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 10:55am:

simond001 wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 10:35am:
The doctors are paid to provide a service. They have to provide their own premises, equiptment, staff, pensions etc.. the same as all other private businesses.


And are they allowed to charge their patients directly for their premises or staff, pensions etc?  No of couse not, they are meant to pay for it out of what they get paid to operate the surgery.  The same thing goes for their phone systems which is why they should not be able to pass on the costs of running and buying them to patients.

If we follow your logic then it will be 5p per minute for the phone call this year and 50p per minute in 5 years time.............


I'd like to treat that as a serious concern but it obviously isn't.  The cost of changing numbers is high, and unless the whole NGN and PRS industry was deregualted this could never happen for appointment booking.  The cost os the call also covers the cost offorwarding the call out of hours for a lot of prctices, which saves the caller having to redial an out of hours service.


Quote:
[quote]5pence per minute sounds cheap to me! (but then, I see the benfefit of instant access, auto appointment booking and call forwarding out of hours).


No I think that you and your chums who make a living out of vending services that use NGNs actualy see the benefits to your personal bank balance which in turn allows you to drive the sporty little numbers that you then like to discuss over at www.petrolheads.com/gassing/[/quote]

Again, i plead with you to try and stay focused. The fact that i like cars does not in any way affect my thoughts. Reality is that i earn less that most GP's, so i am in the same position as the majority of users of both this site, and my local GP (who does use a 0844 number). My main business has been telecoms for ten years, and within NGN's I do not deal with any PRS 090 services or services that i do not agree with.

I urge you to accept people for who they are, regardless of their income, status or any other petty jealousies that you have. It is not conducive to your campaign.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 21st, 2007 at 12:57pm

simond001 wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 12:33pm:
I urge you to accept people for who they are, regardless of their income, status or any other petty jealousies that you have. It is not conducive to your campaign.


Its just that I find most people who earn their living selling 084 and 087 prefixed numbers to businesses seem to have no problem at all with being economical with the truth and misleading their clients in order to sell their wares.  NEG being a case in point.

If all these services were on 09 and there were clear pre and post call charge announcements and line subscribers could restrict access to 09 by other household members through PIN number access (indeed that restriction was enabled by default) I would have less problems with the activities of the premium rate number industry (of which the 084/7 industry is a clandestine part).  But even then I would ban all national and local government services and the emergency services from being allowed to use such premium rate numbers for contact by the general public.

You go on about how its more convenient for the call to be rerouted out of hours etc, etc.  Well fine that allows that doctor to have a better image with the patient that may allow him to get more patients and improve the profitability of his practice.  But with that being so why isn't the doctor paying this extra marketing cost of his business. ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 21st, 2007 at 3:08pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 12:57pm:

simond001 wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 12:33pm:
I urge you to accept people for who they are, regardless of their income, status or any other petty jealousies that you have. It is not conducive to your campaign.


Its just that I find most people who earn their living selling 084 and 087 prefixed numbers to businesses seem to have no problem at all with being economical with the truth and misleading their clients in order to sell their wares.  NEG being a case in point.

who is most people? a very sweeping statement. I'd like to understand the research you have put into this. Please advise.

~ Edited by Dave: Quote box tidied up

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 21st, 2007 at 3:55pm

simond001 wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 3:08pm:
who is most people? a very sweeping statement. I'd like to understand the research you have put into this. Please advise.


I would suggest the ethical part of your industry has only sold 0800 and 0845 numbers and in respect of the 0845 numbers the ethical members of your industry would now be working very hard to sell their clients a replacement 03 calls solution.

The 0844, 0870 and 0871 number ranges are all about nothing other than hidden revenue sharing that is reliant on the fact that many members of the public wrongly believe them to be ordinary local (0844) and national (0870 and 0871) rate calls. The only exception is the use of these numbers by dial thru calling services who are completely transparent about the cost of the calls and state it at the outset in the same way as they do for the 09 numbers they also use to provide the service.

All the NGN number vending salesmen who have appeared in this forum and the weasel words they have then used to justify their hidden premium rate services, yourself included, have only served  to reinforce my views on the matter.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 21st, 2007 at 9:56pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 3:55pm:

simond001 wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 3:08pm:
who is most people? a very sweeping statement. I'd like to understand the research you have put into this. Please advise.


I would suggest the ethical part of your industry has only sold 0800 and 0845 numbers and in respect of the 0845 numbers the ethical members of your industry would now be working very hard to sell their clients a replacement 03 calls solution.

The 0844, 0870 and 0871 number ranges are all about nothing other than hidden revenue sharing that is reliant on the fact that many members of the public wrongly believe them to be ordinary local (0844) and national (0870 and 0871) rate calls. The only exception is the use of these numbers by dial thru calling services who are completely transparent about the cost of the calls and state it at the outset in the same way as they do for the 09 numbers they also use to provide the service.

All the NGN number vending salesmen who have appeared in this forum and the weasel words they have then used to justify their hidden premium rate services, yourself included, have only served  to reinforce my views on the matter.


Effectively you have no basis for your bigotted thoughts. You have not researched this subject. You have no knowledge or understanding of the work that is going on within the industry to ensure that numbers are used correctly, that a smooth transfer can be achieved from 087 to other ranges.  

In all industries there is good and bad. Unfortunately you have decided to ignore the good and you have a prejudiced view of all telecoms employees working within the NGN industry. You have accepted that in some instances NGN's can be used (whether 0870 or other) if it benefits you financially. You do not appreciate a business case that does not suit you personally. Against all advise you have continued your tirade, with some of the worst marketing ideas i have ever heard.  

I have never before been told i use weasel words. This is just another of the many improper and unjust slants that you use against anybody that does not agree with you in every instance of your campaign. This should not be a for or against argument, but one of understanding, education and ethics.  

You will not gain the respect of those who you need on side until you learn to use these yourself.

Every time i read these posts and believe that i can help with your cause, i am reminded that you have serious personal issues with the industry. I have therefore decided that i will not participate in this forum any more.



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 21st, 2007 at 10:23pm

simond001 wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 9:56pm:
I have therefore decided that i will not participate in this forum any more.


[smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif] [smiley=bath.gif] [smiley=vrolijk_26.gif]

It seems you genuinely find it baffling when the usual range of lies and half truths used to successfully missell the conversion of normal numbers in to covert premium rate numbers doesn't actually work with us.

Can I offer you a clue that in trying to express your pro NGN views here you are likely to get about as much sympathy as a member of Brake would over at www.petrolheads.com/gassing ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Tanllan on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:14am

simond001 wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 12:33pm:
My main business has been telecoms for ten years, and within NGN's I do not deal with any PRS 090 services or services that i do not agree with.
Now I am puzzled. I thought that the whole problem was that 09X numbers are reasonably well badged as Premium Rate (revenue share), whereas 08X are not; it is the undeclared revenue sharing that is the whole problem.
08X numbers were not originally used in that way. The convenience was from the (then) marginal national to local ratio funding the handling. I know, I was there...
Everyone's gripe is from the underhand and dishonest way of skimming money. UGH.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 7:41am

Tanllan wrote on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:14am:
The convenience was from the (then) marginal national to local ratio funding the handling. I know, I was there...

Everyone's gripe is from the underhand and dishonest way of skimming money. UGH.


And of course 0844 and 0871 are even more despicable and inexcusable than 0845 and 0870 since they were never ever linked to local or national rate and were allowed by a cynical and telco scams enhancing Ofcom purely to give telcos further hidden premium rate revenue opportunities without most consumers even realising that they were paying a premium rate for making the call. :o >:(

I think simond001's problem is that he has actually started to believe his own propaganda and so can't understand it when others don't.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:00pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 12:57pm:
PIN number


It's PIN not PIN Number

PIN = Personal Identification Number.

PIN number = Personal Identification Number number

Why do people feel the need to duplicate the word number ?
 

A few others:-

It's PAC not PAC Code, it's MAC not MAC Code,  it's ATM not ATM Machine, it's LCD not LCD Display, it's DVD not DVD disc....

 ;)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:33pm

derrick wrote on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:00pm:
PIN = Personal Identification Number.

PIN number = Personal Identification Number number

Why do people feel the need to duplicate the word number ?


Why do you feel the need to be pedantic Derrick.

I thought we were both on the same side. ;) :P

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:35pm

idb wrote on Aug 21st, 2007 at 12:46am:
http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/wnnewslatest/display.var.1628840.0.doctors_cash_in_on_phone_rip_off.php

Doctors cash in on phone rip off
By James Connell [...]
>>

As a follow-up:

http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/display.var.1634166.0.inquiry_into_cost_of_calling_doctor.php

Inquiry into cost of calling doctor

By James Connell

<<
HEALTH chiefs have vowed to investigate GP surgeries who force patients to use premium rate telephone lines.

Worcestershire Primary Care Trust has launched an immediate investigation after your Worcester News revealed at least two practices - St John's House surgery in Bromyard Road, Worcester and Ombersley Medical Centre - were using expensive 0844 numbers.

Paul Bates, chief executive for the PCT, said the trust had no power to ban the numbers.

"The PCT itself cannot ban these numbers and cannot impose restrictions outside the national GP contract arrangements," he said. "Nevertheless, we are going to investigate their use and we will work with local GPs to identify alternative options which GPs will be encouraged to use.

"The PCT is aware that some practices in Worcestershire do use 0845 and 0844 numbers. We do not approve of this but cannot stop it."

Since we published our story on Saturday, the practice manager at Ombersley Medical Centre has said she is flabbergasted and gutted" to discover the phone lines are costing patients more.

Some calls to 0844 numbers can cost 40p a minute from a mobile and 4p more a minute than an ordinary landline.

But Debbie Weston said she had been led to believe the calls were at a local rate by their supplier.
"People need to be aware that as far as we're concerned we're not expecting patients to pay any more than they should be. I was flabbergasted and gutted by the article," she said.

[...]
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:42pm

idb wrote on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:35pm:
Paul Bates, chief executive for the PCT, said the trust had no power to ban the numbers.

"The PCT itself cannot ban these numbers and cannot impose restrictions outside the national GP contract arrangements," he said. "Nevertheless, we are going to investigate their use and we will work with local GPs to identify alternative options which GPs will be encouraged to use.

"The PCT is aware that some practices in Worcestershire do use 0845 and 0844 numbers. We do not approve of this but cannot stop it."


At last a PCT chief executive who has guts and sticks up for patients rather than looking to only say what is politically correct.

Bates for CEO of the NHS I say.

Also give that journalist a medal.  One of the best articles against 0844 misuse I have seen.  If only they had also mentioned the 10 Downing Street petition against these numbers.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 3:07pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:33pm:

derrick wrote on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:00pm:
PIN = Personal Identification Number.

PIN number = Personal Identification Number number

Why do people feel the need to duplicate the word number ?


Why do you feel the need to be pedantic Derrick.

I thought we were both on the same side. ;) :P



Just a minor irritation,(we all have them), same as interviewers, presenters, especially on radio, who constantly sprinkle their conversations with "yaknow" every few words, bl**dy annoying.  ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 6:39pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:42pm:

idb wrote on Aug 22nd, 2007 at 12:35pm:
Paul Bates, chief executive for the PCT, said the trust had no power to ban the numbers.

"The PCT itself cannot ban these numbers and cannot impose restrictions outside the national GP contract arrangements," he said. "Nevertheless, we are going to investigate their use and we will work with local GPs to identify alternative options which GPs will be encouraged to use.

"The PCT is aware that some practices in Worcestershire do use 0845 and 0844 numbers. We do not approve of this but cannot stop it."


At last a PCT chief executive who has guts and sticks up for patients rather than looking to only say what is politically correct.

… give that journalist a medal.  One of the best articles against 0844 misuse I have seen. ….

An unqualified “here here” from me.

Mr Bates seems to believe that the national GP contract which he is obliged to use when commissioning local services does not include any prohibition on GPs charging patients for NHS services. I am presently highly sceptical on this point.

It is unlikely that the contract could anticipate every devious way of collecting money from patients directly in the course of delivering NHS services so that each could be specifically prohibited. There surely cannot be any clause that allows GPs to enter into a commercial relationship with patients in respect of the delivery of NHS services, even if that relationship uses the patient’s telephone service provider as an agent.

If PCTs cannot vary the terms of the contract so as to make it particular and thereby confidential, where is this document, issued by a public body, published?


Even if PCTs cannot stop use of 0844 numbers, they have a duty to advise all patients of charges made for the NHS services for which they are responsible (although not necessarily a duty to publish an up-to-date and comprehensive table of telephone call charge tariffs).

(For campaigners: PCTs have a very important role in this as they are the lowest level publicly accountable body involved. They also publish these telephone numbers as a key part of their role. Looking through their latest “Guide to local services” is a good way of finding where 0844 numbers are being used.)

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 2:21am
http://www.expressandstar.com/2007/08/22/probe-due-on-gp-call-costs/

<<
Patients fear they are being charged over-the-odds for phone calls to premium-rate lines at doctors’ surgeries in the Wyre Forest and elsewhere in Worcestershire.

Now health chiefs have launched investigations into the use of high-cost telephone systems by some GPs. The probe follows complaints about call charges and officials say they will check out patient’s concerns.

Checks will be made on the 67 doctors’ surgeries throughout the county and Worcestershire Primary Care Trust says it will be “working with GPs to put an end to the practice”.

Concerns about the cost of calls to doctors through telephone systems that charged callers at premium rates were first voiced across the country two years ago.

Then the Minister for Health John Hutton introduced regulations banning the use of 087, 090 and 901 numbers to protect patients from paying premium and national rates to call GPs and dentists.

He called for practices to change to numbers which offered patients a guaranteed low rate and said that sick people and their families should not be expected to pay “over-the-odds”.

Paul Bates, chief executive of Worcestershire Primary Care Trust, said: “The Primary Care Trust itself cannot ban these numbers. It also cannot impose restrictions outside the national GP Contract arrangements. Nevertheless, we are going to investigate the use of these numbers.”
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 5:57am

idb wrote on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 2:21am:
Nevertheless, we are going to investigate the use of these numbers.”
>>


One wonders what their investigation will reveal? :-/

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 10:15am

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 5:57am:
One wonders what their investigation will reveal?

That over 1200 NHS GPs' surgeries have already been hoodwinked into changing over and NHS patients, who have already paid for the NHS and GPs' (generous) salaries via overt and covert taxation, are now also having to pay rip-off rates for their calls and, thereby, are putting more money into GPs and NEG's pockets whenever they wish to contact their surgery?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 10:38am

Heinz wrote on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 10:15am:
That over 1200 NHS GPs' surgeries have already been hoodwinked into changing over and NHS patients, who have already paid for the NHS and GPs' (generous) salaries via overt and covert taxation, are now having to pay rip-off rates for their calls and, thereby, are putting more money into GPs and NEG's pockets whenever they wish to contact their surgery?


Clearly one certainly can hope so.

But one has a terrible feeling that pressure may be applied from on high to this PCT CEO and threats about the security of his job made if he does not find that this new high tech system cannot be satisfactorily funded unless the NEG 0844 model is used.

Of course perhaps this CEO is a maverick and/or is on the verge of retiring or wanting to move on to another kind of job.  In which case he may be prepared to produce a report that tells the truth about the grotesque misuse of these covert premium rate numbers.

What this does show though is that all of you who have a doctor's surgery that uses an 0844 number must go through the complaints procedure to the top level at your PCT in order to hopefully cause other similar reviews of the appropriateness of the use of NEG 0844 numbers to take place.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 11:01am

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 10:38am:
... one has a terrible feeling that pressure may be applied from on high to this PCT CEO and threats about the security of his job made if he does not find that this new high tech system cannot be satisfactorily funded unless the NEG 0844 model is used.


Perhaps, but then again, we may not be completely wasting our time.



NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 10:38am:
What this does show though is that all of you who have a doctor's surgery that uses an 0844 number must go through the complaints procedure to the top level at your PCT in order to hopefully cause other similar reviews of the appropriateness of the use of NEG 0844 numbers to take place.


Exactly. When combined with pressure from the top, this should fix it.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jimnutt on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 11:18am
The West Sussex County Times ran an article last week about the introduction of 0844 numbers in the Horsham area, and has been inundated with letters and e-mails of complaint from its readers.  Another follow-up article is due on Friday. . .

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Aug 23rd, 2007 at 2:42pm
I have e-mailed Paul Bates at Worcestershire PCT,(re reply#240 above), congratulating him on his investigation,and pointing him in the direction of this site and in particular this thread, the e-mail was opened 40 minutes ago so I will let you know if he responds

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 24th, 2007 at 8:29am
Read this, typical...

http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/news/Health-phone-system-chaos.3134861.jp

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Aug 24th, 2007 at 9:56am
It appears that article has been 'got at' by NEG - the 'Add your comments' link has mysteriously disappeared.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:10am
This is only 7 miles down the road from me and comes after a very recent hunt on my part had at that stage indicated no 0844 NEG numbers in Dorking or Horsham or my surrounding villages.  The only nearby NEG surgeries were in airport worker Crawley.

I clearly need to write a letter or send a press release to the paper entering in to the debate and pointing out I am a former local district councillor and national anti 084/7 campaigner who had a resolution passed on neighbouring Mole Valley District Council to make sure that they never used these ripoff phone numbers.

Also perhaps directing people in the West Sussex County Times to the debate that is going on here as well as to our website in general.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:32am

sherbert wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 8:29am:
Read this, typical...

http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/news/Health-phone-system-chaos.3134861.jp


"Typical" in that it attacks the system for being simply "new" and "controversial" without pointing out what is truly wrong about it, other than it being likely to fail, as with any new technology.

The true issue is this NHS GP using a revenue-sharing NGN to fund delivery of its services by collecting money from patients as they use them.

The explanation in the pdf file linked to at http://www.parksurgery.com/ points out the difference between "0844 numbers" and "0870 or premium rate numbers" simply in terms of the lesser cost - "0844 numbers cost just over 4p per minute to call (plus VAT this equals 4.9p)".

Some will pay more, but otherwise it is perfectly correct, the level of cost is the only difference. The principle is the same, callers are paying money to the person called. The caller paying the provider for a service delivered by telephone may be OK for "sexual entertainment" services, but it is not for NHS services.

There are many other issues with NGNs and there may be other issues with Surgery Line, such as reliability, but this particular case is "typical" in that it fails to raise the most important point.

Thanks are due to jimnutt and sherbert for bringing this to our attention, I intend no criticism.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:43am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:32am:

sherbert wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 8:29am:
Read this, typical...

http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/news/Health-phone-system-chaos.3134861.jp


"Typical" in that it attacks the system for being simply "new" and "controversial" without pointing out what is truly wrong about it, other than it being likely to fail, as with any new technology.

The true issue is this NHS GP using a revenue-sharing NGN to fund delivery of its services by collecting money from patients as they use them.

The explanation in the pdf file linked to at http://www.parksurgery.com/ points out the difference between "0844 numbers" and "0870 or premium rate numbers" simply in terms of the lesser cost - "0844 numbers cost just over 4p per minute to call (plus VAT this equals 4.9p)".

Some will pay more, but otherwise it is perfectly correct, the level of cost is the only difference. The principle is the same, callers are paying money to the person called. The caller paying the provider for a service delivered by telephone may be OK for "sexual entertainment" services, but it is not for NHS services.

There are many other issues with NGNs and there may be other issues with Surgery Line, such as reliability, but this particular case is "typical" in that it fails to raise the most important point.

Thanks are due to jimnutt and sherbert for bringing this to our attention, I intend no criticism.

David



I also believe that some families put a bar on 08 numbers to stop these numbers being used by members of the family to keep down telephone costs. To un block you have to put a fairly long pin number in and then dial. So what I am saying is that this could cause all manner of problems when someone wants tthe doctor quickly..

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:48am

sherbert wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:43am:
I also believe that some families put a bar on 08 numbers to stop these numbers being used by members of the family to keep down telephone costs. To un block you have to put a fairly long pin number in and then dial. So what I am saying is that this could cause all manner of problems when someone wants tthe doctor quickly..

I am not aware of a call barring facility currently existing for 08 number ranges as Ofcom does not define them as premium rate (despite what the dictionary says) and also any bar on 08 numbers would catch Freephone numbers too.

However it is undoubtedly true that many overseas telecoms carriers will not carry calls at all to either the 0844 numbers normally used by NEG Surgeryline practices or to the even more expensive 0870 numbers that scumbag liars NEG then try to offer as the replacement number for calling from overseas.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:59am

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:48am:

sherbert wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:43am:
I also believe that some families put a bar on 08 numbers to stop these numbers being used by members of the family to keep down telephone costs. To un block you have to put a fairly long pin number in and then dial. So what I am saying is that this could cause all manner of problems when someone wants tthe doctor quickly..

I am not aware of a call barring facility currently existing for 08 number ranges as Ofcom does not define them as premium rate (despite what the dictionary says) and also any bar on 08 numbers would catch Freephone numbers too.

However it is undoubtedly true that many overseas telecoms carriers will not carry calls at all to either the 0844 numbers normally used by NEG Surgeryline practices or to the even more expensive 0870 numbers that scumbag liars NEG then try to offer as the replacement number for calling from overseas.


According to the story in today's West Sussex County Times there is this facility. Anyone who can get this paper this item is on the front page column two

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 24th, 2007 at 11:12am

sherbert wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:59am:
According to the story in today's West Sussex County Times there is this facility. Anyone who can get this paper this item is on the front page column two


Only goes to show the pathetic lack of understanding of most journalists of telecoms issues.

I will make sure to write a letter to the paper guiding people to this website and to the 10DowningStreet petition.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Aug 24th, 2007 at 11:17am

Quote:
However it is undoubtedly true that many overseas telecoms carriers will not carry calls at all to either the 0844 numbers normally used by NEG Surgeryline practices or to the even more expensive 0870 numbers ....


how definitive is this statement?

I thought 0870 number can be connected from overseas.  If there are any exceptions it would be good to know what they are.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 24th, 2007 at 11:23am

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 11:12am:

sherbert wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 10:59am:
According to the story in today's West Sussex County Times there is this facility. Anyone who can get this paper this item is on the front page column two


Only goes to show the pathetic lack of understanding of most journalists of telecoms issues.

I will make sure to write a letter to the paper guiding people to this website and to the 10DowningStreet petition.


This was not a journalist but a member of the public who has this facility apparantly.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 24th, 2007 at 11:38am

sherbert wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 11:23am:
This was not a journalist but a member of the public who has this facility apparantly.


I'm not aware of a facility that allows dialling of 01/02 numbers while blocking 084 and 087 numbers.  I am aware of premium rate number 09 call barring and also call barring for all chargeable calls including 01, 02 and 084/7 number ranges.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Aug 24th, 2007 at 2:42pm
I have just spoken to my Health Centre, and have been informed that the centre has an 0844 number and has had it since last year, and that old chestnut that they have been told that it is the same rate as BTs "local rate", full number 0844 4720001, although I did use the old 01772 number and it still worked, (I thought the old numbers got disconnected?).

Was asked to write in, (no email address I was told), with my comments and proof of my statements, where is the point? they have already got the system running and believe what they are told by NEG,(assuming that is who they got the system off, as the receptionist asked "who is NEG").

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 24th, 2007 at 2:52pm

derrick wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 2:42pm:
I have just spoken to my Health Centre, ... where is the point?

A simple suggestion:

Have a chat wih the "PALS" at Central Lancashire PCT on 0800 032 24 24.

Ask if the GPs who provide their NHS services are allowed to charge for them.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 24th, 2007 at 2:52pm

derrick wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 2:42pm:
Was asked to write in, (no email address I was told), with my comments and proof of my statements, where is the point? they have already got the system running and believe what they are told by NEG,(assuming that is who they got the system off, as the receptionist asked "who is NEG").


Surely the point Derrick is to have their actions reviewed at higher level in your local healthcare trust to try and get the use of 0844 banned and to force the doctors to pay the extra to have the NEG equipment migrated on to 03 numbers.

I think you may perhaps be feeling disheartened after the recent stonewalling by the Information Commissioner in respect of NHS Direct?

But if you become deadlocked with the PCT you could then go to your MP and the Parliamentary Ombudsman.  Also what is the appeal process against an ICO decision?  Is that not also to the Parliamentary Ombudsman via your MP too?

Signatures to the 10 Downing Street petition now at 4845 and counting.  In position 40 on the front page by size.

Everyone with an NEG surgery in their local area needs to write to their local paper giving the URL of the 10 Downing Street petition against these numbers.

We also need Martin Lewis to mention the petition and give the URL in his weekly MoneySavingExpert email.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Aug 24th, 2007 at 3:34pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 2:52pm:

derrick wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 2:42pm:
Was asked to write in, (no email address I was told), with my comments and proof of my statements, where is the point? they have already got the system running and believe what they are told by NEG,(assuming that is who they got the system off, as the receptionist asked "who is NEG").


Surely the point Derrick is to have their actions reviewed at higher level in your local healthcare trust to try and get the use of 0844 banned and to force the doctors to pay the extra to have the NEG equipment migrated on to 03 numbers.

I think you may perhaps be feeling disheartened after the recent stonewalling by the Information Commissioner in respect of NHS Direct?

But if you become deadlocked with the PCT you could then go to your MP and the Parliamentary Ombudsman.  Also what is the appeal process against an ICO decision?  Is that not also to the Parliamentary Ombudsman via your MP too?

Signatures to the 10 Downing Street petition now at 4845 and counting.  In position 40 on the front page by size.

Everyone with an NEG surgery in their local area needs to write to their local paper giving the URL of the 10 Downing Street petition against these numbers.

We also need Martin Lewis to mention the petition and give the URL in his weekly MoneySavingExpert email.



I have previously spoken to my PCT, who tell me that they have no jurisdiction over doctors as they are independent contractors and only "monitor" them re their contracts.

I have just spoken to my PCT again and been told the same, also that they are under the impression that 0844 cost no more than a normal phone call! I will e-mail into the complaints department at Lancs PCT and see if that will start anything.  Can you give me some relevant web links to put into the e-mail?

I have copied most of this from this post by Hienz :-http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=6087663&postcount=11

I will also write into the practice manager, but do not hold out much hope  >:(


"Also what is the appeal process against an ICO decision?" That is to appeal to the Appeals Tribunal, of which I have already set in motion.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Aug 24th, 2007 at 3:44pm
And I've e-mailed Martin Lewis drawing his attention to THIS POST when he returns from holiday.

Let's hope .....


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Aug 25th, 2007 at 10:21am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 2:52pm:

derrick wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 2:42pm:
I have just spoken to my Health Centre, ... where is the point?

A simple suggestion:

Have a chat wih the "PALS" at Central Lancashire PCT on 0800 032 24 24.

Ask if the GPs who provide their NHS services are allowed to charge for them.



I have already spoken to them, see my post below yours #261, the PCT can do nothing except monitor the doctors contract and cannot make them use/not use a particular number as they are "independent contractors" (not employed by the NHS, their statement not mine),

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 25th, 2007 at 10:43am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 2:52pm:
Ask if the GPs who provide their NHS services are allowed to charge for them.


derrick wrote on Aug 25th, 2007 at 10:21am:
... the PCT can do nothing except monitor the doctors contract and cannot make them use/not use a particular number as they are "independent contractors" (not employed by the NHS, their statement not mine),


I do not disagree. The PCT cannot dictate what particular type of phone number doctors use. The issue only arises with revenue sharing. I cannot believe that the contract allows doctors to collect money in return for the delivery of the NHS services  That is the issue which every PCT and the DoH must address.

I know that there are other issues and complexities involved, however I am making the point that calls to 0844 numbers are more expensive BECAUSE the caller is not only paying the telco, but is also paying a fee to the person they are calling. Are doctors allowed to charge fees for the delivery of NHS services?

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Aug 25th, 2007 at 10:54am
I am writing a letter to send to the local practice,(no email addy), and to the Central Lancs PCT with those and other comments in it, can't see them budging though, bureaucracy,old boys network  and all that .

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by moneysavin on Aug 25th, 2007 at 6:53pm
Another practice manager who has lost the plot on 0844 charging.

"Practice manager at the Pershore centre Pam Ford said that the 0844 number did not cost the 4,000 patients a week that use it, much more and that the practice was not making money out of it."


http://www.eveshamjournal.co.uk/mostpopular.var.1637270.mostcommented.probe_into_cost_of_calling_the_doctor.php

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 25th, 2007 at 6:57pm
10 Downing Street Petition now standing at 4,997 signatures, mainly just from visitors to this website.

If we could get it mentioned in a couple of tabloids I'm sure we could get around 1 million signatures like the anti road tolling petition.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Aug 25th, 2007 at 7:28pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 25th, 2007 at 6:57pm:
If we could get it mentioned in a couple of tabloids I'm sure we could get around 1 million signatures like the anti road tolling petition.

Or by Martin Lewis.

COME ON MARTIN.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 25th, 2007 at 7:43pm

Heinz wrote on Aug 25th, 2007 at 7:28pm:
Or by Martin Lewis.

COME ON MARTIN.


A mention in Martin Lewis's newsletter would only get us to the 40,000 signatures we had before.

To get a million signatories needs The Sun, Daily Mirror, Daily Mail and Daily Express to all give publicity to the petition.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by moneysavin on Aug 26th, 2007 at 3:05am
More practices mislead. >:(

"Mrs Kelley said the company which implemented the phone number in Stamford said all calls would cost 3.7p per minute. This was also agreed by the New Springwell practices."

http://www.stamfordtoday.co.uk/news?articleid=3116459

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 26th, 2007 at 8:01am

moneysavin wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 3:05am:
More practices mislead. >:(

"Mrs Kelley said the company which implemented the phone number in Stamford said all calls would cost 3.7p per minute. This was also agreed by the New Springwell practices."

http://www.stamfordtoday.co.uk/news?articleid=3116459


The 3.7p per minute is obviously being given to them by top liars NEG.  But even with VAT it still doesn't come to 5p per minute these calls actually cost.  :o >:( >:( >:(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Aug 26th, 2007 at 8:07am

moneysavin wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 3:05am:
More practices mislead. >:(

"Mrs Kelley said the company which implemented the phone number in Stamford said all calls would cost 3.7p per minute. This was also agreed by the New Springwell practices."

http://www.stamfordtoday.co.uk/news?articleid=3116459

e-mail to the Editor sent:


Quote:
Dear Ms. Green,

Further to your report about the failure of the SurgeryLine telephone system at Stamford, Billingborough and Rippingale NHS GPs' surgeries (http://www.stamfordtoday.co.uk/news?articleid=3116459) I thought you might be interested to hear a little more about the SurgeryLine system and how it is ripping off NHS patients throughout the country.

NEG, the suppliers of SurgeryLine systems, use a sales technique of offering GPs' practices incentives of a 'free' switchboard and associated equipment and a proportion of the excessive 5p per minute call charges (not the 3.7p per minute the company told your reporter) which result when non-geographical 0844 numbers replace existing 01 or 02 geographic numbers.  NEG have the temerity to say the call charges are less than 5p per minute - but, deviously, they quote without VAT.  How many patients get VAT-free telephone bills?  In any case, with VAT, the 3.7p your reporter was told the calls cost is 4.35p - so that figure is demonstrably false.

Of course, common sense tells us that no business would offer free equipment unless they were certain of recouping their money - and more - so the question has to be asked, how are they going to do that? Simple, patients are going to pay! All patients - from the wealthy to the poor - are going to pay. Every time they call the surgery, they are going to pay.

Apart from the fact that such systems require patients to remember an eleven-digit number as opposed to a much shorter local number, 0844 numbers are 'revenue-sharing' and generate an income for the surgery and/or the telephone service provider and result in call-queuing - at the expense of patients!

The firm attempts to justify the unnecessary queuing which results when these systems are installed by saying that it is more efficient - because callers never receive the engaged tone!  They cannot, of course, explain how patients entering an electronic wilderness to wait, whilst paying 5p per minute to do so, is more efficient than, as they would do now, them just pressing the last number redial button to try again.

When only one or two people are available to answer calls anyway, such systems really just make patients pay yet another stealth tax for the dubious privilege of listening to ‘press this’, ‘press that’ menu options and/or ‘musak’ whilst waiting. The real truth behind the 'better service to patients' and 'efficient use of modern technology' rhetoric is simply that the systems are more efficient at extracting extra money from patients!

Equally worryingly, it is not possible to make calls to UK 08xx numbers from most overseas countries and, therefore, a patient or hospital overseas would not be able to contact the surgery for information in case of emergency.

Many people have 'inclusive' telephone call packages these days whereby all calls to UK 01 or 02 numbers are, in effect, free at all times. At 5p per minute and with queuing times artificially lengthened, calls to 0844 numbers from patients attempting just to make an appointment or enquire about a test result, now regularly cost in excess of 50p.

Of course, the introduction of these numbers additionally penalises the poor and elderly and others who do not have access to a home phone. Calls to 0844 numbers from telephone boxes cost a minimum of 40p and are charged at 14p per minute and mobile phones companies charge up to 40p per minute - not the 'headline' price of 5p (which, in itself, is 54% per minute more than someone on the basic BT package would pay for a call to an 01 or 02 number).

You will probably be aware that a petition (http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/NGN-use-by-GPs/) against the use of these numbers by GPs’ surgeries has been started on the Downing Street website and has already attracted a considerable number of signatures.

Pity the people registered with the Stamford, Billingborough and Rippingale surgeries - and any others where these rip-off and reprehensible systems have been installed.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Aug 26th, 2007 at 9:20am

moneysavin wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 3:05am:
More practices mislead. >:(

"Mrs Kelley said the company which implemented the phone number in Stamford said all calls would cost 3.7p per minute. This was also agreed by the New Springwell practices."

http://www.stamfordtoday.co.uk/news?articleid=3116459


This was already mentioned by idb on the 17th August (the day the story was online) - see here.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Aug 26th, 2007 at 9:48am

Quote:
How many patients get VAT-free telephone bills? In any case, with VAT, the 3.7p your reporter was told the calls cost is 4.35p - so that figure is demonstrably false


There seems to be some confusion about call charges to GPs who changed to 0844 numbers. I suppose this is because not all 0844 calls cost the same.

However, from home landlines the NEG SurgeryLine numbers are charged at BT's g6 rate and cost at all times:

4.25p/min excl. VAT - which is irrelevant since patients cannot reclaim VAT on calls to their doctor
5.00p/min incl. VAT

The BT price list for specialised numbers is here:
http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/consumer/consumerProducts/pdf/SpecialisedNos.pdf

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Aug 26th, 2007 at 10:01am
Lompos, I think what Heinz was getting at was that the article stated the calls would cost 3.7p. We all know that the NEG numbers actually cost 5p inc VAT, but that the article was factually incorrect in stating it cost 3.7p (whether or not that was including VAT).

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 26th, 2007 at 10:30am
Somethin 'fishy' is going on. The West Sussex Times has been reporting on the doctor's surgery fiasco, last Friday and the Friday before and the stories have been removed from their web site..http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/

This seems to be a very underhanded way of ingnoring the Great British Public's concerns.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Aug 26th, 2007 at 11:19am

sherbert wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 8:29am:
Read this, typical...

http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/news/Health-phone-system-chaos.3134861.jp


Do you mean this story? Still seems to be there...

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 26th, 2007 at 11:32am

jgxenite wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 11:19am:

sherbert wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 8:29am:
Read this, typical...

http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/news/Health-phone-system-chaos.3134861.jp


Do you mean this story? Still seems to be there...



If you go into the home page..http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/sectionhome.aspx?sectionid=507

There is no link to the story from there that I can see.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 26th, 2007 at 11:55am

sherbert wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 11:32am:
If you go into the home page..http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/sectionhome.aspx?sectionid=507

There is no link to the story from there that I can see.


Because it was last week's edition and this page is reserved for a story in the current week's edition?

I expect they only have quite a primitive website.  Sadly most of my stories on the wesbites of local newspapers have been wiped out after a few months and replaced by more recent news items.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 26th, 2007 at 12:09pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 11:55am:

sherbert wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 11:32am:
If you go into the home page..http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/sectionhome.aspx?sectionid=507

There is no link to the story from there that I can see.


Because it was last week's edition and this page is reserved for a story in the current week's edition?

I expect they only have quite a primitive website.  Sadly most of my stories on the wesbites of local newspapers have been wiped out after a few months and replaced by more recent news items.



No it was front page of this week's edition. It was there, but it has been removed by who?

Now here is another thought, who owns NEG? Is it a publicly listed company? If it is I bet it is worth looking at the list of shareholders and see how many doctors own shares in the company. If they do conflicts of interst spring to mind. I know I an an old cynic but.....

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 26th, 2007 at 1:18pm

sherbert wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 12:09pm:
No it was front page of this week's edition. It was there, but it has been removed by who?


I assume it was removed by the weekly update process that changes the stories on the website related to that week's current edition.


Quote:
Now here is another thought, who owns NEG? Is it a publicly listed company? If it is I bet it is worth looking at the list of shareholders and see how many doctors own shares in the company. If they do conflicts of interst spring to mind. I know I an an old cynic but.....


See http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/30257fb28f71aa103a59977f41b87064/compdetails (note this will be unavailable from 8pm tonight until 7am tomorrow and then from midnight to 7am from Tuesday onwards).

You can get the shareholders and directors using the webcheck service as long as you are prepared to pay a quid for the info.

I wouldn't necessarily assume there are any doctors amongst the shareholders as the company seems to be run by a load of Essex wideboys (hardly surprising in view of their selling methods).  If I was a doctor who was a shareholder I would now be looking to get rid of shares as fast as possible given the heat now being directed towards NEG's unscrupulous activities.  Also I don't suppose they will necessarily use the title doctor on the shareholder record.  You would have to cross reference the shareholder list with the British Medical Association's database.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by kk on Aug 26th, 2007 at 3:49pm

Quoting from wscountrytimes.co.uk


Start QUOTE

HUNDREDS of Horsham patients were plunged into chaos after major technical faults hit a controversial new town GP surgery phone system yesterday (Monday August 20).

Bosses at Horsham's Park Surgery, in Albion Way, today apologised to patients cut off when the new Surgeryline system collapsed, disconnecting callers after they had choosen from an options menu.

Simon Dean, Park Surgery executive partner, told wscountytimes.co.uk engineers were working on the Surgeryline system today (Tuesday August 21) with a view to having it back to normal as soon as possible.
He said: "As with any new system of this nature, we have had teething problems.

"Yesterday (Monday August 20) we had major difficulties, when callers were being disconnected after selecting from the options menu.

"Apparently this was caused by a fault on the incoming BT lines.

"We sincerely apologise for this failure and wish to thank all of those affected for their patience and understanding.

"Today (Tuesday August 21) we have engineers on site sorting the problems out and we hope that everyone will soon appreciate the benefits of the new system."

What do you think of the new phone system. Add your comments to this story
Last Updated: 21 August 2007 3:48 PM

End Quote.

Can anyone find any comments to the above story?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Aug 26th, 2007 at 4:02pm
Someone suggested earlier that there were comments on this, but they all "mysteriously" disappeared, and that the add comments link doesn't work. One wonders if NEG had a word with them about it...

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 27th, 2007 at 2:30pm

sherbert wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 10:30am:
Somethin 'fishy' is going on. The West Sussex Times has been reporting on the doctor's surgery fiasco, last Friday and the Friday before and the stories have been removed from their web site..http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/

This seems to be a very underhanded way of ingnoring the Great British Public's concerns.



I have emailed the paper asking why. When & if I get a reply I will post the reply here.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Golf_Paul on Aug 28th, 2007 at 3:10pm
www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=136730&command=displayContent&sourceNode=136541&contentPK=18221083&folderPk=79656&pNodeId=243835

From that article on the Mail website ...

"Today, a Department of Health spokesman said ministers had written to primary care trusts asking them to try to prevent patients being charged extra to call their doctor.

He said: "NHS organisations have a duty to ensure they provide the best possible service to patients without exploiting them."


A spokeswoman for Hull Teaching Primary Care Trust said it had written to GPs and dentists urging them not to use systems with higher call charges.

However, she said the decision was down to individual practices."




Maybe the rolling ball is gathering pace.  I hope something will soon be done to stop this disgraceful scam   >:( :(


Edited by bbb_uk: Amended title


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Aug 28th, 2007 at 6:34pm
Reader comments on this story in the Hull Daily Mail are flowing in : -----



The link to the Petition against doctors using 0844 is :-----http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/NGN-use-by-GPs/ SIGN IT NOW to get this scam stopped!!!!
Michael, Reading




The Government is fully aware of this disgrace. 27 MPs recently signed a motion in Parliament condemning doctors who use 0844 numbers. If YOU want to stop this then sign the Petition on the Prime Minister's website, see the link below: http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/NGN-use-by-GPs/ The Department of Health issued instructions to all PCTs in 2006 saying that these numbers are NOT to be used. All doctors and their PCTs using 0844 are contravening a clear directive. They should be disciplined and forced to cancel their contract with NEG, the unscrupulous phone company selling this scam. NEG claims that doctors are not making money out of this scheme are false. The doctors get their phone system completely free and other financial benefits. Therefore doctors ARE profiting.  
Michael , Reading




How can a PCT justify having patients who are in need of emergency treatment or visit having to listen to a load of options from this type of phone call. Any frustrated patient would call 999 instead putting further stress on the emergency services. Since PCTs took over local health care services seem to have suffered. Healthcare is being determined by accountants and pen pushers being paid salaries higher than they deserve. Before PCTs the healthcare in this area was good. Stop messing about with the NHS with reorganastion after another
Cath, Walkington




What on earth is happening to healthcare in this country? It used to be a system you could trust. Now it takes you an age to get through to GPs surgeries, costs you extra to phone them, you have to get past the dreaded receptionists, who often give misguided and ill informed advice to you. If you do have to go to a hospital for any period of time the worry is that you could come out with MRSA. We have gone from a system that was the envy of the world to one you would expect in a third world country.
geoff, hull




Madness. What is next ?? you will be speaking to elvis with an indian accent in southern india as this will be cheaper for the nhs ?
Gilbert, Hessle Road




Look on the PCT website. The non proffessional element of the board are all failed Labour councillors, so they will be in auto pilot of tax us more and deliver us less
Ste, West Hull




There is absolutely no place for this type of call system in a medical surgery. People call their surgery sometimes in great distress, elderly or informa and the last thing they want is to be passed from one line to another, pressing this button and that. If I need an urgent appointment at my surgery the only way I can guarantee one is to queue outside the doors first thing in a morning, make the appointment and then return later in the day. I am unable to ring from work as the line is more often than not engaged or you are placed in a queue and you don't know how long you will be there for. Then, when you do get through, often all the appointments are taken and you are told to ring again the next day. Just another way of building favourable statistics - if you don't get through or give up, you don't become a statistic do you? Maybe it does save the medical staff's time but what about the rest of us - some of us have to work too. It's just another step in the wrong direction!!
Swany, Cottingham




I've never read such drivel as this article! Don't GP's earn too much for doing too little as it is? Or is it purely due to the greed of their 'Practice Managers'? "A spokesman said the practice was not making a profit out of patients"....of course they're not....I suppose the moon's made from cheese too!
Bill., Paull


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 28th, 2007 at 6:50pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 11:38am:

sherbert wrote on Aug 24th, 2007 at 11:23am:
This was not a journalist but a member of the public who has this facility apparantly.


I'm not aware of a facility that allows dialling of 01/02 numbers while blocking 084 and 087 numbers.  I am aware of premium rate number 09 call barring and also call barring for all chargeable calls including 01, 02 and 084/7 number ranges.



This is the quote that I was on about a few days ago from the local paper....

Comment: IN RESPONSE to the article regarding the change of surgery phone numbers, my phone provider, BT, supplies us with a block on all calls made to national, international and mobile calls made from our home line.
Unfortunately, this is a necessity due to my teenager daughter's compulsion to ring other mobile phones from the landline - a universal teenage trait it seems!
However, the new doctor's phone number is also covered by this block, which means that every time I need to ring the doctor - which, with three children, is quite often - I need to key in a long chain of numbers to temporarily remove the block.
Should something happen, and someone else needed to call them from my house, they would be unable unless I supplied them with the pin number.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 28th, 2007 at 11:44pm

Golf_Paul wrote on Aug 28th, 2007 at 3:10pm:
From that article on the Mail website ...
Thanks for picking this up and presenting it here.


Quote:
"Practices earn 2p per minute from each call."
Well done to the journalist for pointing this out.



Some (slightly picky) points of correction:


Quote:
"Today, a Department of Health spokesman said ministers had written to primary care trusts asking them to try to prevent patients being charged extra to call their doctor. He said: "NHS organisations have a duty to ensure they provide the best possible service to patients without exploiting them."

WRONG - NHS organisations have a duty to ensure they provide the best possible service to patients without CHARGING them.
(We do not want to get drawn into discussing whether any particular charge for NHS services is fair.)




Quote:
A spokeswoman for Hull Teaching Primary Care Trust said it had written to GPs and dentists urging them not to use systems with higher call charges. However, she said the decision was down to individual practices."

WRONG - Individual practices can choose their phone system and their telephone number -
they CANNOT DECIDE to CHARGE PATIENTS for NHS services by using a revenue sharing number.




Quote:
'misleading terms like local rate and national rate'

BEWARE - Because of the historic anomaly in Hull, there is still a distinction between local and national calls for those who remain with the proud local former monopoly-holding telecomms provider.




Golf_Paul wrote on Aug 28th, 2007 at 3:10pm:
Maybe the rolling ball is gathering pace.  I hope something will soon be done to stop this disgraceful scam.

It is! It will!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Aug 29th, 2007 at 11:36am

sherbert wrote on Aug 27th, 2007 at 2:30pm:

sherbert wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 10:30am:
Somethin 'fishy' is going on. The West Sussex Times has been reporting on the doctor's surgery fiasco, last Friday and the Friday before and the stories have been removed from their web site..http://www.wscountytimes.co.uk/

This seems to be a very underhanded way of ingnoring the Great British Public's concerns.



I have emailed the paper asking why. When & if I get a reply I will post the reply here.



Needless to say my email has been ignored. >:(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 29th, 2007 at 12:12pm
I have not received any update emails for several of the recent posts in this thread, even though the Notification part of my site membership still says I am subscribed to it.

I also have not received any recent update emails from other SayNoTo0870 threads to which I am subscribed.

What exactly is going on? :-/

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Aug 29th, 2007 at 5:50pm
I've not been having any problems. You sure your mail host isn't blocking the emails or incorrectly marking them as spam?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 29th, 2007 at 6:14pm

jgxenite wrote on Aug 29th, 2007 at 5:50pm:
I've not been having any problems. You sure your mail host isn't blocking the emails or incorrectly marking them as spam?


It seems Plusnet have been having teething problems with their new spam filtering service Critical Path.  These caused waiting emails to be deleted off their server and then being totally incompetent Plusnet had failed to keep any backups.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by BexTech on Aug 29th, 2007 at 7:03pm
A BIRMINGHAM Labour MP has condemned doctors who encourage patients to ring high-cost phone lines to make appointments.

The GP surgeries advertise expensive 0844 numbers for patients to call.

Birmingham Edgbaston MP Gisela Stuart said it means patients are charged 5p a minute from a landline, compared to 1p a minute for an ordinary local call in off-peak times.

More at: Birmingham Mail

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Aug 29th, 2007 at 8:27pm
This is todays article in the Birmingham Mail : ----

Anger at GP call charges   Aug 29 2007

 By Jonathan Walker, Birmingham Mail
 
A BIRMINGHAM Labour MP has condemned doctors who encourage patients to ring high-cost phone lines to make appointments.

The GP surgeries advertise expensive 0844 numbers for patients to call.

Birmingham Edgbaston MP Gisela Stuart said it means patients are charged 5p a minute from a landline, compared to 1p a minute for an ordinary local call in off-peak times.

Some of the extra cost is received by GPs, or by telephone companies which supply them with services in return for the money.

At least six practices in Birmingham and the Black Country are listed with 0844 numbers on Yell, the Internet version of Yellow Pages.


Ms Stuart said she was demanding answers after concerns were raised by a constituent. She said: "I think this is really wrong. GPs surgeries are already paid for the work they do. On top of that, to have a system where they benefit from people ringing in to make appointments is just unacceptable."


Not only does an 0844 number costs more than a local number, but it is also unlikely to be included in call plans allowing telephone customers to make free local calls at evenings or weekends. The calls can cost 40p minute from mobile telephones.


GPs are banned from offering services on premium rate numbers, but 0844 lines are not included because they costs less than 10p a minute to call.


However, they are "revenue sharing" numbers, which means a portion of the extra cost is received by the surgery.


West Midland practices using 0844 numbers include Fairway Surgery in Stechford; Karis Medical Centre in Edgbaston; Netherton Health Centre in Dudley; Bath Street Medical Centre in Dudley; The Ridgeway Surgery in Dudley and Luqman Medical Centre in Walsall.


The Department of Health revealed it was so worried about the trend towards using expensive numbers that it wrote to Primary Care Trusts in December.


But Birmingham East and North PCT, which is responsible for GP services including the Fairway Surgery in Stechford, said there were no rules to prevent surgeries using 0844 numbers.


A spokeswoman said: "There is no restriction for telephone numbers starting 0844. "


No-one was available for comment from either the Fairway Surgery or the Karis Medical Centre.



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 29th, 2007 at 11:12pm
Jonathan Walker is the first journalist I have seen who seems to have fully comprehended every aspect of this topic.  I don't suppose he was briefed by someone from this website was he Loddon? ;)

The PCT's say they cannot stop the doctors using 0844 but then just how was it that the Department of Health was able to issue an edict that successfully banned all NEG surgeries from continuing to use 0870 numbers. :-? ::) ;)

Clearly someone in government has the power to make the use of NGNs other than 03 by doctors surgeries illegal.

I wouldn't be surprised to find that Ofcom also has the necessary backstop powers given to it in the Communications Act 2003 to take action in the public interest since doctors are not commercial entities and do not compete to provide services in the conventional sense.   Unfortunately I don't think Ofcom would actually recognise the public interest even if it ran them over in a large truck. ::) :o >:( >:( >:(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 30th, 2007 at 1:57am

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 29th, 2007 at 11:12pm:
Jonathan Walker is the first journalist I have seen who seems to have fully comprehended every aspect of this topic.

The extended version of this piece in the Birmingham Post shows that he and a total of 3 MPs now seem to understand the issue very well.

http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk/birminghampost/news/tm_headline=gp-surgery-phone-charges-slammed&method=full&objectid=19699991&siteid=50002-name_page.html


Understanding seems to have advanced in Worcestershire also -

http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/display.var.1645509.0.foster_to_lobby_government_over_gp_premium_rate_numbers.php


Let us hope that this understanding is perhaps spreading.




NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 29th, 2007 at 11:12pm:
I don't suppose he was briefed by someone from this website

Can we please stick to discussing external issues rather than the personal merits of those who post here. This is a public forum viewed by those whom we seek to influence, as well as those who may wish to undermine our efforts.



NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 29th, 2007 at 11:12pm:
Clearly someone in government has the power to make the use of NGNs other than 03 by doctors surgeries illegal.
I wouldn't be surprised to find that Ofcom also has the necessary backstop powers


I believe that it is only the use of revenue-sharing numbers when providing NHS services that is “illegal” because the GP contract does not allow fees to be levied on patients. I am confident that PCTs will catch on to this very soon now.

As for other NGNs, and revenue-sharing where the renter of the line is not prohibited from taking money from those who call, I do not believe that there are any specific statutory powers to be invoked across the public sector. We rely on the general powers of Ministers to direct the activities of their departments and departmental agencies and the powers of all public bodies to determine the terms of contracts for those who undertake work for them.

There are however ways in which public sector activites are coordinated and these must be a focus for campaigning effort. The no 10 petition is an excellent example of this.

I do not believe that Ofcom has any specific powers that could be invoked to affect the topic under discussion in this thread within any relevant timescale. There are however broader issues about Ofcom for discussion elsewhere. These may come back "on topic" once 0844 ceases to be an option for users of Surgery Line. I believe that this will be very soon now.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:46am

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 26th, 2007 at 1:18pm:
I wouldn't necessarily assume there are any doctors amongst the shareholders as the company seems to be run by a load of Essex wideboys (hardly surprising in view of their selling methods).  


And yet again you turn to personal insults.

NGM  Take heed of the advise given by Silentcalls Victim. Stay on topic, remain focused on what you want to achieve, and remove the personal affront from your posts. You will gain nothing by this appearing as a petty vendetta against a single company.

You are attempting to change the rules that allow the use of 0844's for doctors surgeries. This isnt that hard a campaign to achieve in light of the changes that have been made recently to 087 numbers. It seems to me that the focus of this is frequently lost, and effort is being spent on denegration and  petty issues.

If this campaign is for the benefit of the patient, you also need to address the implications if the 0844 is repalced with a geo number.  Do you remove the system and revert to a single person answering the phones, with the time and cost implications of that (no auto appointment bookings, no out of hours forwarding, no automatic signingin at the surgery etc..) or do you keep the system and its benefits and fund it from another source?

~ Edited by Dave: Quote box tidied up

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:46am
The article in the WORCESTER NEWS together with some of the public comments deserve to be recorded here for posterity and future reference purposes : ----

     Foster to lobby Government over GP premium rate numbers
     By James Connell

     WORCESTER MP Mike Foster is lobbying Government health chiefs to put a stop to premium rate calls to doctors.

      Mr Foster has written to the Health Secretary, Alan Johnson, asking him to ban outright expensive 0844 telephone lines to GPs.

The numbers are used by 11 GP surgeries across Worcestershire, including St John's House Surgery in Worcester, Ombersley Medical Centre in Ombersley, Grey Gable Surgery in Inkberrow and Pershore Medical Centre in Pershore.

Some 0844 numbers can cost 40p a minute from a mobile and up to 4p a minute more than ordinary landline numbers.

Watchdog Ofcom is against the use of numbers and Paul Bates, chief executive of the Primary Care Trust, has already condemned their use but said the PCT had no power to ban them.

Surgeries using the numbers are now subject to a PCT investigation which aims to discourage practices from adopting the numbers and to drop them if they already use them.

Mr Foster is now taking the fight to the top to get ministers to back a blanket ban on all such phone lines within the NHS.

Mr Foster said:"There is real unease about GP practices earning money from patients in this way. GPs earn their money from the delivery of services to patients."

He hopes to get a reply to his letter within four weeks.

Mr Foster added: "I want to see him state that the NHS continues to be free at the point of use, and that includes banning premium rate or revenue sharing phone calls to your GP. The local PCT have reacted quickly and well, but it is clear there is a national perspective to this as well. We need to stop the use of such revenue sharing phone calls across the NHS wherever it is taking place."

Mr Foster also wants practices to declare how much cash they get from the calls.

The Department of Health banned 087, 090 and 901 numbers but 0844 numbers were considered local rate and were not banned.

12:09pm Monday 27th August 2007

And some of the comments posted on the Worcester News website : ---

Posted by: Jim Evans on 3:55pm Mon 27 Aug 07
Well done Mike Foster! Let`s hope Gordon Brown returns to his Labour roots and starts driving the money lenders out of our temple. You will forgive us if we don`t hold our breath,though!
Well done Mike Foster!

Let`s hope Gordon Brown returns to his Labour roots and starts driving the money lenders out of our temple.

You will forgive us if we don`t hold our breath,though!Quote |

Posted by: finnil, Worcester on 11:55pm Tue 28 Aug 07
And guess what number you ring to contact The Labour Party...a national rate 087 number (08705 900 200), which is banned by the Dept of Health ! (Admittedly, Mike Foster does publish a local 01905 number).
And guess what number you ring to contact The Labour Party...a national rate 087 number (08705 900 200), which is banned by the Dept of Health !
(Admittedly, Mike Foster does publish a local 01905 number).

Posted by: NHS Patient, Midlands on 12:15am today
We are making progress. See how Mr Foster has changed his position from that of 22 August when he said "the Government had no power to stop GPs using expensive lines". People are slowly begining to understand what is going on. Let us hope that the PCT inquiry will have a similar positive outcome.
We are making progress. See how Mr Foster has changed his position from that of 22 August when he said "the Government had no power to stop GPs using expensive lines". People are slowly begining to understand what is going on. Let us hope that the PCT inquiry will have a similar positive outcome.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:53am

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:46am:
If this campaign is for the benefit of the patient, you also need to address the implications if the 0844 is repalced with a geo number.  Do you remove the system and revert to a single person answering the phones, with the time and cost implications of that (no auto appointment bookings, no out of hours forwarding, no automatic signingin at the surgery etc..) or do you keep the system and its benefits and fund it from another source?


Since the system is already installed and will have negligible resale value if removed the answer is to change to an 03 number and get the doctors surgery to pay the extra cost for the benefit they have derived from handling their calls more efficiently from their point of view.

If absolutely necessary the NHS should modestly increase the funding arrangements for doctor's surgeries that adopt modern systems using 03 call routing.

By the way simond001 I see you couldn't keep away despite your earlier threat to do so. ;) ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:54am

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:46am:
If this campaign is for the benefit of the patient, you also need to address the implications if the 0844 is repalced with a geo number.  Do you remove the system and revert to a single person answering the phones, with the time and cost implications of that (no auto appointment bookings, no out of hours forwarding, no automatic signingin at the surgery etc..) or do you keep the system and its benefits and fund it from another source?


Simond001, could you please explain why all these things cannot be done, when using the telephone swithboard and associated equipment which you supply, together with a geographic number???

~ Edited by Dave: Quote box tidied up

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:57am

loddon wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:46am:
Mr Foster is now taking the fight to the top to get ministers to back a blanket ban on all such phone lines within the NHS.

Mr Foster said:"There is real unease about GP practices earning money from patients in this way. GPs earn their money from the delivery of services to patients."

He hopes to get a reply to his letter within four weeks.

Mr Foster added: "I want to see him state that the NHS continues to be free at the point of use, and that includes banning premium rate or revenue sharing phone calls to your GP. The local PCT have reacted quickly and well, but it is clear there is a national perspective to this as well. We need to stop the use of such revenue sharing phone calls across the NHS wherever it is taking place."

Mr Foster also wants practices to declare how much cash they get from the calls.


Well done Mike Foster - clearly not a toady, even if he is a Labour MP. (See www.michaelfoster.co.uk)

Perhaps he can now widen out his efforts to also take in the even more grotesque abuses of frequently terminally ill patients and their families by Patientline while he is writing to the relevant health ministers.

This is the item on his website about the 0844 doctors surgeries abuses:-

www.michaelfoster.co.uk/detail.asp?articleid=591

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:03am

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:53am:

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:46am:
If this campaign is for the benefit of the patient, you also need to address the implications if the 0844 is repalced with a geo number.  Do you remove the system and revert to a single person answering the phones, with the time and cost implications of that (no auto appointment bookings, no out of hours forwarding, no automatic signingin at the surgery etc..) or do you keep the system and its benefits and fund it from another source?


Since the system is already installed and will have negligible resale value if removed the answer is to change to an 03 number and get the doctors surgery to pay the extra cost for the benefit they have derived from handling their calls more efficiently from their point of view.

If absolutely necessary the NHS should modestly increase the funding arrangements for doctor's surgeries that adopt modern systems using 03 call routing.

By the way simond001 I see you couldn't keep away despite your earlier threat to do so. ;) ::)


An 03 cannot be dialled from all international destinations. This was one of your primary objectives.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:04am
Simond001,  someone, in an earlier post, said that NEG offer doctors a choice of either an 0844 OR a Geographic local number (presumably their existing number).   Is this true?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:08am

loddon wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:54am:

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:46am:
[quote author=NGMsGhost link=1160182005/270#280 date=1188130721

If this campaign is for the benefit of the patient, you also need to address the implications if the 0844 is repalced with a geo number.  Do you remove the system and revert to a single person answering the phones, with the time and cost implications of that (no auto appointment bookings, no out of hours forwarding, no automatic signingin at the surgery etc..) or do you keep the system and its benefits and fund it from another source?


Simond001, could you please explain why all these things cannot be done, when using the telephone swithboard and associated equipment which you supply, together with a geographic number???


Lodden, I dont supply this equiptment.

However. Reading the previous post it is my understanding that a portion of the cost for the equiptment is covered by the use of a rebate from the 0844 number (2ppm is mentioned).  if it is agreed that there is a benefit to the system and service it provides it should be retained.  

My question was how should it be paid for. NGM has answered this by stating that the NHS should pay additional money to the surgery for the service.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:11am

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:08am:
My question was how should it be paid for. NGM has answered this by stating that the NHS should pay additional money to the surgery for the service.


Just as the NHS should also buy out the assets of the beleaguered Patientline so that the sick and elderly can have their relatives communicate with them for the price of a normal 01/02 phone call as would be the case if they were in most private hospitals in the UK.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:16am

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:03am:
An 03 cannot be dialled from all international destinations. This was one of your primary objectives.


Purely due to Ofcom's usual regulatory ineptitude and failure to sort things out.

However if the calls cost no more than usual rate for making 01/02 calls for the OCP in the overseas territory I cannot see why they would not offer connectivity to the 03 range.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:26am

loddon wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:04am:
Simond001,  someone, in an earlier post, said that NEG offer doctors a choice of either an 0844 OR a Georphic local number (presumably their existing number).   Is this true?


I'm sorry but i don't know. When i first read these posts i did spend some time on their website trying to understand the whole service but cannot recall anything about that.  A NGN has to pint at a Geo for delivery, so it may be that they keep the existing number. This would work daytime, but wouldnt work after hours or for network based services as the call would have bypassed the IVR/ICR.

This would also have minimal benefit for daytime callers (low income families are least likely to take up the Bt inclusive call option) as they will still be paying the Bt daytime rate for a local call, or hit by a mcc from BT, and evening callers will have to call the surgery to get a "closed message", then redial an out of office number that could well be a mobile.

An option of a local geo number, (preferably the original surgery number) terminating at a IN. Calls could then be sent straight to the suregery durin open hours, and to the out of hours service when closed. Their would be a cost implication though  for the inbound call, and a further cost for the onward call.

The difficulty (as ever) is the balance betwen cost and service, and where the funding comes from. If this was a  national NHS funded service it would work. This would however be a massive financial undertaking as every surgery would want to improved service, and additional funding would be required for the capital cost of the eqpt (if you can buy it, you can get a grant somewhere for it!)

If this is achieved, i will be first applying for a sales position at NEG! Their shares (if public) will also go through the roof as they appear to be one of the main providers of this service.  



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:29am

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:11am:

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:08am:
My question was how should it be paid for. NGM has answered this by stating that the NHS should pay additional money to the surgery for the service.


Just as the NHS should also buy out the assets of the beleaguered Patientline so that the sick and elderly can have their relatives communicate with them for the price of a normal 01/02 phone call as would be the case if they were in most private hospitals in the UK.


I agree. I have a relative who has been in hospital for 4 months, and feel that Patientline offers very little over the original NHS fundedservice (payphone on whels and tv in the ward) and is unnaceptably expensive. It also penalises those least able to travel and the elderly.

I also have isues with hospital parking charges, but that's another day!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:49am
With regard to what will happen to PatientoopsSurgery Line once 0844 numbers cannot be used for it.

This will cause difficulties for PCTs, GPs and the DoH, not to mention NEG. It will also be tricky for Ofcom and the Telcos as 03 is still not ready to go. All these parties will need to sort this out, probably over some period of time. I hope that we will be able to apply pressure by stressing the principles that need to be applied. We may also be able to work positively with these parties on specific issues to ensure that the best solutions emerge.

I cannot yet see any obvious answers to cover the many different aspects. Let us get to the situation where a clear declaration is made that revenue sharing is not longer legitimate (without having to wait for all the answers covering the implications, nor worry too much about the fact that it never has been) and then let matters proceed from there.


On the general point, I think we all agree that whatever telephone technology is seen to best meet the needs of NHS patients, it must be paid for out of NHS funds. In each case the benefits will have to be seen to justify the cost. Different practices may come up with different solutions that best suit their needs and those of their patients. Distorting this judgement by partially funding the solution with fees collected from patients could be said to be an imaginative way around the problem of tight budgets, but it is, as it always was, totally unacceptable in the context of an NHS free at the point of use.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Aug 30th, 2007 at 11:44am
OK, I have got the Lancashire Evening Post  interested and they are going to do a story on it in the next few days, I have been told by the reporter that our local MP, Mark Hendrick has expressed concern, (maybe why they are taking if up?), I have given a lot of info to the reporter, including links to this site and others, but don't know how much she will use.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 30th, 2007 at 11:55am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:49am:
With regard to what will happen to Patient Line once 0844 numbers cannot be used for it.


I think you may mean Surgeryline. ;)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Aug 30th, 2007 at 1:23pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:49am:
With regard to what will happen to Patient Line once 0844 numbers cannot be used for it.

This will cause difficulties for PCTs, GPs and the DoH, not to mention NEG.


The issue would be that in light of legislative change the number and system provider (NEG in this instance) will have the right to change the terms of their contract. This is a standard term written into any telecoms agreement. (otherwise telco's would have to continue paying rebates to customers after Feb 08!)

The cost will then be born by the surgery. This cost will have a negative effect on their balance sheet, and the cost covered by saving money elsewhere. Whether this be one less nurse, one less receptionist etc would be up to the practise manager. The reality is that Doctors and Practice owners will not want to fund it from their pockets, so cuts will have to be made.  

The worry is that this could have a more direct impact on somebody than the cost of the call.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Aug 30th, 2007 at 1:31pm

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:26am:
I'm sorry but i don't know. When i first read these posts i did spend some time on their website trying to understand the whole service but cannot recall anything about that.  A NGN has to pint at a Geo for delivery, so it may be that they keep the existing number. This would work daytime, but wouldnt work after hours or for network based services as the call would have bypassed the IVR/ICR.

This would also have minimal benefit for daytime callers (low income families are least likely to take up the Bt inclusive call option) as they will still be paying the Bt daytime rate for a local call, or hit by a mcc from BT, and evening callers will have to call the surgery to get a "closed message", then redial an out of office number that could well be a mobile.

An option of a local geo number, (preferably the original surgery number) terminating at a IN. Calls could then be sent straight to the suregery durin open hours, and to the out of hours service when closed. Their would be a cost implication though  for the inbound call, and a further cost for the onward call.


Simond001.   Could you please explain your terms instead of quoting industry acronyms which most of us don't understand.   What are IVR/ICR, IN, mcc?    I have no idea what you are talking about and therefore do not understand what points you are trying to make.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 30th, 2007 at 1:32pm

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 1:23pm:
The reality is that Doctors and Practice owners will not want to fund it from their pockets, so cuts will have to be made.  

The worry is that this could have a more direct impact on somebody than the cost of the call.


The arm twisting argument that not having hidden covert premium rate numbers will lead to a reduction in medical services is always used by businesses who try to scam patients by selling covert premium rate numbers as normal rate numbers.  But once you start down this road where do you stop.  No doubt the same arm twisting arguments will still be being advanced even when the calls are costing 50p per minute as they are with Patientline.

Freeze any increases in GP pay for a couple of years to fund it is what I say.  They are already paid considerably more than they are actually worth given that they are no longer prepared to work anti social hours in most cases.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Aug 30th, 2007 at 1:48pm

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:08am:

loddon wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:54am:

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:46am:
[quote author=NGMsGhost link=1160182005/270#280 date=1188130721

If this campaign is for the benefit of the patient, you also need to address the implications if the 0844 is repalced with a geo number.  Do you remove the system and revert to a single person answering the phones, with the time and cost implications of that (no auto appointment bookings, no out of hours forwarding, no automatic signingin at the surgery etc..) or do you keep the system and its benefits and fund it from another source?


Simond001, could you please explain why all these things cannot be done, when using the telephone swithboard and associated equipment which you supply, together with a geographic number???


Lodden, I dont supply this equiptment.


As you won't answer my question I will give you my understanding.    All these functions can equally well be performed when using a geographic number.   These functions are provided by the equipment and not the 0844 number.  

It is apparently one of the many falsehoods given by NEG when selling their systems to doctors that they need to use 0844 in order to get these functions.    This is not true.

What doctors should be doing is preparing a specification of their requirements and then inviting competitive tenders from suppliers and comparing compliance and price before selecting their supplier and equipment.    One of the requirements should be that call costs to patients are no greater than standard 01/02 charges.    How many are actually comparing competitive proposals before selecting NEGs solution?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Aug 30th, 2007 at 2:39pm

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:08am:
My question was how should it be paid for. NGM has answered this by stating that the NHS should pay additional money to the surgery for the service.


I think we are in danger of getting carried away with the argument about funding and the cost of new telephone systems.   Firstly, the doctors are funding their existing systems already.   We should only be talking about the marginal additional cost of a new system.   That additional cost is of course a fully allowable business expense so the doctor can claim that money back out of his tax payments.    

We are not talking about massive expenditure here.   A quick search on Google will show that a new private switchboard to handle up to, say, 100 extensions can be purchased for well under £1000.    Of course there are set-up costs and maybe new handsets and some customisation/parameterisation of the software and making recorded messages etc.    This is not an excessive cost to the doctor; they've all done it before with older equipment which was vastly more expensive.   Like everything electronic these systems now cost a fraction of the price 10 years ago.    

So I say, no need for any additional cost to the NHS, the doctors can easily afford to fund their own systems out of their current budgets.

~ Edited by Dave: Quote box tidied up

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 30th, 2007 at 4:05pm

loddon wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 2:39pm:
A quick search on Google will show that a new private switchboard to handle up to, say, 100 extensions can be purchased for well under £1000.


Which NEG then charge £5,000 for installing after no doubt telling the doctor that the cost of the equipment is say £3,500 and ripping him off for £1500 or so of further installation charges for work that probably only takes say 8 or 10 hours at most.


Quote:
So I say, no need for any additional cost to the NHS, the doctors can easily afford to fund their own systems out of their current budgets.


Here, here,here.  It is the fact that doctors are only taking the NEG route out of either ignorance, stupidity, naivety or in order to further line their own already fat pockets that needs to be emphasised by this campaign.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Aug 30th, 2007 at 4:20pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 4:05pm:
Which NEG then charge £5,000 for installing after no doubt telling the doctor that the cost of the equipment is say £3,500 and ripping him off for £1500 or so of further installation charges for work that probably only takes say 8 or 10 hours at most.


Except that the doctor is paying nix.   The patients are paying through their call costs and NEG are probably raking in £50,000 upwards year on year for the life of the system.    Talk about a bad deal for the patients!!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 31st, 2007 at 12:20am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:49am:
edited [timestamp=1188514220]

I have corrected the error in this posting, apologies to all, and thanks to those who spotted it.

I have also added emphasis to the point that we may need to first ensure that action is taken to ban use of revenue sharing numbers by GPs before undertaking a detailed exploration of the difficulties that this will cause. All the points in recent postings are legitimately and fairly made, and are well within the topic of this thread.

If the thoughts expressed in this forum are being shared with those who may make the key decision, I do not wish this to be delayed until all the (perfectly valid and relevant) matters that will arise have been resolved.

I see this as one of those occasions where a simple clarifying statement of principle must be made before the necessary work to address the implications can begin. More commonly the sequence is reversed, but not with this matter. (I am happy to discuss my justification for this tactical determination off-line.)

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 31st, 2007 at 7:55am

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 1:23pm:
… This cost will have a negative effect on their balance sheet, and the cost covered by saving money elsewhere. Whether this be one less nurse, one less receptionist etc would be up to the practise manager. The reality is that Doctors and Practice owners will not want to fund it from their pockets, so cuts will have to be made. The worry is that this could have a more direct impact on somebody than the cost of the call.

I hope you recognise that the points you make stand as strong justifications for two hated concepts. I am not suggesting that you would seek to advance or defend them, but I ask you to consider carefully.

When increasing "headline" rates of taxation is unpopular and increasing public expenditure is popular, the obvious solution is to raise money by "stealth taxes". You seem to suggest that we would be best not to bring this issue to public attention, as service cuts will be an inevitable consequence of exposing what may be seen as the necessity of GPs funding their operations by collecting money from patients without them being aware of it.

You also seem to suggest that patients should be ready to knowingly pay to maintain the level of service provided by their GP so that NHS services are not "free at the point of use". My first posting to this thread dealt with this point at some length. If the realities of the market, to which you refer, are given too much rein within the NHS then its cherished funding principle is lost altogether.

Please feel no personal animosity from myself, I address only possible implications of the points you make.


It may be that the DoH has mistakenly directed PCTs to allow practices to fund NHS services delivered by receptionists or nurses out of money collected from patients. This is in breach of the GP contract, and so those positions would be put at risk if the terms of the contract were now belatedly enforced.

It may be difficult to determine where the responsibility for any such unhappy situation would lie. It would be very tempting to bring in another party who was responsible for proposing the breach of the contract, knowingly exploiting this error by the DoH, and deriving commercial benefit from the breach. If such cases exist, then it may be difficult for the four parties to work out how the matter could best be resolved, as blame is likely to be flung around between them.

Now that such cases will come into the open, I believe that the government should not redefine the principles of the NHS so that the present situation may continue - a proper solution must be found for each individual case. I cannot say what that would be in each case and would not wish to propose a single universal answer, but solutions must be found.

Others may believe that the government should simply let things remain as they are by redefining the principles of the NHS to confirm a position which some believe to exist already and may support. For myself, I do not believe that the NHS should deliver "value for money" to its individual "consumers", nor that we should each have a free "choice" about how much of our gross income we spend on healthcare.

If this were so, then every NHS practice could have whatever telephone system and however many nurses and receptionists its patients were prepared to pay for. Some would find that perfectly acceptable. Those of us who do not must recognise that these matters are far from simple.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 1st, 2007 at 4:22pm
I see the relevant points for debate being well presented (on both sides) in the following article and the first reader comment.

http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/wnnewslatest/display.var.1657056.0.0.php

I hope that any posted responses will focus on the issues, rather than speculation about who "NHS Patient" may be. It could be any one of the millions of us entitled to use that name.

I hope that others will join me in circulating this link as widely as possible.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 2nd, 2007 at 9:20am
And again:

http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/dewsbury-news/Premium-wait.3164532.jp

Perhaps others will join me in pointing out to those involved that it makes no difference how wonderful the "patient experience" may be. NHS GPs cannot fund their services by charging patients through taking a revenue share no matter how "low" the "cost" of the "call".

David

P.S. Different listing in this version -
http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/Premium-wait.3163915.jp

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Sep 5th, 2007 at 10:50pm
http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/localnews/display.var.1666547.0.making_appointments_to_become_easier_thanks_to_surgery_line.php

Making appointments to become easier thanks to Surgery Line

<<
PATIENTS who phone their local GP or dental surgery in Enfield will soon find it easier to get through.

Enfield Island Surgery and Dental Access Centre is one of several practices in the area to improve phone services for all of its patients from the end of this week.

So, from Friday, the main telephone number will change to 0844 815 1366 and the fax number will become 0844 815 1395.

advertisementKnown as Surgery Line, the new system has been designed for use in the general practice.

With extra phone lines and elements of call automation, it is planned that the line will reduce call congestion, easing the pressure on the main switchboard.

With over 3,000 patients on the register, phone lines can become jammed at peak times, and it is hoped that the new system will allow receptionists to deal with calls efficiently.

The service includes a new switchboard, headset, a call recording facility and extra safety features for staff.

It is hoped that this will result in patients being able to get in contact with whoever they want to speak to much quicker.

To ease the changeover, anyone calling the old number will hear a recording with details of the new number they should call.

This recording will be kept on the system for as long as necessary.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Sep 5th, 2007 at 10:54pm
"Hello. Thank you for calling. All of our receptionists are just on their tea break, but please hold while we generate more revenue from your call..."

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 5th, 2007 at 11:04pm

idb wrote on Sep 5th, 2007 at 10:50pm:
Making appointments to become easier thanks to Surgery Line

<<
PATIENTS who phone their local GP or dental surgery in Enfield will soon find it easier to get through.

Enfield Island Surgery and Dental Access Centre is one of several practices in the area to improve phone services for all of its patients from the end of this week.

So, from Friday, the main telephone number will change to 0844 815 1366 and the fax number will become 0844 815 1395.

advertisementKnown as Surgery Line, the new system has been designed for use in the general practice.

With extra phone lines and elements of call automation, it is planned that the line will reduce call congestion, easing the pressure on the main switchboard.

With over 3,000 patients on the register, phone lines can become jammed at peak times, and it is hoped that the new system will allow receptionists to deal with calls efficiently.

The service includes a new switchboard, headset, a call recording facility and extra safety features for staff.

It is hoped that this will result in patients being able to get in contact with whoever they want to speak to much quicker.

To ease the changeover, anyone calling the old number will hear a recording with details of the new number they should call.

This recording will be kept on the system for as long as necessary.


Sack that journalist for gross incompetence and find them a replacement job fit only for those who mindlessly simply accept all corporate propaganda by giving them a job in the customers services department of a large faceless moneygrubbing multinational.

And as for Mr Alistair Campbell, the Josef Goebels of NEG, even flogging, castration and hanging, drawing and quartering is too good for him.  This man would sell a nuclear bomb to Osama Bin Laden himself if it gave him a new Porsche and an even larger executive mansion. :o >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Sep 6th, 2007 at 10:35am
Some comments have appeared on the Enfield Independent website : ----

Posted by: NHS Patient, London on 11:38pm Wed 5 Sep 07
Unfortunately these improvements cannot go ahead for NHS patients. The terms of the contract which the Primary Care Trust is required to have in place must prevent practices from receiving remuneration from NHS patients. Part of the extra cost of calling these "revenue sharing" numbers is paid to the practice. NHS services may not be funded by payments from patients. Patients are waiting for the government to confirm that the principle of the NHS being "free at the point of use" will be re-instated, by explicitly banning use of 0844 numbers by GPs. Alternatively this principle will be abandoned and Enfield patients will be free to pay for whatever other improvements they wish NHS providers to make to their services.
Unfortunately these improvements cannot go ahead for NHS patients.
The terms of the contract which the Primary Care Trust is required to have in place must prevent practices from receiving remuneration from NHS patients.
Part of the extra cost of calling these "revenue sharing" numbers is paid to the practice.
NHS services may not be funded by payments from patients.
Patients are waiting for the government to confirm that the principle of the NHS being "free at the point of use" will be re-instated, by explicitly banning use of 0844 numbers by GPs. Alternatively this principle will be abandoned and Enfield patients will be free to pay for whatever other improvements they wish NHS providers to make to their services.

Posted by: George, London on 10:24am today
This is an appalling and incompetent piece of journalism. To mindlessly accept and print such corporate propaganda without any investigation of the facts or background is a disgrace to the journalistic profession. Why don't you go back and talk to a good number of patients at the Enfield surgery and obtain some real opinions and reactions. Ask them if they are happy to pay up to 40p per minute to call their doctor on a mobile or a call box. Are they happy to subsidise their doctors phone system. Report that 27 MPs have put down a motion in Parliament condemning doctors for using 0844 a premium rate number. Try and report the truth and facts for a change.

Posted by: George on 10:29am today
Any patient of this Enfield surgery, or indeed any person who would object to their surgery going to 0844 can vote against on the Prime Ministers website -- Stop doctors using 0844 numbers --- http://petitions.pm. gov.uk/NGN-use-by-GP s/ -- Go there and VOTE NOW!!!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Sep 6th, 2007 at 12:07pm
http://www.lep.co.uk/news/Doctors-accused-of-ripoff-phone.3178994.jp

Doctors accused of rip-off phone lines

<<
Doctors at surgeries in Lancashire have been accused of using rip-off telephone lines to cash in on their patients.
At least four GP surgeries in Preston have abandoned their "01772" area code number in favour of the more expensive "0844" prefix - a move branded by Preston's MP as 'disgraceful'.

And many others throughout Lancashire are believed to have followed suit forcing patients - including pensioners, the chronically ill and disabled - to pay higher call charges.

Although not officially classed as "premium rate", the new numbers are up to 4p a minute more expensive to call from standard BT landlines, and can cost up to 35p a minute using a mobile phone.

In the Preston area, Ashton Health Centre in Ashton, Fishergate Hill Surgery in central Preston, Briarwood Medical Centre in Ashton and Riverside Medical Centre, in Walton-le-Dale, have abandoned their "01772" area code numbers for an "0844" prefix.

Nearly all mobile phone and landline operators exclude 0844 numbers from free minutes available with fixed-price contracts.

Mobile operators charge contract and pay-as-you-go customers between 15p and 35p per minute to call the prefix at all times.

There are fears that pensioners and others with chronic illness or disability who have to contact their surgery regularly will run up higher bills.

Preston's Labour MP Mark Hendrick said: "I cannot see them doing this unless it is paying them or they're making money from it.

"At the worse, if they are making money, it would be disgraceful. If they are saving money, then costs are being thrown onto the patient."

A spokesman for Central Lancashire PCT said: "The 0844 is a local rate telephone number and not a premium rate.

"GPs - as independent contractors - have a choice of the telephone systems they adopt."

However, 0844 operator Network Europe Group (NEG) argues that their service allows patients to wait in a queue or leave messages instead of simply receiving an engaged tone.

A Department of Health spokesman said: "NHS organisations have a duty to ensure that they provide the best possible service to patients without exploiting them."

Derrick Lawton, 56, of Powis Road, Ashton-on-Ribble, Preston, found out Ashton Health Centre, on Pedders Lane, had switched to the higher price system.

He has now lodged a formal complaint with the practice as well as with Central Lancashire PCT.

Mr Lawton today said: "The NHS is supposed to be free at the point of use and that is why we pay taxes and National Insurance premiums."We should not have to pay a 'booking fee' to arrange to see the doctor and that is what ringing an 0844 number actually does.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 6th, 2007 at 12:22pm
[quote author=idb link=1160182005/315#326 date=1189076864]Would this be our very own Derrick by any chance I wonder. ;)

Careful Derrick as NEG now have your address.

I trust you will be keeping your mobile phone and a baseball bat by your bedside in case of a raid by Alistair Campbell and his fellow NEG thought police in the middle of the night.

If we hear you have suddenly disappeared we will make sure to tip off the Police as to who they should have at the top of their list of prime suspects. :o

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Sep 6th, 2007 at 6:11pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 6th, 2007 at 12:22pm:
Would this be our very own Derrick by any chance I wonder. ;)


It sure would, although they have not included a lot of what I gave them, they have also put in the lie from NEG about the "cost patients less overall" and the lie from Central Lancs PCT that the cost is "local rate"  I informed the PCT that the call was not local and gave them plenty of info to prove it, I have tried to get hold of some one from the PCT but at the moment can only get an answerphone.


However the link provided by ibd, does only shows an abridged version of what is actually in the LEP, the full text is as follows,( it is headlined on the front page):-

[color=#3300cc]by Aasma Day and Mark Hookham
aasma. day@lep. co. uk

DOCTORS at surgeries in Lancashire have been accused of using rip-off telephone lines to cash in on their patients.
At least four GP surgeries in Preston have abandoned their 01772 area code number in favour of the more expensive 0844 prefix - a move branded by Preston's MP as "disgraceful".
And many others throughout Lancashire are believed to have followed suit forcing patients - including pensioners, the chronically ill and disabled - to pay higher call charges.
Although not officially classed as premium rate, the new numbers are up to 4p a minute more expensive to call from standard BT landlines and can cost up to 35p a minute using a mobile phone. In the Preston area, Ashton Health Centre in Ashton, Fishergate Hill Surgery in central Preston, Briarwood   Medical Centre in Ashton and Riverside Medical Centre in Walton-le-Dale, have abandoned their 01772 area code numbers for an 0844 prefix.
Around 1,200 practices across the country have switched.
The move has prompted a formal complaint to Central Lancashire Primary Care Trust from one angry patient who discovered his GP practice had adopted the controversial system.
Derrick Lawton, 56, of Powis Road, Ashton, Preston, found out Ashton Health Centre, on Pedders Lane, had   switched   to
Turn to Page 5

From Page 1
the higher price system. He has now lodged a formal complaint with the practice as well as with Central Lancashire PCT.
Mr Lawton today said: "The NHS is supposed to be free at the point of us.
Rather than paying the 3p a minute local rate at peak times and lp a minute off-peak from a standard BT landline, callers to an 0844 number pay a flat fee of 5p a minute.
He added: "With 0844 numbers, as soon as the phone is answered by an automated system, you are being charged 5p a minute from a BT landline and a lot more if you are calling from a payphone or a mobile."
Nearly all mobile phone and landline operators exclude 0844 numbers from free minutes available with fixed-price contracts.
Mobile operators charge contract and pay-as-you-go customers between 15p and 35p per minute to call the prefix at all times.
There are fears that pensioners and others with chronic illness or disability who have to contact their surgery regularly will run up higher bills.
Mr Lawton is also concerned as it is not possible to make to UK 0844 numbers from most overseas countries, so he fears a patient overseas will not be able to contact their surgery in the event of an emergency.
Preston's Labour MP Mark Hendrick said: "I cannot see them doing this unless it is paying them or they're making money from it. -At the worse, if they are making money, it would be disgraceful."
A spokesman for Central Lancashire PCT said: "The 0844 is a local rate telephone number and not a premium rate.
"GPs - as independent contractors - have a choice of the telephone systems they adopt."
GPs' practices using 0844 numbers can also receive around between lp and 2p a minute from incoming calls or are offered a free switchboard and equipment.
However, 0844 operator Network Europe Group (NEG) argues that their service allows patients to wait in a queue or leave messages instead of simply receiving an engaged tone.
Alastair Campbell, company spokesman, says 0844 numbers ease congestion and cost patients less overall because they do not spend as long on the phone.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 6th, 2007 at 11:20pm

derrick wrote on Sep 6th, 2007 at 6:11pm:
" ... our very own Derrick ..."

Great work - well done.

The lies are more than countered by the true facts of the story as reported. Set against the expectations one may reasonably have for someone who is not a PR professional getting something into the media, this is a terrific achievement.

If you are happy to become a local hero, you will deserve it.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Sep 7th, 2007 at 5:44pm
I have received a response from the Ashton Health Centre, nothing more that you would expect:-

Main Surgery
Ashton Health Centre
Pedders Lane
Ashton
Preston
PR21HR

Tel:0844 4720001
Fax:0-1772768138
30th August 2007

Dear Mr Lawton,

Thank you for your letter regarding the telephone system that the three
practices use here at the health centre and I am sorry that you feel that are
communications network is unacceptable.

I can confirm however that the practice operates a Centrex Switchboard
system which is approved by the NHS bodies. The call charges to the
practice are that in line with the Telewest tariff for local call charges and are
4pence per minute which is the same as a BT network. The call charge could
be a maximum of 8pence per minute if being accessed via a mobile phone
network which again is line with BT charges.

The practice has not received a free switchboard or hardware from any
supplier, indeed the practices pay a monthly charge to the supplier to support
the facilities offered by a Centrex system.

I acknowledge your comments regarding queuing systems however previous
patient questionnaires and surveys heavily condemned the old system that
the practice employed and found constant engaged tones frustrating. The
telecommunications system which has been in place now for over 18 months
allows patients the option to select and access the most appropriate person
within the organisation without having to listen to an engaged tone. The
system also allows us to monitor our busiest times and therefore ensure
appropriate staff are in place to answer calls at the peak times. The queuing
system allows patients the option to either hold in a queue or call back if they
do not wish to hold. Although acknowledging your comments and concerns
the practice has received positive feedback in its recent patient satisfaction
surveys regarding the improved telephone access. Please also note that
patients can still call the old practice numbers if they so wish.

I have reviewed the Downing Street web-site and shall await with interest the
outcome of the petition in February 2008.

Thank you for raising your concerns with me and I will raise your specific
issues both with the practice user group and at the next internal review
meeting. I have also asked the Telewest Healthcare Manager to formally
review our contract and services offered to patients.

I have copied a copy of this response to the complaints team at Central
Lancashire PCT Should you still remain unsatisfied with the outcome of the
investigation you are able to contact the Healthcare commission for an
independent review of your case. The healthcare commission will review your
complaint within two months of the date of the final formal written response.
The Healthcare commission can be contacted at~:

Healthcare Commission
FREEPOST NAT 18958
Complaints Investigation Team
Manchester M1 9XZ
Telephone: 0845 6013012

Once again my sincere apologies and in the meantime if you would like to
discuss any aspect of this letter or meet with me please do not hesitate to
contact me.

Kind regards
Mrs L.A.Powler
Practice Manager
cc. Carol Hannon, Central Lancashire PCT

INVESTOR IN PEOPLE

Notice the bit that is at the bottom of the letter, that I have highlighted in red!

She is having a meeting next Wednesday, 12th September with Telewest and someone from the health board? not sure who that is , but then she is on leave so I do not expect any further correspondence for about 2 weeks when she has said she will get back to me.

I( have just spoken to Louise Fowler pointing out the errors in her letter re call charges, she tells me that  
Telewest Communications Plc. provides the number and the service and that Ashton Health Centre has no contract with NEG Surgeryline! I find that hard to believe, and that is where she has got her pricing from, I have explained that the practice should supply the geo number alongside the 0844 number and she has said that all the old 01772 numbers still work, but after the meeting next week she will need to have a "business meeting" within the practice to discuss the issues that I have raised



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Sep 7th, 2007 at 6:42pm

derrick wrote on Sep 7th, 2007 at 5:44pm:
Please also note that
patients can still call the old practice numbers if they so wish.


What's the problem?    Surely this is OK?   You can carry on using the old number if you prefer.    I wish my surgery would offer the same facility -- that is all I ask.

Have you tested to make sure the old numbers still work?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Tanllan on Sep 7th, 2007 at 10:05pm
If it is centrex then all the facilities are there, 084 is being greedy.
But retaining the 01xxx is also good if confusing; why not just use normal, non revenue share number?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 7th, 2007 at 11:36pm

Tanllan wrote on Sep 7th, 2007 at 10:05pm:
If it is centrex then all the facilities are there, 084 is being greedy.
But retaining the 01xxx is also good if confusing; why not just use normal, non revenue share number?

Could one could assume that private patients (those who pay the doctor by calling the 0844 number) are given priority bookings!
Is this what is meant by NHS Choices - better services for those who choose to pay more?

Alternative numbers may help to build pressure to get premium rate numbers removed in the commercial sector, but - no, Loddon (#331) - some of us ask for more. No NHS patient should be penalised for their failure to discover a cheaper geographic alternative to the published 0844 number. Neither should other patients benefit from this additional improper contribution to the running costs of the surgery.

I hope, and believe, that I am not alone in fighting to defend the principles of the NHS for the sake of all, not simply seeking to protect my own position or attacking just one of a number of companies responsible for misleading doctors - [url]see http://www.davidhowarth.org.uk/?page=239&group=2[/url]

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Sep 7th, 2007 at 11:48pm
http://www.blackburncitizen.co.uk/display.var.1673932.0.row_over_health_centre_phone_lines.php

Row over health centre phone lines
By Pete Magill

<<
HEALTH chiefs have been condemned for putting wealth before health' in a row over phone systems at a number of East Lancashire medical centres.

Patients at medical centres in Padiham, Burnley Wood and Clayton-le-Moors must dial an 0844 number to make appointments or order a repeat prescription.

The lines are thought to be four pence more per minute than a BT landline - and mobile phone users face call charges of up to 35 pence per minute.

NHS bosses say the system is more efficient though - as it can provide a number of phone lines via a single number and costs the same to call from anywhere in the UK.

All three centres come under East Lancashire Primary Care NHS Trust. None in Blackburn and Darwen are believed to operate the system.

"People have been complaining about this in Padiham and I think it is a bit of a disgrace," said Granville Lord, a former councillor and mayor of Padiham.

"This is all about accessibility and availability. If people can receive health advice over the phone or pick up a prescription, rather than making an appointment, then that is what most health centres tend to want these days.

"It is sad in this day and age that surgeries are putting wealth before health. If the system is not broken then why fix it?"

A spokesman from East Lancashire PCT said : "The 0844 numbers have been suggested to use by the Department of Health to assist in accessing GPs, given that the patient can ring anywhere in the country and it would still be a local call rate.

"In trying to streamline the GP practice answering service and to cut down waiting times on phone calls, the health centre turned to a new digital system that could give various options to patients when they phoned in.

"This has speeded up the service considerably, by reducing the time spent on the phone for patients, and helping to cut down on long and frustrating engaged' waiting times before a patient gets through, particularly at busy times.

"The evidence indicates that the majority of people use landlines to contact their GP and the number of patients affected because they are using a mobile is small.

"It is worth noting that the move to an efficient telephone system is anticipated to reduce the connection time for people making an appointment and of the few who use a mobile, fewer still will spend less than a minute on the phone."

The 0844 prefix has also been adopted by a number of surgeries in the Preston area.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Sep 8th, 2007 at 8:01am

loddon wrote on Sep 7th, 2007 at 6:42pm:

derrick wrote on Sep 7th, 2007 at 5:44pm:
Please also note that
patients can still call the old practice numbers if they so wish.


What's the problem?    Surely this is OK?   You can carry on using the old number if you prefer.    I wish my surgery would offer the same facility -- that is all I ask.

Have you tested to make sure the old numbers still work?



The problem is that the geo numbers are not published,(look at the letter from the practice, there is only the 0844 number on it, although the fax number is geo), and unless you know about the geo number you will not be able to use it, also we do not know if/when these numbers will be withdrawn and it is not just.

It is not just about my practice as we need to stop ALL practices using these covert revenue sharing.

I did use one of the geo numbers to call the practice and yes it is working, but for how long?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Sep 8th, 2007 at 1:04pm

derrick wrote on Sep 7th, 2007 at 5:44pm:
The call charges to the practice are that in line with the Telewest tariff for local call charges and are
4pence per minute which is the same as a BT network. The call charge could
be a maximum of 8pence per minute if being accessed via a mobile phone
network which again is line with BT charges.


Sorry - local call charges are 4ppm? Since when? Also, a maximum of 8ppm from a mobile phone?! According to my phone provider, O2, calls to 0844 numbers are charged at 20-25ppm. That is hardly 8ppm!! What planet is Mrs Powler living on?!?!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Sep 8th, 2007 at 2:10pm

jgxenite wrote on Sep 8th, 2007 at 1:04pm:

derrick wrote on Sep 7th, 2007 at 5:44pm:
The call charges to the practice are that in line with the Telewest tariff for local call charges and are
4pence per minute which is the same as a BT network. The call charge could
be a maximum of 8pence per minute if being accessed via a mobile phone
network which again is line with BT charges.


Sorry - local call charges are 4ppm? Since when? Also, a maximum of 8ppm from a mobile phone?! According to my phone provider, O2, calls to 0844 numbers are charged at 20-25ppm. That is hardly 8ppm!! What planet is Mrs Powler living on?!?!



I have explained this to her re my post above, #338, at the bottom.

p s her name is Fowler, not Powler , that is my OCR not working correctly and me not picking it up  ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Sep 8th, 2007 at 3:42pm
Is this a glitch in the campaign re 0844 being revenue sharing? or am I missing something?

From BTs page, http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/btbusinessProducts/displayProduct.do?productId=BTB-6716

Under the heading "COSTS"

"Revenue share          No revenue share with this number"

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Sep 8th, 2007 at 3:54pm

derrick wrote on Sep 8th, 2007 at 3:42pm:
Is this a glitch in the campaign re 0844 being revenue sharing? or am I missing something?

From BTs page, http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/btbusinessProducts/displayProduct.do?productId=BTB-6716

Under the heading "COSTS"

"Revenue share          No revenue share with this number"

It's up to the telco what revenue it pays.

For example, you doctor's surgery number starts 0844 472 which is a Telewest number. Let's assume that they get their 0844 number from ntl:Telewest. See this page which explains that subject to call volumes, revenue can be 'earned'.

Think about lower rate 0844s which are used for dial-up internet. They must generate enough revenue to pay for the service. They will also have high call volumes.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Sep 8th, 2007 at 4:12pm

Dave wrote on Sep 8th, 2007 at 3:54pm:

derrick wrote on Sep 8th, 2007 at 3:42pm:
Is this a glitch in the campaign re 0844 being revenue sharing? or am I missing something?

From BTs page, http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/btbusinessProducts/displayProduct.do?productId=BTB-6716

Under the heading "COSTS"

"Revenue share          No revenue share with this number"

It's up to the telco what revenue it pays.

For example, you doctor's surgery number starts 0844 472 which is a Telewest number. Let's assume that they get their 0844 number from ntl:Telewest. See this page which explains that subject to call volumes, revenue can be 'earned'.

Think about lower rate 0844s which are used for dial-up internet. They must generate enough revenue to pay for the service. They will also have high call volumes.



Yes I understand that, but why does BT say "No revenue share with this number"?

If I want to quote that page re the name for 0844 numbers being Contactcall, I might shoot myself in the foot because the organisation I am complaining to could just say, that page says "no revenue sharing with this number" and I can't get out of it!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Sep 8th, 2007 at 4:14pm

derrick wrote on Sep 8th, 2007 at 4:12pm:
Yes I understand that, but why does BT say "No revenue share with this number"?

Because, evidently, BT does not pay revenue on its 0844 numbers.


derrick wrote on Sep 8th, 2007 at 4:12pm:
If I want to quote that page re the name for 0844 numbers being Contactcall, I might shoot myself in the foot because the organisation I am complaining to could just say, that page says "no revenue sharing with this number" and I can't get out of it!

But "Contactcall" is its brand name for 0844 and not what they are defined as throughout the industry.

You have evidence that your doctor's number is a Telewest one, so you could quote the page I pointed to.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by irrelevant on Sep 8th, 2007 at 7:06pm
There are lots of providers of 0844 numbers, just because BT doesn't provide revenue from them doesn't mean the rest don't - BT have traditionally been viewed as the expensive people to get service from.



Not related to this, but handy for general argument, I was doing some digging and came across this file:
http://www.flextel.co.uk/ofcom/20051206_ngn_cost_comparison.pdf

It's a handy list of call costs to various NGN prefixes from each of the mobile operators - I didn't know the range was so huge.. (£1.20/min to call an 0800??)  

It's 18months old now unfotunately, but gives it's sources so a new one could be compiled.  (Just checked t-mobile site here- up to £2.50/min to call "other 08")

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 8th, 2007 at 10:43pm
We know that 0844 numbers in general are revenue sharing. That is the basis of the NEG proposition, as declared in its published marketing literature. It is also the basis for campaigning efforts to enforce prohibition of their use by those who may not receive remuneration from callers - e.g. NHS GPs. It has been accepted by a GP who charges fees to patients who are constituents of the Home Secretary.

I am happy to campaign on that basis and will continue to do so.

There are doubtless many quirks and exceptional situations. If someone has clear evidence that seriously undermines the general understanding, then this must be brought forward. The evidence could be challenged, or we may have to give up campaigning on this basis. If there is simply some doubt, then it may be better to resolve this in private, rather than by questioning the basis of campaigning efforts in this public forum.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Sep 9th, 2007 at 9:08am

loddon wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 1:48pm:

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 9:08am:

loddon wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:54am:

simond001 wrote on Aug 30th, 2007 at 8:46am:
[quote author=NGMsGhost link=1160182005/270#280 date=1188130721

If this campaign is for the benefit of the patient, you also need to address the implications if the 0844 is repalced with a geo number.  Do you remove the system and revert to a single person answering the phones, with the time and cost implications of that (no auto appointment bookings, no out of hours forwarding, no automatic signingin at the surgery etc..) or do you keep the system and its benefits and fund it from another source?


Simond001, could you please explain why all these things cannot be done, when using the telephone swithboard and associated equipment which you supply, together with a geographic number???


Lodden, I dont supply this equiptment.


As you won't answer my question I will give you my understanding.    All these functions can equally well be performed when using a geographic number.   These functions are provided by the equipment and not the 0844 number.  

It is apparently one of the many falsehoods given by NEG when selling their systems to doctors that they need to use 0844 in order to get these functions.    This is not true.

What doctors should be doing is preparing a specification of their requirements and then inviting competitive tenders from suppliers and comparing compliance and price before selecting their supplier and equipment.    One of the requirements should be that call costs to patients are no greater than standard 01/02 charges.    How many are actually comparing competitive proposals before selecting NEGs solution?


Lodden, apologies but i dont read this post frequently.

The acronyms I have used are as fllows.
mcc Minimum call charge. The minimum cost that is charged by the calling parties telecom provider for a call regardless of duration (BT 3pence to 5pence, BT payphone 40pence etc.)

IVR/ICR Interactive Voice / Call Response.This is the software that allows calls to be answered, and then directed to the correct extension when the user either speaks, or pressesbuttons on their handset. (Allows calls to be answered automatically, reducing the number of telephone operators who frequently take a call, and pas it straight to a different extension).

IN Intelligent network. The hardware and software that is used by Telco's to direct the NGN call to a specific nuber, and then reroute if certain parameters are met (out of hours, no answer, call volume exceed capacity of surgery etc.)

You are correct that all of these facilities can be achieved using a Geographic number. It would be a simple procedure to use a Local STD number that terminates at the IN, and is then delivered to either a surgery or other number as per the individual requirements. This is not an inexpensive option however as every call is counted as two calls (one from BT - the Geo provider and another rom the Geo provider to the surgery).

As i have no working history with NEG, i cannot offer an answer to whether Surgeries get alternative proposals for the services.

If you require any furthers answers from me directly, please email me to advise as I do not wish to appear rude by not responding in a timely manner.

Best regards. Simond

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by irrelevant on Sep 9th, 2007 at 12:11pm

simond001 wrote on Sep 9th, 2007 at 9:08am:
The acronyms I have used are as fllows.
mcc Minimum call charge. The minimum cost that is charged by the calling parties telecom provider for a call regardless of duration (BT 3pence to 5pence, BT payphone 40pence etc.)

6pence on BT now, call setup charge, PLUS duration charge.  Unless the call is free under your package, in which case there's no charge.

Quote:
You are correct that all of these facilities can be achieved using a Geographic number. It would be a simple procedure to use a Local STD number that terminates at the IN, and is then delivered to either a surgery or other number as per the individual requirements. This is not an inexpensive option however as every call is counted as two calls (one from BT - the Geo provider and another rom the Geo provider to the surgery).

And how is this different to the NTS calls?  In any case, you don't need to count more than the initial call inwards - I can today get an 01/02 number in any area code I want, delivered to me via VOIP.  And I can send it on via VOIP to an IPphone or another digital PBX anywhere in the world for free (excepting bandwidth).  It's only if you have to drop back out to the PSTN that it's gong to cost, and you need little more than a DSL line of some form at the destination to avoid that one.   I was routing phone calls between business sites for free via their 512K/256K internet ADSL links six years ago; it's hardly rocket science.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by simond001 on Sep 9th, 2007 at 1:04pm
The ingress call (from caller to IN) would be on PSTN, not VoiP. This is due to BT charging a PSTN ingress charge to the nearest POP (Point of presence) for the carrier that hosts the NGN.
To deliver this on VoiP to the recipient surgery could easily be accomplished, but it would involve the cost of either an ADSL or SDSL (preferred) service. You would however still require an amount of PSTN lines in case of network fault, router failure or power failure.

To stop the "mine has never gone down" argument before it starts, the highest funded and world's largest VoiP provider had a single outtage that switched of telephony for 20million users for over 12 hours last month. This would not be acceptable in a surgery.

Although BT do carry calls from PSTN to VoiP internally using the CN21 service this has duplicity over PSTN, so an outtage would not affect service. It is a cost saving service for BT, not for their customers.  

This whole situation comes back to economics and service. Does the service justify the cost that is being charged, and is the correct person paying for the service.  



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Sep 10th, 2007 at 8:04pm
BBC Radio Gloucestershire are intending to broadcast a story/debate about doctors using 0844 numbers tomorrow morning, Tuesday 11th September just after 7 am.   A doctor is apparently lined up to put his side of the case and the BBC will no doubt be seeking views from other people.   The link to Radio Gloucestershire is : ----

http://www.bbc.co.uk/gloucestershire/  

On the righthand side of the home page is a button to use to listen to the broadcast live over the web.   No doubt those living in the area will be able to tune in on their receivers.

Of course, there is never any guarantee that such a feature will actually be broadcast due to editorial considerations, but we believe there is a very good chance that this item will make it on to the airwaves.

Good listening.

[edit]Discussion on this broadcast is here.[/edit]

~ Edited by Dave: Link to discussion thread added

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Sep 11th, 2007 at 12:40pm
http://www.lep.co.uk/news/MPs-join-attack-on-39ripoff39.3190277.jp

MPs join attack on 'rip-off' phonelines

<<
Lancashire's MPs have united in condemning public bodies over their use of 'rip-off' phonelines.
The MPs hit out after the Evening Post revealed that GP surgeries were using an 0844 number and public bodies such as Lancashire Constabulary and Lancashire Trading Standards were using an 0845 number.

Although not officially classed as premium rate, the new numbers are up to 4p a minute more expensive to call from standard BT landlines and can cost up to 35p a minute more using a mobile phone.

South Ribble Labour MP David Borrow said councils and the police need to consult with residents over the use of such phonelines.

And the controversial numbers should be scrapped if the public demands it.

He said: "They should be looking to the people they serve, because they are not private companies. They are spending tax payers' money and there should be a system in place to gauge public opinion on this issue.

"If people are not happy then this should be looked at again."

Nigel Evans, Tory MP for Ribble Valley, said: "Quite frankly they should be freephone numbers. People pay for the NHS through taxes and they are paying further for using those services."

Michael Jack, Tory MP for Fylde, added: "I think this practice should be stopped. It is another way of making money out of the unsuspecting public and the public should show their dissent."

Lindsay Hoyle, Labour MP for Chorley, said: "This is just another added burden people could do without. It is unacceptable."

Ben Wallace, MP for Lancaster and Wyre, said: "It is not good enough that we are paying above inflation hikes in council tax and our tax. It now seems they are ripping us off by the back door."

But Preston MP Mark Hendrick called for more competition in the sector which could drive prices down. He said: "With more and more public authorities using these numbers, it might be some of these companies could steal a march by offering such a package."

Gabby Nelson, Lancashire County Council's assistant director of customer access, said: "It is fairer to have one general contact number, as there are many different area codes across the 12 Lancashire districts."

Meanwhile, patients are angry after discovering they face extra charges for ringing up to make an appointment with their doctor.

The Lancashire Evening Post revealed that at least four GP surgeries in Preston have changed their 01772 area code number in favour of a more expensive 0844 prefix.

Now it has emerged that Longton Health Centre has also adopted the controversial telephone line system – prompting a meeting of Longton Parish Council and a letter of complaint to the practice.

Stewart McLoughlin, 60, who lives in Longton and is a patient at the practice, as well as a parish councillor, said: "When I received my itemised telephone bill, I was furious that every time I had called the surgery, the calls had lasted around five minutes and I had been charged while waiting to make an appointment.

"It is ridiculous as in the past, I would only be on the phone for about 30 seconds and would pay much less for the telephone call."

The practice says it does not make any money out of the system and that the new telephone system was brought in after patients complained about the inability to get through to the health centre on the telephone.

But Mr McLoughlin says the parish council are still unhappy and have written another letter.

He said: "It may just be pennies, but pennies make pounds and I object to the NHS making money out of me."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Sep 11th, 2007 at 7:39pm

Quote:
Gabby Nelson, Lancashire County Council's assistant director of customer access, said: "It is fairer to have one general contact number, as there are many different area codes across the 12 Lancashire districts."

Mr Nelson, if it is that important then you should use a 0300 number.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 12th, 2007 at 7:35am
The item regarding doctors surgeries was on the local news on the hour at 7am and there was then a short 5 minute item quoting various local residents followed by comments played on air from David, described as being "a one man national campaign against these numbers".:o :o :o

So David first you are something of a sceptic as to whether it is wrong to charge for calling doctors when the NHS charges for prescriptions or dental treatment but now you have become a national one man campaign against these numbers leaving the rest of us behind.  I wonder what happened to the rest of us involved in the multi man campaign against the numbers.  Are you perhaps getting confused with your own previous one campaign against Silent Calls?

Is this your usual modus operandi so that you try to obtain all the credit for such campaigning and do you have special contacts with the BBC from your professional role (whatever that is) that let you get straight on the program.  When I tried calling I had a job even getting past the switchboard and then Jules the producer of the program seemed distinctly frosty and disinterested in adding my comments for their 8am slot on the item.

I see I am once again not receiving update emails for new posts in this thread.  How did that happen?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 12th, 2007 at 8:15am
I was asked by a forum member to withdraw my previous comments complaining about David being represented on David Bristol as a one man campaign against the 0844 doctors numbers.

I don't think I can do that now as other comments from other members have followed in the other Radio Bristol thread but all I can say is that I now understand this to be the result of reporter error on the program not due to any attempt to mislead them by David.

I would therefore like to thank David for his efforts in getting the issue on air and apologise if I may wrongly have suggested that he may have tried to mislead BBC Radio Bristol when it is in fact the program's error.

Title: NEG Dentist Line
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 12th, 2007 at 2:21pm
I don't suppose many of you will have often visited the website www.networkeuropegroup.com but if you do as I have just done today you will find that NEG has just sired a new - child in the form of NEG DentistLine. :o :o :o [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Could it be that seeing the writing finally on the wall for their revenue sharing Surgery Line model, due to it breach of GP Contracts with the NHS, that they are now focusing their efforts on the dental industry the large majority of which is entirely privatised and with even the NHS part that isn't being in the habit of charging patients pretty enormous fees.

And with probably no equivalent of the terms restricting direct charging in the GP contract for NHS dentists (and with there not being many NHS dentists anyway) there is nothing that anyone will able to do in order to stop the relentless rollout of NEG Dentist Line.#

About the only hope that it may be stopped is that lethargic Ofcom will finally muster the energy to get off its big fat corporate ass and make some kind of regulations requiring full disclosure of all 0844 revenue sharing and/or that the bad publicity associated with NEG Surgeryline will be enough to scare off most dentists away from signing up with it.

What is the betting that NEG employ the same old tactics of lieing about their DentistLine numbers being local rate and providng the dentists surgeries with big signs saying Low Cost Call against the new 0844 number. ;) ::) :'(

Title: Re: NEG Dentist Line
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 12th, 2007 at 4:32pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 12th, 2007 at 2:21pm:
you will find that NEG has just sired a new - child in the form of NEG DentistLine.

Could it be that seeing the writing finally on the wall for their revenue sharing Surgery Line model, due to it breach of GP Contracts with the NHS, that they are now focusing their efforts on the dental industry

And with probably no equivalent of the terms restricting direct charging in the GP contract for NHS dentists (and with there not being many NHS dentists anyway) there is nothing that anyone will able to do

What is the betting that NEG employ the same old tactics of lieing about their DentistLine numbers being local rate


If, as is likely, this anlysis is correct, it is very disappointing. I had been hoping that NEG would now be gearing itself up to work even harder to promote the benefits of Surgery Line as these would stand up as value for money without it having to be funded "illegally". Retiring from the GP market in the current environment would not look good, it could even be seen as an admission of complicity in malpractice.

Those who believe that there could be dangers in dealing with this company have a duty to alert the body representing dentists in the UK. I believe that it should be for dentists to walk into this with their eyes more widely open than was the case with their GP colleagues. There is a lot of relevant evidence collected in association with this thread, I am sure that certain professional representative bodies would be keen to review it in the interests of their members.

Although there are charges for NHS dentistry, they are rigidly regulated and controlled and many people are exempt. I would expect that there are clear rules governing remuneration taken from NHS patients, so the situation may not be as different from the situation with GPs as one may fear. Once the DoH and PCTs start to get to grips with the contractual situation regarding doctors, it may be appropriate to offer them another similar challenge. It seems that the present challenge is proving very difficult for them to deal with as we still await a definitive comment from any PCT.


David

Title: Re: NEG Dentist Line
Post by pw4 on Sep 12th, 2007 at 5:41pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 12th, 2007 at 2:21pm:
And with probably no equivalent of the terms restricting direct charging in the GP contract for NHS dentists (and with there not being many NHS dentists anyway) there is nothing that anyone will able to do in order to stop the relentless rollout of NEG Dentist Line.

However, the ban on 09 and 0870 applies to GPs, NHS dentists, NHS opticians and GP out of hours service providers, so any future extension of it to 0844 and 0845 may do also.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Sep 12th, 2007 at 9:51pm
http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=231771&command=displayContent&sourceNode=231773&contentPK=18365969&folderPk=108571&pNodeId=231777

RINGING THE DOCTOR MAY COST YOU MORE

09:00 - 12 September 2007

<<
Family doctors are charging more for patients to call them up, but say it means they are getting a better service.Eleven out of 83 GP practices in Gloucestershire have signed up to the 0844 'lo call' rate numbers, which have come in for criticism from patients' groups.

The code replaces the usual dialling code, such as 01452, and gives patients an automated response to reach the department they need.

Peter Mannion, chairman of Gloucestershire Primary Care Trust's patient and public involvement in health forums, said: "We have had some, but not many, complaints.

"We have examined the problem at our forum meeting and we are awaiting a response from the PCT as to which surgeries in its area are using this system. If you are poorly, the last thing you want is to put money in the till."

But the representative body of county GPs, the Gloucestershire Local Medical Committee, said GPs were not making any money out of the system.

"The phone company pays the practice 1.2p a minute for incoming calls, to a maximum that equals the rent (for the line) received, so they can never make a profit out of it," said LMC lay secretary Mike Forster. "Doctors want to run efficient practices that do the best for patients."

He said the system had many advantages, and added: "Many (patients) complain in surveys that they don't like hanging on waiting for the phone to be answered or being caught in a traditional phone queuing system.

"You are through at once to the 0844 system and can get to the top of the queue if you have a medical emergency."

Dr Peter Fellows, of Severnbank Surgery, in Lydney, said: "There will always be complaints so we have to make it as efficient as possible.

"Most modern practices have a lot of departments, so it makes a lot of sense to be able to divert incoming calls immediately rather than do it through an operator. It also limits the costs and time we spend handling the calls."

He said on calls from a landline, the cost per minute was 4.9p to an 0844 number against 6.49p for the first minute and 3.95p after that to a BT line.

Dursley GP, Dr Tom Yerburgh, said: "We are not considering having the service. If it gave a better service, fine, but I don't know enough about it."

A Gloucestershire PCT spokesman said calls to 0844 were not premium rate lines as had been reported.

"In 2005, the independent telecommunications regulator, Ofcom, undertook a review of 0844 numbers and made no changes to the charging system.

"A number of GP practices in Gloucestershire have switched to the new system as they believe it offers an improved service."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Sep 13th, 2007 at 1:14pm
http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=23&storycode=4114493&c=2

GPs blame PCTs in phone row

<<
The GPC has sprung to the defence of GPs who have been criticised for using high-tariff phone lines, claiming practices are being encouraged to switch to more expensive systems by cash-strapped PCTs.

GPs have recently come under fire in the media for using 0845 and 0844 numbers, which critics claim lead to higher patient call charges.

But GPC chair Dr Laurence Buckman said PCTs have refused to supply practices with new telephone systems unless they switch, and claimed trusts were being offered free telephone exchange by telephone companies.

He said: ‘Some PCTs said ‘‘we’re really not interested in paying for these things anymore, we’d like to use this company because they’re offering a free system in return’’. It’s almost entirely to save PCTs money.’

He added: ‘I understand why practices did go with it if it was the only way of getting a new phone exchange, and PCTs were not going to support you unless you used this company.

‘I also understand why patients don’t like it, but to finger GPs are say they’re ripping people off is very unfair.’

The move provides further indication of the range of cost-cutting measures being employed by PCTs.

Despite projections of a near £1bn NHS surplus this financial year, PCTs across the country have embarked on major cost-cutting campaigns which have included telecoms.

Dr Buckman said that ‘lots of PCTs got on to this bandwagon’, adding that he had rejected an invitation from his PCT to switch lines in his own practice because ‘it didn’t seem to be a saving for patients’.

However, Dr Dennis Abadi, a GP in north London, said his practice installed an 0844 number after patient survey results showed no one could get through on the phone. He added: ‘We had 8,700 patients and one incoming line. It was a shocking service in terms of access.’

Dr Abadi said he approached his local PCT for a grant to implement a new system, but was told ‘no money was forthcoming’ which led his practice to approach telephone company NEG, which installed the system free of charge.


He admitted: ‘Part of this is offset by calls. It’s not quite cost neutral, but we’ve had no complaints in more than two years, and it has given us fantastic results for telephone access.’

Dr Simon Parkinson, secretary of Worcestershire LMC and a GP in Redditch, employs an 0844 number in his practice, and believed criticism of GPs was ‘unfair’. He said: ‘The LMC’s view is that there’s nothing wrong with this. People thought it was a worthwhile service for patients; they’ve not gone into it to make money.’

giacobucci@cmpmedica.com

Surgery phones row

• Controversy over surgery telephone costs surfaced this year as the media enjoyed a feeding frenzy over a series of alleged TV phone in scams.

• The allegation was that surgeries were ripping off their patients.

• Although numbers beginning in 0845 cost the caller around the same as local BT rates, callers to 0844 numbers can potentially pay a fixed call price of up to 5p per minute, with calls from mobiles as high as 25p a minute.

Have your say

Are you being pressed to switch lines?

pulse@cmpmedica.com
>>


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 13th, 2007 at 1:40pm

idb wrote on Sep 13th, 2007 at 1:14pm:
But GPC chair Dr Laurence Buckman said PCTs have refused to supply practices with new telephone systems unless they switch, and claimed trusts were being offered free telephone exchange by telephone companies.

He said: ‘Some PCTs said ‘‘we’re really not interested in paying for these things anymore, we’d like to use this company because they’re offering a free system in return’’. It’s almost entirely to save PCTs money.’

He added: ‘I understand why practices did go with it if it was the only way of getting a new phone exchange, and PCTs were not going to support you unless you used this company.

‘I also understand why patients don’t like it, but to finger GPs are say they’re ripping people off is very unfair.’

The move provides further indication of the range of cost-cutting measures being employed by PCTs.


So more New Labour Stealth Taxes and/or another example of the crazed thinking by misguided NHS senior management that hidden charges by the back door are acceptable.   Obviously though the trade body representing GPs could have come out publicly against it but has failed to do so.  They seem more interested in bumping up their own salaries than protecting their patients. :o

No wonder we have NHS Direct, Patientline and Surgeryline.  Its consistent with a universal view by NHS Directors that hidden charges on patients through phone calls are acceptable. >:( >:( >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif] [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Sep 17th, 2007 at 4:46pm
I have received a reply from Louise Fowler,(Ashton Health Centre),in response to my email to her last week where I quoted,(and supplied the link to),  Lord Warners Letter.


This is what I sent:-

The following is Lord Warner's letter advising PCT chief executives that Ofcom, as a result of its latest consultation, has decided to create a new country-wide number range  

And can be viewed here:- http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Lettersandcirculars/Dearcolleagueletters/DH_064287

As you can see it is dated nearly 9 months ago, although the original letter from the DoH was written 11th April 2005,29 months ago!!!  I suggest you take note of it!

This is her reply:-

Thanks for the mail - this option was discussed at length with Telewest on Wednesday and they are persuing this option for us although acknowledging that we need to retain the same level of functionality. I am also meeting with BT to see what options they have next week.

Will keep you informed of progress.

Louise







Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 17th, 2007 at 6:23pm

derrick wrote on Sep 17th, 2007 at 4:46pm:
Thanks for the mail - this option was discussed at length with Telewest on Wednesday and they are persuing this option for us although acknowledging that we need to retain the same level of functionality. I am also meeting with BT to see what options they have next week


If the contract is with Telewest the penalties for breaking it are probably less horrendous than with NEG and also Telewest are more susceptible to being embarassed by adverse publicity on this issue.  Whereas NEG being a hardened bunch of unashamed scammers will just keep shouting their lies about 0844 being local rate or low cost call until lethargic Ofcom finally gets off its big fat overpaid corporate ass and finally makes it illegal to make such claims about 0844 numbers.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 17th, 2007 at 11:44pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 17th, 2007 at 6:23pm:

derrick wrote on Sep 17th, 2007 at 4:46pm:
… this option was discussed at length with Telewest on Wednesday … I am also meeting with BT …

If the contract is with Telewest the penalties for breaking it are probably less horrendous than with NEG … … lies about 0844 being local rate or low cost call until lethargic Ofcom finally … makes it illegal to make such claims about 0844 numbers.


It is good to see a positive approach being taken by this surgery. It could become a model for the many other surgeries who (we hope) will have to go through a similar process. I hope that all alternative providers will be alerted to the sizeable business opportunity that they may have.


Recent incomplete research that identified 498 GP numbers advertised on the NHS website has been extended to confirm that 469 of these are in ranges allocated to Opal Telecom Limited (part of the Carphone Warehouse Group) - 0844: 477, 499, 815 and 844.

The relevant Ofcom publication classifies these as "Special Services basic rate" - the proper (meaningless) term to be used in place of those used to deliberately misrepresent the likely and potential cost to callers.


We may reasonably assume that NEG is an agent of Opal (or something equivalent). Whilst the precise terms of any such arrangement are commercially confidential, it would be interesting to know if either party is prepared to be open about the general nature of the relationship.

Charles Dunstone may like to tell us how much money he is making out of doctors and their patients. This doubtless helped him to pay the paltry fine imposed earlier this year for making Silent Calls. (This connection is totally coincidental so far as I am concerned.)


Whilst only parliament may make law, Ofcom has introduced regulatory constraints covering the way in which telecommunications services are marketed by providers and their agents. These supplement general statutory provisions. There is no reason why Ofcom could not investigate any provider found to be breaching these regulations and take appropriate enforcement action. Ofcom would however normally only be driven to investigate following complaints from the consumers involved (i.e. the doctors).


Members may wish to look into the specific Ofcom regulations that may been breached. It would also be interesting to see a table of the call charges imposed by various providers for the ranges of numbers listed above.

A list of the mobile networks that allow them to be part of inclusive packages would be of particular interest. ;)

It would be good to know if someone could come forward with a better deal for NHS GPs who want to offer improved telephone services to patients without having to set aside the essential principles of the NHS. The subject of this thread explicitly invites such an offer from NEG.

David

P.S. Winking smiley added to indicate irony.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 17th, 2007 at 11:51pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 17th, 2007 at 11:44pm:
Members may wish to look into the specific Ofcom regulations that may been breached. It would also be interesting to see a table of the call charges imposed by various providers for the ranges of numbers listed above.

A list of the mobile networks that allow them to be part of inclusive packages would be of particular interest.


No mobile operator includes 0844 numbers in their bundled minutes packages full stop.

Ditto no inclusive minutes landline packages include 0844 numbers in the deal either.

Title: Media: Premium wait
Post by Dave on Sep 18th, 2007 at 11:29am
Source: Yorkshire Evening Post
Published: 31 August 2007


Quote:
Premium wait

By Mark Hookham
Polticial Editor

THOUSANDS of Wakefield patients will have to pay more to speak to their family doctor.

At least eight GP surgeries have abandoned area code numbers for 0844 numbers. They are up to 4p a minute more expensive to call from a standard BT landline and can cost up to 35p a minute on a mobile.

The surgeries have ignored the advice of Wakefield Primary Care Trust in switching.

Local health bosses are now coming under increased pressure from the government to ensure that patients do not have to pay higher telephone charges.

Around 1,200 practices across the country have switched to "0844" numbers.

Rather than paying the 3p a minute local rate at peak times and 1p a minute off-peak from a standard BT landline, callers to an 0844 number pay a flat fee of 5p a minute.

Nearly all mobile phone and landline operators exclude 0844 numbers from free minutes available with fixed-price contracts. Mobile operators charge contract and pay-as-you-go customers between 15p and 35p per minute to call the prefix at all times.


There are fears that pensioners and others with chronic illness or disability who have to contact their surgery regularly will run up higher bills.

Doctors contacted by the YEP refused to discuss the move, but one of the largest suppliers of 0844 phone lines, Network Europe Group, said that the service allows patients to wait in a queue or leave messages instead of simply receiving an engaged tone.
The 0844 numbers ease congestion and cost patients less overall because they do not spend as long on the phone, the spokesman said.

At last, a report that states call costs correctly and doesn't imply "local rate"! I'll overlook the fact that it is claimed that it is claimed to be 1p/min off-peak.

How exactly can the system "cost patients less overall"? Less than what? Less than getting the engaged tone and redialling???!!!

If you are in a queue, you are paying for it. With the call rate being higher than with a 01/02 number, then the total call cost must be more.

The article goes on to say:

Quote:
"The 0844 is not a premium-rate number and whilst we are able to advise GPs, they are independent contractors, and it is down to them to decide what is in their patients' best interests."

But it is not acceptable because GPs are charging patients!

Another similar story from nearby Horsforth from YEP's sister paper here.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Sep 18th, 2007 at 11:34am

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 17th, 2007 at 6:23pm:
If the contract is with Telewest the penalties for breaking it are probably less horrendous than with NEG and also Telewest are more susceptible to being embarassed by adverse publicity on this issue.  Whereas NEG being a hardened bunch of unashamed scammers will just keep shouting their lies about 0844 being local rate or low cost call until lethargic Ofcom finally gets off its big fat overpaid corporate ass and finally makes it illegal to make such claims about 0844 numbers.

But don't forget that if they have been mislead re the cost of these calls, they could have redress under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 (part III) misleading price indications

Under the Consumer Protection Act 1987, it is an offence to give misleading price
indications to consumers, and the maximum penalty is an unlimited fine.  Liability
can extend to the business which provided the number, if they gave incorrect pricing
information to the advertiser.

In addition, where Special Services have been marketed to businesses in a
misleading way, the business customer may be entitled to cancel the contract and to
claim compensation (which could include the cost of re-printing business stationery).

Title: Article in British Medical Journal
Post by Dave on Sep 18th, 2007 at 12:12pm
Source: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/335/7619/534-a
Published: 15 September 2007


Quote:
GPs and patients clash over use of premium rate phone lines

Adrian O'Dowd

Margate

GPs in the United Kingdom are being urged to consider dropping the use of 0844 phone numbers for their practices, which campaigners say force patients to pay a premium rate for the calls.

Doctors' leaders, however, have hit back at the accusations, saying that GPs are not making a profit from the lines and that they have improved patients' access.

Concerns are growing about the extra costs to patients who contact practices that have switched their surgery phone numbers from local geographical codes to the 0844 code. These codes are more expensive, say patients' groups and the "Say No to 0870" website (http://saynoto870.com), which campaigns against the use of premium rate codes such as 0870, 0844, and 0845. The website has begun a petition to prevent the use of such numbers by general practices and out of hours GP services.



Responses to this article can be found here.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Sep 18th, 2007 at 1:03pm
Source: Craven Herald
Published: Monday 5th February 2007


Quote:
Wharfe MP warns of GP practices using costly phone lines

SOME GP practices are forcing the most vulnerable people to fork out for expensive phone calls to make appointments to see their doctors, MPs have been told.

Shipley MP Philip Davies - whose constituency includes Burley-in-Wharfedale, Baildon and Menston - told the Commons almost a dozen practices covered by Bradford and Airedale Primary Care Trust were using an 0844 telephone number in their practices.

According to British Telecom, prices for calls to the line can range from 4p to 10p per minute - higher than the price of a regular local telephone call.

Mr Davies asked the Government to make a statement over the use of 0844, 0845 and 0870 numbers after he was told of constituents' concerns.

Responding, Commons Leader Jack Straw said: "I am aware that those numbers are charged at a slightly higher rate, depending on which precise exchange number is used."

He also said he would be speaking to Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt about the concerns.

[…]

A spokesman for Bradford and Airedale Teaching PCT said: "It is a matter for individual GP practices to decide what phone numbers to use. However, we would always encourage them to act in the best interests of their patients and we are not aware of any practice in the district using any of the banned high cost numbers.

[…]


Full details of Philip Davies MP's statement in the Commons is available on his website here.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Sep 25th, 2007 at 10:40am
Further response from Louise Fowler,(Ashton Health Centre);-

Dear Mr

Thank you for your continued communication regarding the practice telephone system.

I can confirm that we have met with Telewest our current supplier and discussed with them the issues you have raised in your letter. Telewest are pursuing on our behalf other alternatives to our current telephone system however they appreciate that we need to retain the same functionality as the existing system due to the size and complexity of the organisation. The Health Care Manager for Telewest has been made aware of the concerns and is also pursuing them within the organisation especially with regards to the political stance. We are expecting feedback from her in the next couple of weeks with an option appraisal.

In addition we have met with BT and discussed with them our needs, the gentleman we met with was not a specialist in the health care sector and therefore has referred our requirements to another colleague; we are awaiting dates for a further meeting with him.

As you can see we have taken on board your complaints and are actively looking at alternative options.

I will of course keep you updated of progress.

Kind regards

Louise Fowler

Practice Manager


Am I being naive here ? is it not just a case of supplying the underlying 01 number?




Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by ultra1984 on Sep 26th, 2007 at 5:33pm
Hi NGMsGHOST.

I know it's a bit late but I have only just seen the PM you sent me about the article in the Telegraph and contacting them.  I cannot PM you as I haven't done 5 posting,  Thanks anyway I would have been interested in talking to him.  It cost me £5 that month I contacted the surgery but they never offered me the money back.  Yes you were right I was upset.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 26th, 2007 at 8:09pm
There is a way to have the forum alert you automatically by email if you get a PM by changing the setting in your Member Profile to get the forum to do this.  Unfortunately it is turned off by default whereas in my view it should be turned on by default and only turned off if the member if they do not want the feature.  A way to overcome the restriction on sending PMs if you don't have 5 posts is to make another 4 posts though.  However the last time I checked I thought you had to have 30 posts to send a PM but may be they lowered the number required.

As to the newspaper article its a shame you weren't available at the time as the guy at The Times was very keen to cover real people who had exprienced the doctors surgery overcharge issue.

I hope you have signed the 10 Downing Street website petition against these numbers at:-

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/NGN-use-by-GPs/

Now in Position number 18 by size with 9,486 signatures.

loddon was the main forum member here organising the contact with The Times journalist.  Perhaps he can think of another angle to let the journalist cover the story again and give your case a mention.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by ultra1984 on Sep 26th, 2007 at 8:31pm
 I have fillled it in but have not had an E-mail come through to comfim. I don't know why.  Not doing very well am I. LOL    ;D

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by ultra1984 on Sep 26th, 2007 at 8:44pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 26th, 2007 at 8:09pm:
There is a way to have the forum alert you automatically by email if you get a PM by changing the setting in your Member Profile to get the forum to do this.  Unfortunately it is turned off by default  . . . .

Yes I forgot to set it to e-mail me to let me know!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 26th, 2007 at 9:19pm
I always get the emails back and I have signed up to about 60 different petitions on the site. :o

However it has been known for some nanny state ISPs like AOL, TalkTalk etc to filter out the 10 Downing Street confirmation messages as Spam.  Or may be you have a Spam filtering program on your PC that is doing this.

Try setting all spam filters to off and signing up again and you may perhaps then get the confirmation email.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 2nd, 2007 at 12:30pm
Received the following this morning;-

Thank you for this email which I received this morning, I have not received in previously.

I can confirm we are now actively pursuing the "03" telephone number option, I will of course keep you updated of the programme.

Kind regards

Louise Fowler

Practice Manager


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Oct 4th, 2007 at 1:30am
http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=231771&command=displayContent&sourceNode=231775&contentPK=18568259&folderPk=109317&pNodeId=231889

PATIENT'S FURY AT 'CASH CON' SURGERY CALLS

00:30 - 04 October 2007

<<
Three doctors' surgeries in the Forest use premium rate 0844 telephone numbers which cost callers at least 5p per minute.If patients contact these numbers using a mobile - and many people only have a mobile - they have to pay at least £1.77 - an extortionate amount - for a five-minute call.

Businessman Clive Dunning who lives with his wife Sue in Rodley, is incensed at the use of these premium rate telephone numbers everywhere.

"The government and health services use them and most people don't realise what it costs to ring," he said.



"It is nothing but a con and it costs even more because of the automated responses you have to go through, which rack up the time.

"Services and businesses try to persuade us that it's only the same as a local call, but many people with a landline or a mobile get free calls.

"We all have to pay to use these premium numbers.

"I warned my business suppliers we would no longer use them unless they gave me a landline for contact. They soon come up with one!

"It is dishonest for anyone to use these numbers without clear information as to the cost."

Three surgeries in the Forest use 0844 numbers which cost 5p a minute from a landline and 30p from mobiles - Forest Healthcare in Cinderford, Severnbank Surgery in Lydney and The Health Centre in Coleford.

When The Forester finally got through to the receptionist at Severnbank, which took two minutes of messages and musak, practice manager Carolyn Thomas said the system and number had been introduced to make diverting out of hours calls simpler.

But she did not realise that inward calls from mobiles cost so much.

"The government was keen for us to get an automated system," she said, "and to get that, we had to have a premium number. The truth

"I have checked with our suppliers (NEG????!!) and they say it is possible to include specific 0844 numbers in free calls but people have to ask their provider. LIES, LIES, LIES!

"We have only had an odd complaint about the cost but we will look at it. I had no idea that it could cost so much."

A call to Forest Healthcare in Cinderford was much longer, taking five minutes to get through, only to find that the practice manager was too busy to talk to us.

And Bridget Docking, practice manager at Coleford, refused to discuss the subject. That's UK democracy for you!
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Oct 4th, 2007 at 11:06am

Quote:
"I have checked with our suppliers (NEG????!!) and they say it is possible to include specific 0844 numbers in free calls but people have to ask their provider. LIES, LIES, LIES!

Of course it's possible for them to be included by telcos......they would be making a loss though. They would be making a loss to pay the surgeries (to pay for their phone systems). The money doesn't come out of thin air. Is Ms Thomas really fit to be a practice manager?


Quote:
"We have only had an odd complaint about the cost but we will look at it. I had no idea that it could cost so much."

Ms Thomas, did you do any research?  ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Oct 6th, 2007 at 11:29pm
Information on Surgery Line is on NEG's website here. The graphic says that there are "1,140 solutions implemented and counting", "Serving over 6.2 milliom patients".

And there's a 3 minute video here. I expect that this will form a DVD presentation that the salespeople will take to surgeries.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Oct 8th, 2007 at 1:56pm
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/Anger-over-GPs39-phone-call.3306056.jp

Anger over GPs' phone call charges

<<
GP surgeries which changed phone numbers to make money on patients' calls are "disgraceful" according to a former Mayor of Northampton.
Some surgeries in Northampton, including Abington Park Surgery and King Edward Road Surgery, switched their numbers from a Northampton dialling code to numbers with an 0844 prefix in July.

The numbers are more expensive to callers than regular numbers, with the total price of each call divided between BT and the surgeries.

Former borough councillor John Rawlings, who was a member of several medical committees, said the price mattered less than the principle of surgeries providing services for free.

He said: "I find it quite disgraceful that any surgery should charge us, as patients, to call them. I and most people would see the telephone as purely and simply a method of communication, not a service that we should expect to pay a doctor's surgery. It's like being charged by the surgery to send them a letter – it is not on.

"The practice might say the costs go into the surgery but I don't see that as a justification. It is the NHS – all parts of seeing your GP ought to be free, but for patients in Abington they have no choice but to pay."

Both surgeries in the Christchurch Medical Centre, which serve about 22,000 residents, brought in the new numbers with a new phone system called Surgery Line, which uses call automation and additional phone lines to tackle call congestion.

A spokesman for the phone system said: "Unless they stay on the phone for more than four minutes, it costs the same amount as the old number."

Justin Pearce, practice manager of the King Edward Road surgery, acknowledged the new phone system was "by no means perfect" but said features like recording technology would ensure it lasted well into the future.

He said: "We felt we needed this updated phone system and it needed to be paid for in some way."

Abington Park surgery was unavailable for comment.
Last Updated: 08 October 2007 9:10 AM
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Oct 9th, 2007 at 6:17pm

idb wrote on Oct 8th, 2007 at 1:56pm:
A spokesman for the phone system said: "Unless they stay on the phone for more than four minutes, it costs the same amount as the old number."
Who is this spokesperson because he/she really needs maths lessons!


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Oct 11th, 2007 at 11:16pm
The EDM, posted elsewhere, now has 41 signatures. Does your MP know about this? If not, let him/her know!

1989 COST OF CALLING DOCTORS' SURGERIES 24:7:07
Mrs Sharon Hodgson
Bob Spink
Andrew George
Bob Russell
Mr Andrew Dismore
Stephen Williams
* 41
Mrs Janet Dean Mr Stephen Hepburn David Simpson
That this House strongly deplores the practice of doctors' surgeries setting up more expensive telephone numbers with an 0844 prefix, which are up to four pence a minute more expensive to call from a standard BT landline, through which patients have to book appointments, although the telephone watchdog Ofcom is rightly critical of the idea; believes that this unfairly penalises the less well off; and urges the greater use of geographical telephone numbers for such purposes.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Oct 17th, 2007 at 12:35am
http://www.pickering-beacon.co.uk/autumn_pages/a14.htm

<<
Pickering Surgery gets new Telephone Number
0844 815 1130 - From September 2007

Pickering Medical Practice is replacing its telephone system. A new number will be introduced 0844 815 1130 for all calls to the surgery.

       Practice Manager John Fletcher said “our telephone equipment is now quite old and at times has become overwhelmed by call volumes; we need to replace it urgently.  We have had problems with calls being lost in the system, answering machines switching on when they are not supposed to and difficulties with transferring to and from our out of hours service. We conducted a trial last year of automating calls through the building pressing various keys to reach departments in an effort to reduce some of the problems. This trial worked well, with much reduced waiting times to get through to our operators. However, our equipment continued to cause problems, only 4 calls can be handled at a time on our general number; and ultimately we were unable to use the automated set up without replacing the system. This was set to cost between £12,000 and £15,000, which left us with a difficult decision; either replace the phone system and have no money to spend on equipment, or continue to have patients grumbling about calls problems.

       That’s when we heard about NEG who offer brand new state of the art digital systems that manage up to 1000 calls at any one time but are paid for by using the 0844, lo-call scheme. This scheme returns part of the call cost to us which we use to pay for the new system.  This means calls get answered faster, no one gets an engaged tone and has to redial. The new system also links to patient records so that when you ring us it automatically presents the receptionist with your medical record, further increasing speed and accuracy. It also means that in the future we will be able to offer other services such as automated appointments via your phone even when we are closed!

       The only down side will be the current bad press that 08, numbers have had. Much of this is overdone, calls are charged outside call package schemes, if you are on an ordinary BT scheme then there is no difference to the call cost.

       Average call costs to the surgery will be less that 10p which includes the standard BT connection charge at 5p and if your call is being dealt with quickly and efficiently then this would seem a small price to pay; at the same time you will be helping the surgery to use its money for equipment that will in turn help provide patient care.

       The change is scheduled to take place on 17th September; engineers will be replacing the equipment on the Saturday and Sunday 15th & 16th. From the 17th you will need to dial our new numbers 0844 815 1130, for all services and appointments including Thornton Dale. Our Fax will change to, 0844 815 1129.

       If you dial any of our current numbers after that date you will be asked to redial. Once you dial the new number you will be connected to a menu offering 6 choices, 1, for emergencies, 2 for appointments, 3 prescriptions, 4 Health Visitors, 5 District Nurses, 6 for Test Results.

       Remember by using these options you will be quickly put through to the department you need taking pressure from our switchboard and allowing them to deal with any urgent and emergency calls”.  

       NB.. If you are calling from abroad the local scheme doesn’t operate and you will need to dial 00 44 870 111 45 41.

John Fletcher Msc, Practice Manager. Master of scams perhaps?
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda  0844
Post by bazzerfewi on Oct 17th, 2007 at 8:17am
I am not a techi and as such I do not fully understand the workings of all the telecom gadgetry, but as far as I understand it the 08 numbers are used to enable the telecoms system to route calls to the next available operator if they are in a different geographical location.

I used to have an 0845 number for that reason as I had offices in both Barnsley and Hull and a call was routed if busy or not answered.

Why do doctors surgeries need this facility as all calls are answered in the same location so surely call divert and call routing is not needed.

If I recall Feature Line offers all the required services within the same location and only requires the one 01/02 number.

Can somebody clarify this as technology changes all the time.


Baz

Title: Re: NEG propaganda  0844
Post by Heinz on Oct 17th, 2007 at 9:20am

bazzerfewi wrote on Oct 17th, 2007 at 8:17am:
I am not a techi and as such I do not fully understand the workings of all the telecom gadgetry, but as far as I understand it the 08 numbers are used to enable the telecoms system to route calls to the next available operator if they are in a different geographical location.

Why do doctors surgeries need this facility as all calls are answered in the same location so surely call divert and call routing is not needed.

One word answer - MONEY!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Oct 17th, 2007 at 1:26pm
If the 0844 number doesn't work then the 0870 number probably won't either - sigh!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Oct 21st, 2007 at 12:10am
http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/MP-calls-for-0844-numbers.3398033.jp

MP calls for 0844 numbers review

<<
TO BE put on hold a bit longer, press one; to get a bit more irritated, press two; to be put through to another long menu, press three . . . does this sound familiar?
Following complaints from city residents that doctors’ surgeries are using 0844 numbers, MP for north West Cambridge-shire Shailesh Vara is calling for a review of the practice.

Mr Vara has written to the telecommunications regulator OFCOM, Peterborough Primary Care Trust (PCT) and the Department of Health calling for them to reassess the decision to allow practices to use the code.

Some GPs say they made the switch to improve efficiency. However, the new numbers cost extra to call, especially from mobile phones, and some people have difficulty getting through.

Mr Vara said: “A few extra pence here and there may not sound a lot, but it adds up over time, especially for pensioners and those on benefits. As well as the extra cost, there is the added inconvenience.

“I have written to OFCOM, the PCT and to the Secretary of State for Health, urging them to intervene in the interests of patients.

Numbers which begin with the digits 0844 are charged at 5p a minute – a higher rate than regular local numbers. And, if from a mobile phone, the call can cost up to 40p a minute.

Mr Vara says that, in trying to improve efficiency and introducing a system to stop people having to call back if they get an engaged tone, patients are now finding that they have to queue in order to book an appointment, which adds to the cost.

Stanground resident John Foster is backing Mr Vara’s call. The former telephone system engineer, who has installed similar systems in businesses across the country, said introducing 0844 numbers in the surgeries was a bad move.

Speaking earlier this year, he said: “Most of the time there is a 5p connection charge, which covers the cost of the call. But if you wait for 30 seconds for the options and then spend 31 seconds talking, that is just over a minute which means you get charged for two minutes – for a 31-second conversation.”

Mr Vara said the responses received from Peterborough PCT and from the Department of Health both indicated that the issue was being kept under review.

He added: “I hope that it will lead to a sensible outcome in the near future.”
Last Updated: 19 October 2007 3:23 PM
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 21st, 2007 at 3:00pm

idb wrote on Oct 21st, 2007 at 12:10am:
Mr Vara said the responses received from Peterborough PCT and from the Department of Health both indicated that the issue was being kept under review.


And just what does that mean?

My PCT,(Central Lancashire), has been "looking into it" since the DoH letter of April 2005, and certainly from Lord Warners letter of December 2006, how long does it take these people to get off their backside and actually do something instead of "looking into it" or "being kept under review"? while the patients continue to get ripped off!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Oct 21st, 2007 at 3:11pm

derrick wrote on Oct 21st, 2007 at 3:00pm:

idb wrote on Oct 21st, 2007 at 12:10am:
Mr Vara said the responses received from Peterborough PCT and from the Department of Health both indicated that the issue was being kept under review.


And just what does that mean?

My PCT,(Central Lancashire), has been "looking into it" since the DoH letter of April 2005, and certainly from Lord Warners letter of December 2006, how long does it take these people to get off their backside and actually do something instead of "looking into it" or "being kept under review"? while the patients continue to get ripped off!



Actually, "looking into it" & "being kept under review", means, 'go away and leave me alone, I have better things to do with my time and don't really give  a damn about your problem.'  ::)


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 21st, 2007 at 4:59pm

sherbert wrote on Oct 21st, 2007 at 3:11pm:
Actually, "looking into it" & "being kept under review", means, 'go away and leave me alone, I have better things to do with my time and don't really give  a damn about your problem.'  ::)


Exactly what I told the woman I spoke to at my PCT on Friday, of course she said "no it doesn't",   ;D

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 24th, 2007 at 1:25pm
I have just received another email from my practice manager and it seems that they are just using stalling practices;-

I have received an update this morning from the Patient Services Manager who has advised me that as yet there is no further information from BT although she has been chasing the gentleman who came to see the practice for progress. Our health care manager from Telewest has advised us that "03" numbers will be available but as yet she cannot give us a timescale or a cost for the change however she has indicated that it may be early 2008 before these numbers are available. I have asked the Patient Services Manager to continue communications on a fortnightly basis to progress this. In addition to all these discussions we will await formal feedback and direction from the Department of Health regarding these 0844 numbers.

I will endeavor to update you on progress as and when it occurs however I cannot guarantee you a resolution in the near future.

Louise Fowler

Practice Manager


As far as I know, 03 numbers are available now, could some point me in the direction of a link I can provide to prove this, or do you think that it is Telewest who are dragging their heels?




Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:04pm
Is this any help?

http://www.ttnc.co.uk/numbers/03-numbers.do?gclid=CLeJu-_Lp48CFSasGgodPUq5Sg

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:12pm

sherbert wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:04pm:
Is this any help?

http://www.ttnc.co.uk/numbers/03-numbers.do?gclid=CLeJu-_Lp48CFSasGgodPUq5Sg



Not really,( they are with Telewest and I don't think they want to change, although I will include the link), I was looking for something maybe from Ofcom stating they are in use and available.

Thanks

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:22pm
What about this then?

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/news/2007/02/nr_20070213b

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:23pm

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:12pm:
Not really,( they are with Telewest and I don't think they want to change, although I will include the link), I was looking for something maybe from Ofcom stating they are in use and available.

It is not a simple case of saying "yes 03 numbers are in service".

Now that there are different providers, they must negotiate with one another what they pay (between each other) for these calls. This will obviously have a bearing on how much the 03 NGN provider will charge the receiving party.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:30pm

Dave wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:23pm:

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:12pm:
Not really,( they are with Telewest and I don't think they want to change, although I will include the link), I was looking for something maybe from Ofcom stating they are in use and available.

It is not a simple case of saying "yes 03 numbers are in service".

Now that there are different providers, they must negotiate with one another what they pay (between each other) for these calls. This will obviously have a bearing on how much the 03 NGN provider will charge the receiving party.



Yes but don't I remember Ofcom having a page somewhere saying they are now in service? As my practice just seem to be stonewalling.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:41pm

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:30pm:
Yes but don't I remember Ofcom having a page somewhere saying they are now in service? As my practice just seem to be stonewalling.

"In service" and "available" (for allocation) are different things.

They can only become "in service" when they have been allocated. And to call an NGN on one telco from different telco requires there to be an arrangement between the two. This doesn't just happen; it is a commercial agreement.

For example, if you call your surgery's Telewest NGN from your BT line, your call will go along BT's network and be passed to Telewest's. It's reasonable to assume that BT will have to pay Telewest for this.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:46pm

Dave wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:41pm:

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:30pm:
Yes but don't I remember Ofcom having a page somewhere saying they are now in service? As my practice just seem to be stonewalling.

"In service" and "available" (for allocation) are different things.

They can only become "in service" when they have been allocated. And to call an NGN on one telco from different telco requires there to be an arrangement between the two. This doesn't just happen; it is a commercial agreement.

For example, if you call your surgery's Telewest NGN from your BT line, your call will go along BT's network and be passed to Telewest's. It's reasonable to assume that BT will have to pay Telewest for this.





So what happened to Ofcoms " 03 numbers will cost the same as 01/02 numbers and be included in call packages including mobiles" ? I have paraphrased, as I can't find the page,(hence why I am asking for a link)!

Also is that what happens now if I use the 01 number?(it is still working), surely it is still going form BT to Telewset.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:49pm

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:46pm:
So what happened to Ofcoms " 03 numbers will cost the same as 01/02 numbers and be included in call packages including mobiles" ? I have paraphrased, as I can't find the page,(hence why I am asking for a link)!

Nothing, that will still apply.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:56pm

Dave wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:49pm:

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:46pm:
So what happened to Ofcoms " 03 numbers will cost the same as 01/02 numbers and be included in call packages including mobiles" ? I have paraphrased, as I can't find the page,(hence why I am asking for a link)!

Nothing, that will still apply.



But something must be different if there is a charge between providers re the 03 numbers, as per my edit to my last post;-

"Also is that what happens now if I use the 01 number?(it is still working), surely it is still going form BT to Telewset."

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Oct 24th, 2007 at 3:04pm

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:56pm:
But something must be different if there is a charge between providers re the 03 numbers, as per my edit to my last post;-

"Also is that what happens now if I use the 01 number?(it is still working), surely it is still going form BT to Telewset."

I would have thought the these charges between the telcos (known as "terminating charges") would, in reality, be the same as those for 01/02 numbers. If they are higher, then we will probably see 01/02 rates going up to compensate.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 24th, 2007 at 3:11pm

Dave wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 3:04pm:

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:56pm:
But something must be different if there is a charge between providers re the 03 numbers, as per my edit to my last post;-

"Also is that what happens now if I use the 01 number?(it is still working), surely it is still going form BT to Telewset."

I would have thought the these charges between the telcos (known as "terminating charges") would, in reality, be the same as those for 01/02 numbers. If they are higher, then we will probably see 01/02 rates going up to compensate.



OK, so can you direct me to an Ofcom page that mentions the availability/in service re 03 numbers?

I know there is something but can't find it.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Oct 24th, 2007 at 3:21pm

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 3:11pm:
OK, so can you direct me to an Ofcom page that mentions the availability/in service re 03 numbers?

I believe that the link that Sherbert has provided in reply #390 is to the page which you are thinking of.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 24th, 2007 at 3:42pm

Dave wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 3:21pm:

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 3:11pm:
OK, so can you direct me to an Ofcom page that mentions the availability/in service re 03 numbers?

I believe that the link that Sherbert has provided in reply #390 is to the page which you are thinking of.


Yes I think that is the one, I had completely missed that post.

Thanks sherbet

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 24th, 2007 at 3:44pm

sherbert wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:22pm:
What about this then?

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/news/2007/02/nr_20070213b


Thanks sherbet, that is the one, as I said in my post above, I missed your post completely  ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Oct 24th, 2007 at 4:01pm

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 2:12pm:
… they are with Telewest … I was looking for something maybe from Ofcom stating they are in use and available.

According to the latest information from Ofcom, Telewest has applied for and been allocated blocks of 03 numbers in both the 030 range reserved for those such as GPs and also in the general use 034 range -

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi/numbers/numbers_administered/s3.xls



derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 1:25pm:
“… In addition to all these discussions we will await formal feedback and direction from the Department of Health regarding these 0844 numbers.... Louise Fowler  Practice Manager”

I have yet to find anyone able to provide evidence to support the frequently repeated allegation that the Department of Health is undertaking a further review of this issue and intends to issue specific directions regarding use of revenue sharing 0844 numbers. If anyone has clear evidence of such activity, the details would be of great interest.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 24th, 2007 at 4:47pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 4:01pm:
According to the latest information from Ofcom, Telewest has applied for and been allocated blocks of 03 numbers in both the 030 range reserved for those such as GPs and also in the general use 034 range -

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi/numbers/numbers_administered/s3.xls


Another reply from her;-

Thank you for your notification however we have been advised that by Telewest that it will be early 2008 before they are available for the public sector. However we have today tried to contact our Health Care Manager from Telewest for a more detailed timescale. In addition our Patient Services Manager has been contacted today by another telecommunications provider who may be able to offer 03 numbers around Christmas time however there services and options need to be reviewed in full.

I note your comment your comment regarding the 01772 telephone numbers however in order to comply with our NHS contract patients should have to make no more than 1 telephone call to reach emergency out of hour services, the 0844 number does where our 01772 numbers do not.

I understand your concerns about the surgery numbers, we are actively looking at alternatives however this may take some time to facilitate.

Louise Fowler


But she side steps the questions I keep asking her, and what is this about, "contract patients should have to make no more than 1 telephone call to reach emergency out of hour services, the 0844 number does where our 01772 numbers do not. "  

I mean come on, 01 numbers can be diverted!


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Oct 24th, 2007 at 5:04pm
This just goes to show they have not got a clue what they are talking about. They are just being hoodwinked. Do you reckon she is supplying information to you that her provider is furnishing her with?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Oct 24th, 2007 at 5:12pm

sherbert wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 5:04pm:
This just goes to show they have not got a clue what they are talking about. They are just being hoodwinked. Do you reckon she is supplying information to you that her provider is furnishing her with?



I would not be surprised, I just keep resubmitting my questions and asking others relating to her responses, I think eventually she will just stop replying, lets face it they are just civil servants at the end of the day, and they really don't give a t**s bout their paymasters, i.e. the taxpayers.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Oct 24th, 2007 at 6:26pm

derrick wrote on Oct 24th, 2007 at 4:47pm:
“… in order to comply with our NHS contract …”

I would not want to be too hard on Ms Fowler, who is doing more than many in her position would. She may however need to be reminded that to comply with its GMS contract with the PCT a practice may not accept remuneration from patients, including “through any other person”.

This must preclude accepting money obtained from patients calling revenue sharing telephone numbers, no matter how it is spent.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Oct 26th, 2007 at 12:36pm
http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/mostpopular.var.1787561.mostviewed.cost_of_being_sick_is_rising.php

Cost of being sick is rising
By Stephanie Tye

<<
A DOCTOR'S surgery has come under attack for introducing a more expensive telephone number.

Coun Justin Tomlinson (Con, Abbey Meads) said he was horrified at the move by Abbey Meads Medical Centre.

He said he has been in touch with a number of residents who have complained they now pay more when they call to book appointments.

The surgery, in the village centre, uses an 0844 number, rather than a local number.

"I have been contacted by a number of residents regarding this issue," said Coun Tomlinson.

"I am horrified at this financial penalty being forced on those who wish to use the local NHS service.

"All too often additional stealth taxes and charges are creeping into a service which we already fund through ever-increasing taxes."

James Bickerstaffe, who has been a patient at the surgery since 1999, said people were not told of the change of telephone number.

"It has been the 0844 number for a while now, but I only found out about it when I rang to book an appointment and was told to ring the new telephone number," said the 32-year-old, of Abbey Meads.

"I hadn't thought much about it, until I had to call and make an appointment on October 3 and was kept on the phone for a long time."

The civil servant was calling from his mobile phone, so he contacted the billing company to find out how much he had been charged.

According to BT, calls to an 0844 number cost up to 5p a minute for their own customers, but can vary for mobiles and other operators.

And Mr Bickerstaffe said he was shocked when the mobile phone company told him the call, which had lasted about six minutes, cost £1.36.

"I think it is disgraceful that it costs so much to book a doctors' appointment," he said.

"There are other people like me who are at work so need to use their mobiles to book appointments and it is costing a lot. I just don't understand why they changed it to this non-geographical number.

"It is supposed to be a local service so why is it not a local number.

"And why were we not told that the number was changing and that we would be charged more?"

Currently three out of the 29 doctor practices in Swindon use 0844 numbers.

A spokeswoman for Swindon Primary Care Trust said that surgeries using an 0844 number can offer many service benefits to patients through the installation of an advanced telephone system.

"GP practices can choose which telephone system to install," she said.

"But all are aware that they are prohibited from using premium rate numbers, including 087 numbers, by the Department of Health."

Despite several attempts to contact the Abbey Meads Medical Practice, no one was available to comment.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Oct 27th, 2007 at 6:06pm
There are 9 comments on this article currently posted on the Swindon Advertiser website and every one is critical of this doctors practice.   Some are extremely critical : ---

Posted by: MS, Swindon on 8:40am Fri 26 Oct 07
"A spokeswoman for Swindon Primary Care Trust said that surgeries using an 0844 number can offer many service benefits to patients through the installation of an advanced telephone system."       Are we really expected to believe that the number holds any bearing to the system at the other end of it? The 0844 number will route down to a local 01793 number anyway. Just another case of a service we already pay for trying to rip us off even more.

Posted by: ronnie43cats, swindon on 8:51am Fri 26 Oct 07
I am sure months ago when I was advised of this new number the change was made out to be for the better of us patients and the way it was put forward to me was it was a low cost number and was going to cost less. At the time I did wonder how this was possible with a 0844 number but who am I to question...as it is I always have difficulty getting hold of this surgery, half the time they never answer the phones, I know this is not the receptionists fault as have seen for myself how stressed it is first thing with the phones going but maybe they should offer an answerphone service seeing as the this is supposed to be, and lets quote 'an advanced telephone system.' If it is for a general appointment and the time required is not specific I would have thought phoning people back with an appointment fairly easy. Or sorry is this as they will have to bear the brunt cost wise of that phonecall? We get moaned at for not advising we cannot make an appointment but half the problem is you cannot get through in time to tell them you cannot make it and cancel. For me there have been no advancing changes in the way calls are handled since the move to this number. For example you still only have one hour in the day in which to call for text results, remembering to call between these hours is bad enough without the added pain of being at work at that time.

Posted by: Grumpy, Swindon on 9:09am Fri 26 Oct 07
My doctors surgery has also introduced the 0844 number, so say to improve services to patients. Do I believe them - no I do not! It's just another scam to generate more income. Doctors are getting to be a little grubby lately with their overwhelming desire to work less and less for more and more money.
My doctors surgery has also introduced the 0844 number, so say to improve services to patients. Do I believe them - no I do not! It's just another scam to generate more income. Doctors are getting to be a little grubby lately with their overwhelming desire to work less and less for more and more money.

Posted by: trend, swindon on 9:16am Fri 26 Oct 07
"A spokeswoman for Swindon Primary Care Trust said that surgeries using an 0844 number can offer many service benefits to patients through the installation of an advanced telephone system."    What a load of rubbish, our surgery has a normal 01793 number that has an advanced telephone system. This is just another money making scheme.

Posted by: Bri, Swindon on 10:45am Fri 26 Oct 07
What about those with hearing impairment using a relay service and it will cost a bomb just to make an appointment or contact GP. Something SHOULD be done to the PCT to make them aware.

Posted by: Justin Tomlinson, Taw Hill, Swindon on 10:56am Fri 26 Oct 07
Another thing that has annoyed the people who have contacted me is how often they are 'put on hold' or 'held in a queue' racking up the bill.

Posted by: Big Mac on 11:26am Fri 26 Oct 07
And people still think the NHS is 'free'.
You really couldn't make it up. The NHS is a massive money pit that needs completely overhauling, or, preferably, scrapping completely.
It's a 60 year old social experiment that has failed. Why can't we just accept that and use the BILLIONS they steal from us to fund it to build a national health service that actually offers a decent level of health care.
Until we stop clinging on to this notion of the NHS as some wonderful entity, it'll never improve.

Posted by: Voice of Sanity, Haydon End on 12:45pm Fri 26 Oct 07
As someone has already commented, you do not need an 0844 number to offer advanced telephony systems. This is purely a way to increase revenue for the surgery.
We are on on a monthly payment scheme with BT whereby we £20 (ish) a month to BT to cover all of our calls with the exception of mobiles and non-standard codes ie 0844 etc). I am sure there are many more like us who will be paying over the odds to book an appointment with a doctor - something which has already been paid within our taxes!

Posted by: CK, Swindon on 1:38am today
"Despite several attempts to contact the Abbey Meads Medical Practice, no one was available to comment."
Now that's a surprise.
Having had dealings with this particular surgery in the past, I found them to be rude, arrogant, incompetent at best, downright dangerous at worst and now I can add GREEDY to that.
Thankfully I'm no longer with that practice.

Abbey Meads Medical Centre and Swindon PCT should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 2nd, 2007 at 12:37am
A media report that I missed, but may be significant:

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=132935&command=displayContent&sourceNode=132702&contentPK=18686471&folderPk=77465&pNodeId=132393

HEALTH BOSSES PLAN TO AXE COSTLY CALLS TO GP SURGERIES

BY CATHY BUSS

10:30 - 16 October 2007

<<
Health bosses today announced plans to axe expensive call charges to GP surgeries.

They say they want doctors to phase out the use of 0844 numbers which leave patients hanging on the line, clocking up premium-rate charges.

Controversy has been growing over the use of the numbers used by about a third of the city's GP practices.

Campaigners argue that patients should not be having to pay over the odds to get an appointment to see their doctor.

More than 30 people have contacted the Leicester Mercury to highlight problems they have suffered with the "0844" telephone system.

Kathleen Martin, from Whetstone, said she had spent more than £2.50 on 22 calls trying to get through to her doctor's Blaby practice.

Another patient, who did not want to be named, said he was furious at the charges trying to get through to the Merridale Medical Centre.

He said: "It is inconvenient and expensive to be kept in a queue waiting for an answer.

"At least under the old system, when it was engaged, you could put the phone down and ring back later."

Now, Leicester City Primary Care Trust (PCT) is looking at ways the surgeries can replace the numbers.

A total of 20 of the city's 63 GP practices are under contract to use 0844 numbers, which bosses want changed so patients only pay local call charges.

Work is under way to find out how much it will cost to redeem contracts early.

New systems will also be researched, along with options available offering free or local call charges.

Tim Rideout, PCT chief executive, said: "This is a complicated issue.

"But we will work with doctors to ensure no-one pays more to call their doctor's surgery than they would if they were calling any other local number."

The move has been welcomed by the PCT's patient watchdog - the patient and public involvement forum.

Stephanie Donovan, co-chairman of the forum, said: "It is good the PCT is looking at this."

Sir Peter Soulsby and Keith Vaz, Labour MPs for Leicester South and Leicester East respectively, said they were delighted at the move.

Mr Vaz said: "I fully support this. The NHS is a free service and it is wrong for anyone to be worrying about the cost of a call."

Sir Peter said: "It is quite right these numbers should be phased out."

But Gill Law, practice manager at the Maples Surgery, in Evington Road, said: "I don't mind this being looked at, but we have had very few complaints from patients.

"The number enables us to direct calls to the right person to deal with the patient inquiries."

Zuffar Haq, chairman of Leicester Patients Group, said: "Any new contracts with GPs should include a clause banning the use of any number that is above the local call rate.

"It is totally unfair for patients to be paying 10p a minute or more for calls to make appointments."

A spokesman for Leicestershire County and Rutland Primary Care Trust said it could not tell GPs to change telephone numbers, but said: "We are working to make sure the most equitable and easy access possible."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 2nd, 2007 at 1:14am

idb wrote on Nov 2nd, 2007 at 12:37am:
A media report that I missed, but may be significant:


And an earlier report from the same newspaper:

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=132384&command=displayContent&sourceNode=232710&home=yes&more_nodeId1=132393&contentPK=18666472

<<
'22 CALLS AND £2.50 COST TO GET TO SEE GP'

BY JENNY OUSBEY

10:30 - 15 October 2007

A woman called her doctor's surgery 22 times and spent more than £2.50 just trying to make an appointment with her GP, it emerged today.

Kathleen Martin called her medical practice in Blaby repeatedly and was mostly forced to wait in a phone queue before she got through to reception.

Mrs Martin is one of about 30 patients to have expressed their frustration at the expense and inconvenience of 0844 numbers after a Mercury story on September 21.

Many GP surgeries have switched to 0844 numbers in the past few years.

Last month, Jeffrey Kaufman, Mayor of Oadby and Wigston, urged doctors to ditch the lines, saying they cost more than standard rate calls and were inconvenient.

Harborough MP Edward Garnier has also said GPs should be accessible through an ordinary-rate phone number.

Some patients told the Mercury it was quicker to drive to surgeries to fix appointments.

Mrs Martin, of Warwick Road, Whetstone, is with The Northfield Surgery, Blaby.

Other complaints have been received about surgeries in Oadby and Clarendon Park, Leicester.

She said: "It took me 22 calls over a couple of weeks to get through to my surgery.

"I only wanted to book two appointments. Sixteen times I didn't even get in the queue, but it cost me 9.5p each time.

"The other six times I was put in a queue and the call cost ranged from 26p to 14p a time.

"When the line is engaged, you are still paying, which wouldn't have happened with the old number."

Clare Deare, practice manager at The Central surgery, in Brooksby Drive, Oadby, said: "We feel this system offers a better service because patients no longer receive as many engaged tones."

A spokesman for Clarendon Park Medical Centre said: "Due to circumstances beyond our control, there were technical issues with the telephone system.

"We have been in discussions with the company and are awaiting a letter of apology addressed to our patients.

"It is disappointing that a small group of patients have felt the need to highlight their concerns through the Mercury, as the practice welcomes discussion with patients in respect of the service we provide."

Mrs Martin is awaiting a response from her surgery.

A Leicestershire and Rutland Primary Care Trust (PCT) spokesman said: "Some practices use an 08 number because it allows them to provide a more equitable telephone service.

"Instead of patients getting an engaged tone and having to re-dial, calls can be answered in the order received and routed to different departments, instead of all calls being received at one reception point."
>>

See reader comments at

http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=132384&command=displayContent&sourceNode=232710&home=yes&more_nodeId1=132393&contentPK=18666472#views

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Barbara on Nov 2nd, 2007 at 9:37am
This "not many of our patients have complained" stance really irritates me, it is like the companies who, when making unpopular changes say "but our customers tell us..." - has anyone ever been asked anything by a company and had that company listen to their reply???   I suspect there are two reasons why GP practices may not receive large numbers of complaints:
1)   Surgeries don't seem to bother to tell patients about the change, it is only discovered when a patient needs to call the surgery hence they are either understandably too preoccupied with their health problem or the complaints are received over an extended period of time as patients become aware of the change.

2)   This second may be even more of an issue, that patients are scared to criticise their doctors or surgeries for fear of being punished with, for example, being removed from their GP's list or receiving inferior treatment (I know that shouldn't happen but could anyone say it never does?)   There is still an enormous reluctance, particularly among older people, to question ANYTHING a GP or doctor says or does (as my elderly father said last year when summoned for an unecessary test "you can't ask the doctors questions!")

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Nov 2nd, 2007 at 9:56am

Barbara wrote on Nov 2nd, 2007 at 9:37am:
This "not many of our patients have complained" stance really irritates me, it is like the companies who, when making unpopular changes say "but our customers tell us..." - has anyone ever been asked anything by a company and had that company listen to their reply???   I suspect there are two reasons why GP practices may not receive large numbers of complaints:
1)   Surgeries don't seem to bother to tell patients about the change, it is only discovered when a patient needs to call the surgery hence they are either understandably too preoccupied with their health problem or the complaints are received over an extended period of time as patients become aware of the change.

2)   This second may be even more of an issue, that patients are scared to criticise their doctors or surgeries for fear of being punished with, for example, being removed from their GP's list or receiving inferior treatment (I know that shouldn't happen but could anyone say it never does?)   There is still an enormous reluctance, particularly among older people, to question ANYTHING a GP or doctor says or does (as my elderly father said last year when summoned for an unecessary test "you can't ask the doctors questions!")


That last paragraph is very true. It is my understanding that a doctor can 'strike you off' and does not have to give you a reason. They earn huge amounts of money from being a GP plus all the private work they do. If you go and see them with a problem, usually, when it gets abit difficult for them they refer you to someone else.

Why don't they just be honest with their patients and admit that this new telephone sysytem is nothing other than to earn them even more money. >:(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 6th, 2007 at 12:52am
http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/mostpopular.var.1808117.mostviewed.patients_to_have_say_on_0844_numbers.php

Patients to have say on 0844 numbers
By James Connell

<<
PATIENTS are being given the chance to say whether they want their surgery to cancel its 0844 telephone number.

Debbie Weston, practice manager at Ombersley Medical Centre, has taken the step of allowing patients to decide whether or not they keep the 0844 telephone number.

The centre even released a newsletter, letting people know they could register their views.

So far only three people out of the 4,070 patients on the books have been recorded as saying they want the number changed back to an ordinary local rate number.

The centre charges calls at 5p per minute - one pence more expensive than the local rate.

Patients have until the end of November to make their feelings known.

She said: "It's a much better service as it is and the telephone system stops people having to wait. There are no queues. I think people realise that to charge one pence extra per minute is not that bad. Our telephone service is much more efficient now. We have been corresponding with the PCT and they have more or less agreed that we're not charging excessively."

Mike Foster MP who wrote to health Secretary Alan Johnson in August urging him to ban all 0844 numbers admitted he had not yet had a reply.

He said: "I haven't heard back from him yet. I know that the debate has now kicked off across the country. I will ring my office now to get them to chase up the reply."

A spokesman for Worcestershire Primary Care Trust said: "The situation is that as independent contractors the GP surgeries determine the type of telephone systems they have in their surgery. We will, as far as the future is concerned, recommend that they don't employ 0844 numbers. However, it may not be particularly easy for them to disengage themselves from certain contracts."

Eleven surgeries across Worcestershire use 0844 numbers, including St John's House Surgery, Bromyard Road St John's, Worcester.

One of the telephone system's fiercest critics is amputee Sue Davis from St John's who has used the St John's House Surgery for 35 years and has appeared on BBC Breakfast to state her case.

She said: "I think the bad publicity may stop a number of GPs from adopting 0844 numbers. People will realise there's a general feeling in the country against doctors charging people for phoning them. The National Health Service is supposed to be free at the point of delivery. If you're ill and you have to pay for that call, then it's not."


9:32am Monday 5th November 2007

>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Nov 7th, 2007 at 1:21pm
I am now being threatened with legal action for harassment etc, something that I have not done, I have only requested that they act to stop this abuse of patients, but I appear to have hit a nerve!

This letter was received today,6 days after it is dated and 2 days after the postmark;-

1 November 2007

Dear Mr ******

Your Complaint in respect of GP's use of 0844 numbers.

In respect of the above I would like to make the following points;

In the course of the last three months, our complaints department together with other staff members have received at least seven emails and numerous telephone calls from you about this matter, which they have treated seriously and investigated thoroughly. These members of staff have treated you courteously and endeavoured to keep you fully informed.

To reiterate here, what you have been told previously, remains the PCT position at this time,

1)      General Practitioners are independent contractors and responsible for making their
own telephone arrangements.

2)      The Guidance and advice circulated  on this matter by Lord Warner and the
Department of Health, has been brought to the attention of GP's by the PCT,
however as it is guidance only, there are no sanctions available to   the PCT to
ensure that it is followed by our contractors.

3)      The PCT has taken steps to address this matter with its contractors through the
Local Medical Committee, bringing to the Committee's attention the official guidance
on the subject.

4)      The PCT has asked for further guidance from the Department of Health, on this
matter and is awaiting an official response.

5)      The PCT has also sought legal advice, and is satisfied that it has discharged its
responsibilities at this time.

The Trust has done all it can at this time to address the issues you have raised, should circumstances change in light of further guidance from the Department of Health we will undertake to write to you to keep you informed. If you still feel that the issue is unresolved you are entitled to follow the appeals procedure and either ask the Healthcare Commission to conduct an independent review or contact the Independent Complaints Advocacy Service (see contact details and explanatory notes at the end of this correspondence). You are therefore advised that until further Department of Health guidance is issued in respect of this matter the PCT has nothing further to add and will not engage in any future correspondence in respect of this issue.

Whilst I appreciate that you feel strongly about this matter and feel you are acting in the interest of your fellow service users, I must point out that the way in which you have undertaken your campaign has caused distress to Trust staff in particular Christine Martin and Carol Hannon, who feel they have been subject to aggression, intimidation and harassment through both your written and verbal communications. I must ask you to therefore to desist from contacting the PCT or its staff in relation to this matter. Failure to do so will be considered by this organisation as a continued course of harassment which could result in the Trust taking one of the following actions:

•      The matter will be reported to the police with a view to this health body supporting a
criminal prosecution by the Crown Prosecution Service.

•      The matter will  be reported to the NHS Security Management Service Legal
Protection Unit with a view to this health body supporting criminal or civil proceedings
or other sanctions. Any legal costs incurred will be sought from yourself.

•      Consideration will be given to obtaining a civil injunction in the appropriate terms.
Any legal costs incurred will be sought from yourself.

Behaviour such as this is unacceptable and will not be tolerated. This Trust is firmly of the view that all those who work in or provide services to the NHS have the right to work in safety and to do so without fear of intimidation, abuse or violence. It is sincerely hoped that such action will not be necessary.

A copy of this letter is attached. Please sign the second copy and return it to me to indicate that you have read and understood the above warning and agree not to act in a threatening, abusive or intimidating way to NHS employees or staff employed in the provision of Primary Care services in Central Lancashire.

If you do not reply within 14 days I shall assume tacit agreement.

Yours sincerely


Mark Wilkinson
Chief Executive


Explanatory notes re appeals

You have the right to ask the healthcare commission for an independent review of your case. This should be done within six months of the date of this letter. The Healthcare Commission is an independent body established to promote improvements in healthcare through the assessment of the performance of those who provide services. You can contact the healthcare commission on telephone number 020 7448 9200, or write to healthcare commission, FREEPOST NAT 18958, Complaints Investigation Team, Manchester, M1 9XZ.

Website:      www.healthcarecommission.org.uk

E-mail:      complaints@healthcarecommission.org.uk

Alternatively, The Independent Complaints Advocacy Service (ICAS) will be able to advise you. The Telephone number for ICAS is 01772 994065


I have never threatened or harassed or intimidated any one at the PCT!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Nov 7th, 2007 at 1:49pm
Derrick,

This is quite blatant intimidation of the sort we would more expect a scammer like NEG to use.

You need to go to the Health Care Commission on this and to your MP for backup.  There is no justification for the attitude of this body when it is they who are acting outrageously in failing to protect the public and forcing you to take them to task on it.  Unfortunately there are always one or two CEOs who think they are God and this guy is clearly one of them.

I suspect a local journalist would even be interested in covering this threat letter.

There is no way they will follow through on these threats (the Police threat is just a joke).  It is just old fashioned scare tactics and virtually tantamount to a form of blackmail to stop you pursuing your legitimate complaint.

I note he requires you to sign up in 14 days but if you don't sign then takes it as agreement to the conditions anyway.  This man is a dictator of the worst sort.  Write back and formally state that you do not agree to any of his conditions (send an email ther is no signature he can misuse anywhere) and will be complaining to your MP and the Health Care Commission about his letter and this blatant attempt to intimidate you out of pursuing your legitimate complaint.  I must say this form of reaction is very typical indeed of those involved in the UK medical profession who have always had a distinctly disturbing tendence to behave in an authoritarian fashion

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Nov 7th, 2007 at 2:29pm
...and I would suggest you send a similar letter back telling them not to send you threatning letters which I would have thought to  be illeagal.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Nov 7th, 2007 at 3:37pm

sherbert wrote on Nov 7th, 2007 at 2:29pm:
...and I would suggest you send a similar letter back telling them not to send you threatning letters which I would have thought to  be illeagal.


Getting one's MP to write to this guy in those terms would probably be even more effective though.

Even those old fashioned psychopaths who still get to the top of some organisations are usually afraid of and grovel to the power of an MP to put them on the spot and ask Parliamentary questions about them.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Barbara on Nov 8th, 2007 at 3:46pm
Poor Derrick, I think that is absolutely dreadful.  It is an awful feeling to be wrongly accused and threatened in such a way.   I didn't think a PCT could act like that (although am I really surprised after the practice manager at our surgery threatened to remove our epileptic son from the list because I complained to the PCT about the surgery reducing prescribing intervals to 28 days!)   It is about time these people remembered who pays their wages and it IS us through taxation.   Good luck with fighting this, don't be discouraged or intimidated, I'm sure we're all behind you.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Nov 8th, 2007 at 3:47pm
I have to say if I had received that letter from Mark Wilkinson I would have been very upset indeed. You only have to review Derrick's posts to see he is a model of moderation!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 10th, 2007 at 1:39pm
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2007/11/10/fury-over-40p-a-minute-calls-to-docs-surgery-89520-20089126/

<<
Fury over 40p-a-minute calls to Docs' surgery

By Bob Roberts Political Editor 10/11/2007

Patients are being forced to use rip off phone numbers to call their GPs' surgeries.

They can pay up to 40p a minute to make an appointment, get test results or repeat prescriptions at 1,200 doctors' practices in England and Wales. Government guidelines say GPs should only charge a local call rate - 3.25p a minute at peak times with BT. But calls to the surgeries on 0844 numbers cost 40p a minute from a mobile and 5p from a landline, figures given to MPs show. They want Health Secretary Alan Johnson to step in.

Mp Graham Stuart said: "For many people calling their GP surgery can be stressful. They do not expect to be used as props for another money-making scheme."

The Health Department said it had reminded GPs of the guidance but cannot force them to stop.

What do you think? Get published at www.mirror.co.uk/forums

Bob.Roberts@Mirror.Co.Uk
>>


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Nov 10th, 2007 at 3:23pm

idb wrote on Nov 10th, 2007 at 1:39pm:
The Health Department said it had reminded GPs of the guidance but cannot force them to stop.


Why can't they force them to stop? They pay their 6 figure salaries from our taxes and there is no alternative but to see a doctor via the NHS,(unless you are mega rich and have a private doctor), so they have a sort of cartel. So much for the "free at point if use"

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Nov 10th, 2007 at 6:38pm

derrick wrote on Nov 10th, 2007 at 3:23pm:

idb wrote on Nov 10th, 2007 at 1:39pm:
The Health Department said it had reminded GPs of the guidance but cannot force them to stop.

Why can't they force them to stop? They pay their 6 figure salaries from our taxes and there is no alternative but to see a doctor via the NHS,(unless you are mega rich and have a private doctor), so they have a sort of cartel. So much for the "free at point if use"

The Department of Health (in negotiation) prepares the outline of the contract under which NHS GPs operate. This includes a clause that prohibits use of revenue sharing telephone numbers to access NHS treatment:


Quote:
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT, EITHER ITSELF OR THROUGH ANY OTHER PERSON, DEMAND OR ACCEPT FROM ANY PATIENT OF ITS A FEE OR OTHER REMUNERATION FOR ITS OWN OR ANOTHER'S BENEFIT

These contracts are in place between each doctor's practice and the local Primary Care Trust.

The government has thereby "stopped" use of these numbers - on paper. It has however failed to remind PCTs of their duty to enforce the contract and remind doctors of their legal obligation to comply.

The "guidance" makes no reference to the critical issue of revenue sharing.


Graham Stuart MP is a recent recruit to the cause. Let us wish him all good fortune with his EDM, his written questions and other parliamentary activities. MPs from the front- and back- benches of all parties are behind this point. Let us hope that Alan Johnson will shortly be tested on his commitment to the NHS being "free at the point of need".


The reference to "private doctors" is apt. Practices that use payments from patients to fund a higher standard of service are actually operating exactly as a private medical practice does.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Nov 10th, 2007 at 7:41pm

Quote:
THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT, EITHER ITSELF OR THROUGH ANY OTHER PERSON, DEMAND OR ACCEPT FROM ANY PATIENT OF ITS A FEE OR OTHER REMUNERATION FOR ITS OWN OR ANOTHER'S BENEFIT



Quote:
The "guidance" makes no reference to the critical issue of revenue sharing.


The 1st quote is from the doctors' contract.  I would place the emphasis on "benefit".

"Benefit" needn't be revenue share from the calls, it could also be the material benefit of getting a new phone system from NEG in exchange for agreeing to use an 0844 number.  The revenue would then be shared between NEG and BT.

It is unclear what contract types NEG have, and doctors' replies to enquiries did not clarify this either. Some claim not to receive any revenue share, others say they get a "small" share.  May be both types of contracts are being flogged by NEG, however, in either case the patient pays and the doctors get a "benefit" contrary to what is in their contract.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by DonQuixote on Nov 11th, 2007 at 1:14am

idb wrote on Nov 10th, 2007 at 1:39pm:
They can pay up to 40p a minute to make an appointment
So isn't it the mobiles again at 40p versus 5p from a fixed line?
0844 on fixed is just 1.75p too much, but the mobile charge over 35p more. Why?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Nov 11th, 2007 at 2:46am

DonQuixote wrote on Nov 11th, 2007 at 1:14am:
So isn't it the mobiles again at 40p versus 5p from a fixed line?
0844 on fixed is just 1.75p too much, but the mobile charge over 35p more. Why?

For those at home during the day, who are typically on an inclusive package for “normal” calls (e.g. BT Together option 3) the excess starts at 11p for a one minute call (including the call set-up charge). A five minute wait plus a two minute conversation brings this up to 41p “too much” for the call.

For those out during the day, who would tend to call from mobiles, the excess is even greater, as many of these have packages that include “normal” calls at no extra cost. Using the worst known tariff rate and the example given above, the excess is £2.80 less any value one puts on 7 minutes from a limited talk-time allowance (say zero).

41p is bad, but £2.80 is indeed much worse - it is right to ask why. It is also important to note that very little of this exceptional excess charge is actually passed on to the GP. This grab by the middleman further undermines one of the improperly offered justifications for the scam.


Exposing the illegality of revenue sharing by NHS contractors may be helpful in stopping this particular abuse.

The unwarranted excess charging by mobile operators on all non-geographic calls is another valid, but separate, issue that needs attention. If campaigning on the issue addressed by this topic can help draw attention to this also, then we may be lucky enough to wing one bird as we bring down the other. We do not want to aim for both at the same time and hit neither. If we can together be seen to have mastered the coordinated use of two barrels, then even better! There are however other nearby targets in mind for use of the second barrel.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Nov 12th, 2007 at 4:54pm

Barbara wrote on Nov 8th, 2007 at 3:46pm:
I didn't think a PCT could act like that (although am I really surprised after the practice manager at our surgery threatened to remove our epileptic son from the list because I complained to the PCT about the surgery reducing prescribing intervals to 28 days!)   It is about time these people remembered who pays their wages and it IS us through taxation.   Good luck with fighting this, don't be discouraged or intimidated, I'm sure we're all behind you.


In my experience The UK medical profession has long suffered from an appalling syndrome of control freakery, seeing their roles as being more like those of a strict and authoritarian old style schoolmaster than a customer oriented business delivering customers the services they actually require from the business.

We still see this now in the endless moralising by the medical profession over how overweight we are and how much we drink etc instead of focusing on encouraging their patients to do the right thing using the stick rather than the carrot. The UK GP service still seems wedded to the use of the mental stick despite the use of actuall corporal punishment for adults having been made illegal.

Also they continue to run media stories that suggest that UK population is moe unhealthy now than it has ever been but if this is true then who do average lifespans for males and females in the UK continue to rise year after year.

What they are actually after is a perfect world where no one is ill even though such a world would mean a need for far less GPs and so many GPs being redunandant.  Surely GPs ought to actually be grateful for how many sick patients there still are to keep them in their comfortable £100k per annum plus jobs? ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Nov 12th, 2007 at 4:56pm

DonQuixote wrote on Nov 11th, 2007 at 1:14am:
0844 on fixed is just 1.75p too much, but the mobile charge over 35p more. Why?


But on a Fixed Line Payphone its 13p per minute to 0844 vs 1p per minute to 01/02/03.  So the problem does not seem to be confined just to calls that use the mobile phone network.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Nov 14th, 2007 at 4:04pm
A report in PULSE tells of GPs under pressure to drop 0844 numbrers : ---

http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=23&storycode=4115808&c=1

The text is as follows : ---

GPs under pressure to drop 0844 surgery numbers
09 Nov 07

PCTs are moving to force GPs to ditch controversial 0844 phone numbers, after consumer lobbyists accused practices of profiting from patients calls.

Trusts in Worcester and North Somerset have already told GPs to drop 0844 numbers – although some GPs claim the service’s call queuing system has improved patient access.

And Leicester City PCT has ordered a review into use of 0844 numbers, despite claims from local GPs the trust itself had advised practices to use them.

Leicester and Rutland LMC said the PCT had been setting up meetings between GPs and the national provider Surgery Line NEG for more than a year.

Dr V.K Singh, chair of Leicester and Rutland LMC, said these practises were now stuck in seven-year contracts which would be very expensive to break. He said the LMC would press the PCT to fund that cost.

Dr Singh warned that while surgeries with short messages would be able to keep the 084 number, those that offer a larger number of services might be penalised because the length of their message was too long.

Lobbyists claim the number charges patients 10 times the cost of a normal call, although Surgery Line disputes this.


One of 13 practices in Worcester to have adopted the system has come under strong pressure to stop using it.

In September, the practice issued a newsletter asking patients if they wanted to scrap the number - only four out of 4,070 so far have said they wanted this to happen.

Practice manager Debbie Weston said the practice's 0844 number cost just 1p more than a local call, yet a 18 months after the surgery installed the system, Worcester PCT 'tried to extricate itself from it'.

Alistair Campbell, a researcher for Surgery Line, said GPs had asked for guidance following pressure from PCTs to justify their phone systems.

'It's legally impossible for GPs to make money from this. There's no cheque they receive at the end of the month. People have just been making figures up.'

A Department of Health spokesman said it had issued warnings to all PCTs last December asking them to stay away from 084 numbers. 'We do not expect GPs to break existing contracts, but they should not be entering new ones that would involve patients being charged more than a local call.'

What the service costs patients

-
- It costs patients 4.2p a minute pre VAT to ring an 0844 number from anywhere in the UK, whereas previously you would pay a national call charge, so you can call a doctor from anywhere at one standard price.
- It costs patients around 4.26p pre-VAT plus a 4p connection fee to ring a standard BT line. That cost reduces to 1.5p after 8pm – when surgeries are closed.
- After V.A.T both lines equal out to around 5p per minute.
- If patients use pay as you go mobiles the cost rises to up to 20p per minute, but contract customers can include 0844 number sin their ‘favourite calls’ lists and call GPs for free.
- 0844 is not included in unlimited call packages, unlike local numbers. So patients with those packages will pay extra for the 0844 call.
- 0844 numbers are frequently grouped as Premium Rate Calls in monthly phone bills, though they do not actually cost a higher amount.
- With local numbers, the entire charge of the call goes to the service provider, such as BT. With 0844 numbers, a portion of the money goes to the provider (such as BT) and a proportion goes to Surgery Line to pay for the digital service, switchboard, and GP panic buttons – not to the GPs’ pocket.



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Nov 14th, 2007 at 4:56pm
Lies, half-truths and misleading figures presented as facts.


Quote:
What the service costs patients

It costs patients 4.2p a minute pre VAT to ring an 0844 number from anywhere in the UK, whereas previously you would pay a national call charge, so you can call a doctor from anywhere at one standard price.

No.  Calls to NEG 0844 numbers cost 4.25p/minute pre-VAT (5p/minute incl. VAT) - 53.85% MORE per minute than the 2.77p/minute pre-VAT (3.25p/minute incl. VAT) it costs someone with a standard BT package (BT Together Option 1) to call a standard 01, 02 or 03 number.  Obviously, it is not possible to specify as a percentage how much more calling 0844 numbers someone on an inclusive calls package has to pay but the bare figures are 6p call set-up fee plus 5p/minute as opposed to NOTHING!

The 'call set-up fee' in each case is 6p, not 4p.


Quote:
It costs patients around 4.26p pre-VAT plus a 4p connection fee to ring a standard BT line. That cost reduces to 1.5p after 8pm – when surgeries are closed.

No.  As stated above, it costs 2.77p/minute pre-VAT plus a 6p 'call set-up fee' to ring a standard (01, 02 or 03) BT number.  That reduces to a flat rate 3.6p pre-VAT (4.25p incl. VAT) for up to an hour after 6pm and at weekends - when surgeries are now closed.


Quote:
After V.A.T both lines equal out to around 5p per minute.

No.  NEG 0844 numbers cost 53.85% MORE per minute to call.


Quote:
If patients use pay as you go mobiles the cost rises to up to 20p per minute .....

No.  40p per minute would be closer to the truth.


Quote:
..... but contract customers can include 0844 number in their ‘favourite calls’ lists and call GPs for free.

Really?  Name that contract and provider.


Quote:
0844 is not included in unlimited call packages, unlike local numbers. So patients with those packages will pay extra for the 0844 call.

Wow!  The truth.


Quote:
0844 numbers are frequently grouped as Premium Rate Calls in monthly phone bills, though they do not actually cost a higher amount.

No.  They DO cost a higher amount (that's the definition of premium rate).  Even those with only a basic grasp of mathematics know that 5p is more than 3.25p!


Quote:
With local numbers, the entire charge of the call goes to the service provider, such as BT. With 0844 numbers, a portion of the money goes to the provider (such as BT) and a proportion goes to Surgery Line to pay for the digital service, switchboard, and GP panic buttons – not to the GPs’ pocket.

Clever obfuscation.  Cash may not reach the GPs' pockets DIRECTLY but, because the switchboard is paid for by patients' being forced to pay higher call charges, the practice has not had to fund that purchase as it normally would have had to.  Ergo, the GPs gain financially.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Nov 14th, 2007 at 6:27pm

loddon wrote on Nov 14th, 2007 at 4:04pm:
Alistair Campbell, a researcher for Surgery Line, said GPs had asked for guidance following pressure from PCTs to justify their phone systems.

'It's legally impossible for GPs to make money from this. There's no cheque they receive at the end of the month. People have just been making figures up.'


Would that be the same Mr Alistair Campbell previously referred to as being marketing director of NEG and also responsible for preddling 1001 different lies to the press that try to claim the cost of an 0844 call is no higher than an 01/02 call and the same as a "local rate" call.  Leaving off VAT in the price of 0844 calls and including it for 01/02 calls is amongst Mr Campbell's numerous devious and dirty ways to be economical with the truth.

We all know who is really the person who has just been making up their figures don't we Mr Campbell.  What a shame you were born in the UK and not in Cuba, Sadam Hussin's Iraq or Stalin's Russia where your peculiar ability to come up with propaganda completely at odds with the facts would no doubt have been a much admired skill.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Golf_Paul on Nov 14th, 2007 at 7:46pm
From today's Hull Daily Mail and the "This is Hull and East Riding" website .....


http://www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=251483&command=displayContent&sourceNode=228411&home=yes&more_nodeId1=243834&contentPK=18958768



CALL TO AXE GP PHONE CHARGES

08:00 - 14 November 2007



Health Secretary Alan Johnson is coming under increasing pressure to stop patients being charged extra to call their local GP's surgery.

As reported in the Mail, thousands of patients are forced to use an automated phone system that is more expensive than a normal local call to get in contact with 11 doctors' surgeries in East Yorkshire.

Now, the East Riding Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) forum has issued a report on the use of the 084 numbers and has asked Mr Johnson to ensure the lines are withdrawn from public use.



Beverley and Holderness MP Graham Stuart tabled a motion in Parliament calling for an immediate end to the system.

The Department of Health has now said GPs should not be entering into new phone contracts that involve patients being charged extra for calls to surgeries.

Jacqueline Brayshaw, chairman of the forum, which represents about 330,000 patients across the region, said existing 084 numbers should be taken out of service by doctors.

She said: "This can only really be handled by the minister because it is not clear where the responsibility lies.

"Fit, healthy people don't need these services. It is the elderly, vulnerable and people who are chronically ill who need it regularly and therefore suffer the most.

"I hope the report proves to Mr Johnson he needs to ensure this is looked at very carefully and he accepts it is vulnerable people who are paying for this."

The report strongly criticises the Surgery Line system, under which callers do not receive an engaged tone if the line is busy, but are placed in a queue and given a list of options to choose.

However, the call does not tell people their bills are rising while they are on hold.

The system charges patients up to 5p a minute from landlines and up to 40p a minute from mobile phones.

Before the system was introduced, people calling these surgeries on a Kingston Communications line could do so for free.

BT customers would have been charged 3p a minute at peak times and 4.5p for up to an hour off-peak.

The revenue sharing numbers, as they are known, also allow practices to generate up to 2p a minute income from each call.

The PPI forum also revealed a number of other service providers, such as dentists, opticians and pharmacists, had moved to 084 numbers.

Mrs Brayshaw said: "The Department of Health (DoH) has provided no legislation or advice to PCTs."

The report also highlights PCTs wishing to withdraw the use of 084 numbers would not receive any additional government funding to buy surgeries out of the lengthy contracts with phone service providers.

But the latest guidance from the DoH is that GPs should not enter new contracts with providers.

It also recommends GPs should consider 03 numbers, which were introduced earlier this year that cost the same as a geographic call regardless of what type of line the call is made from and can also be included in low-cost call packages.



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 16th, 2007 at 2:22am

idb wrote on Nov 6th, 2007 at 12:52am:
http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/mostpopular.var.1808117.mostviewed.patients_to_have_say_on_0844_numbers.php
And a related article:

http://www.ehiprimarycare.com/news/3214/gp_practice_asks_if_it_should_drop_0844_number

(Can someone in the UK please check the url and correct if necessary - I cannot access it from here, and have posted a google cache)

~ Edited by Dave: Yes, the link works OK

<<
GP practice asks if it should drop 0844 number
13 Nov 2007

A GP practice in Worcester is asking patients whether or not it should keep its 0844 telephone number.

Ombersley Medical Centre is running a poll to decide whether or not they keep the 5p per minute contact number. All 4,070 patients are able to participate when they come into the surgery, and the poll has been promoted in the centre’s newsletter.

Practice manager, Debbie Weston, told Worcester News: “It’s a much better service as it is and the telephone system stops people having to wait. There are no queues. I think people realise that to charge one extra pence per minute is not that bad.”

To date, only four patients have requested the phone number goes back to an ordinary land line, and the poll will stay open until the end of the month. Weston said that the number had helped them deal with more cases over the phone.

Weston added: “Our telephone service is much more efficient now. We have been corresponding with the PCT and they have more or less agreed that we’re not charging excessively.”

The Department of Health has advised surgeries to steer clear of using 0844 numbers, except where practices are already tied to a contract: “We do not expect GPs to break existing contracts, but they should not be entering new ones that would involve patients being charged more than a local call,” a spokesperson said.

A spokesman for Worcestershire Primary Care Trust told EHIPC: “The situation is that as independent contractors the GP surgeries determine the type of telephone systems they have in their surgery. We will, as far as the future is concerned, recommend that they don't employ 0844 numbers. However, it may not be particularly easy for them to disengage themselves from certain contracts.”

Currently, 11 surgeries in the area use 0844 numbers and none have committed to reevaluating this.

One patient, Sue Davis from St John's who has used the St John's House Surgery for 35 years, appeared on BBC Breakfast to state her case.

She said: “I think the bad publicity may stop a number of GPs from adopting 0844 numbers. People will realise there's a general feeling in the country against doctors charging people for phoning them. The National Health Service is supposed to be free at the point of delivery. If you're ill and you have to pay for that call, then it's not.”

According to Pulse magazine, trusts in North Somerset and Leicester have also begun reviews into the use of 0844 numbers in surgeries. It is claimed that GPs in Leicester are stuck in seven year contracts with phone provider Surgery Line NEG.

Graham Stuart, Conservative MP for Beverley & Holderness, told the Mirror: “For many people calling their GP surgery can be stressful. They do not expect to be used as props for another money-making scheme.”
>>

Ms Weston is clearly a mindless drone, incapable of either researching the issues or of independent thought, and has accepted NEG BS and lies at face value. The term 'manager' is erroneously attributed to her.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Nov 16th, 2007 at 11:44am
I think Ms. Weston demonstrates her worth quite well in the sentence, "I think people realise that to charge one extra pence per minute is not that bad."

(1). For the sentence to have been grammatically correct, the singular noun, 'penny' rather than the plural 'pence' should have been used in conjunction with the number one;

(2). For the sentence to have been mathematically correct, the comparison between the 3.25p/minute cost of a call to any 01, 02 or 03 number and the 5p/minute cost of a call to their (NEG) 0844 number should have been calculated accurately (5p is not 1p more than 3.25p, it is 1.75p - 53.85% - more).

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 16th, 2007 at 11:13pm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=494586&in_page_id=1774

40p a minute... just to phone your GP
By DANIEL MARTIN

<<
Millions of patients are having to pay 40p a minute to phone their GP.

More than 1,500 of the 8,000 practices in England - one in five, with 10million patients between them - have flouted government guidance by switching to expensive 0844 numbers.

GPs can keep part of the charge patients pay when they call to fix an appointment, or get test results or repeat prescriptions.

Last night MPs, campaigners and the Department of Health demanded that doctors change back to local-rate numbers.

Tory MP Graham Stuart, who is campaigning on the issue, said: "For many people, calling their local surgery can be a stressful and worrying time.

Higher call charges are likely to have a particular impact on the chronically ill, the old, the disabled and those on low incomes.

"These people should be treated fairly, not as props for yet another money-making wheeze. It is up to the Department of Health to step in and put an end to this unacceptable practice."

Katherine Murphy, of the Patients Association, said: "It's a scandal and it's blighting the vulnerable and the elderly.

"You ring up and you're confronted with a long menu of options. And all the time it's costing, costing, costing an absolute fortune. And what happens to that extra money? Is it being invested in services? I don't think so."

Calls to 0844 numbers calls cost 5p a minute from a landline and 40p from a mobile.

The Department of Health has tried repeatedly to stop GPs using high-cost numbers.

In 2005, it issued guidance over complaints that GPs were using premium-rate 0870 numbers, which are even more expensive.

But doctors moved on to 0844 numbers, which, although not technically premium rate, are still much dearer than a local call.

In December last year, ministers issued further guidance, saying GPs should charge no more than the local call rate of 3.25p a minute.

But because family doctors are private operphonethe NHS cannot force them to change.

The Department of Health said last night: "GPs should consider using the 03 numbering range introduced earlier this year. Calls to these cost the same as a geographic call, regardless of what type of line the call is from. They can also be included in inclusive or low-cost call packages.

"We do not expect GPs to break existing contracts, but they should not be entering new ones that would involve patients being charged more than for a local call."

GPs now earn an average of £110,000 a year - up almost 60 per cent in just three years. They are also taking a higher proportion of the money they receive from the Government rather than investing in staff and services.

Service provider Network Europe Group said last night it had installed 0844 numbers in 1,200 surgeries and it believed more than 300 more had had 0844 or 0845 numbers installed by other companies.

A spokesman said the system benefitted patients because it allowed them to be placed in a queue rather than hear an engaged tone. Previously, 92 out of 100 people who called GPs heard an engaged tone or the was not answered. Part of the profit from each 0844 call goes to cover the installation of new switchboards and headsets, but once they have been paid for the GP is able to spend the money how he wished.

Patients routinely complain of the difficulty of getting hold of their GP to book an appointment, but Dr Richard Vautrey, deputy chairman of the British Medical Association's GP committee, said the new phones were improving the situation.

He claimed doctors did not make money from the lines and added: "Many doctors were encouraged to use them by their primary care organisation because of the benefits to both the practice and patients.

"Practices get a more efficient system and patients get through more quickly and spend less time on the phone, which has reduced the cost of calling the surgery for many patients.

"Where practices have installed these systems the result has been a dramatic improvement in overall patient satisfaction."

But the communications watchdog Ofcom said: "Public bodies should not offer an 08 number unless they also offer a normal number. They should be considering the new 03 numbers."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 17th, 2007 at 3:08am
http://www.worcestershirehealth.nhs.uk/Internet_Library/Primary_Care_Trust/board_meetings/14_November_2007/ITEM%208%20Use%20of%20Non-geographic%20numbers.pdf

USE OF NON-GEOGRAPHIC (‘0844’) TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY GP
PRACTICES

Introduction

There has been considerable media debate regarding the use of 0844 (nongeographic)
telephone numbers by GP practices. In Worcestershire there are
eleven practices using 0844 numbers.

Background

In April 2005 the Department of Health wrote to PCT Chief Executives stating
that Ofcom was considering changes to the pricing arrangements, which could
mean that revenue sharing on 0844 numbers would not be possible. The letter
made PCTs aware that the Department was reviewing the use of all nongeographical
numbers and that practices should bear this in mind if they were
considering switching.

In September 2005 Ofcom proposed that providers of 0844 numbers should be
required to publish more comprehensive and accurate pricing information, and
stated that it planned to monitor the types of services offered on 0844 numbers
and would consider taking action if providers started to offer services on 0844
numbers which were better suited to other number ranges.

In December 2006 the Department of Health wrote to PCT Chief Executives
regarding the introduction 03 numbers which will be charged at the same rate as
calling a geographical number and can be included in any inclusive or low-cost
call packages.

Contractual Obligations

Within Worcestershire the eleven practices with 084 numbers are contracted to
four service providers – Connaught Communication Systems Ltd, Midland
Communications, STL Communications Limited and NEG Telecom Limited. Two
practices have purchased systems outright whilst the rest have contracts which
have between 2½ and 6½ years to run.

Cost of Calls

There is a significant variation in the cost of calling 0844 numbers from mobiles
and the patient is very much in the hands of his or her service provider. For those
patients with a BT residential landline on a standard contract the cost of a
daytime call to an 084 number is 4.255 pence per minute (excl. VAT) 5.00 pence
(incl. VAT). In comparison the cost of making a local BT call in on standard
contract in the daytime is 3.36 pence per minute (excl. VAT) 3.95 pence (incl.
VAT) with a connection fee of 5.10 pence (excl. VAT) 6.00 pence (incl. VAT). On
the face of it there is very little difference between the two. However, significant
numbers of patients will be on low cost call packages, either with BT or other
providers, which may include free daytime calls but will exclude 0844 numbers.

084 vs 03 vs local Number

A practice using an 0844 number will receive a share of call income from the
service provider. This will either be a payment directly to the practice or will be
used to reduce their lease payment.

If a practice moved to an 03 number patients would benefit as these numbers
can be included in low cost call packages. However, 03 numbers will not be
attractive to a practice as not only would they lose their revenue share but they
would also pay to receive incoming calls.

Practices could revert to a local number which could benefit the patient. The
downside from the practice’s point of view is they would once again lose their
revenue share.

Summary

Practices are independent contractors and as such the decision on the type of
telephone system they use is entirely theirs. However, the PCT could
recommend that, in future, practices do not migrate to an 0844 number and this
could be made a the prerequisite for funding of a GP premises development.

The telephone market is extremely competitive and whilst there is little to choose
between the cost of a call to an 0844 number and to a landline on a BT standard
contract the reality is that, for a significant number of patients, this is not a valid
comparison because of the availability of discount call packages.

Migration to an 03 number is not an attractive option for practices as not only
would they lose their revenue share they would actually pay to receive incoming
calls.

Migration to a local number would mean practices would lose their revenue share
but a significant number of patients would benefit from their discount call
packages. Essentially we would be returning to a pre-0844 era in that practices
would pay the full cost of their telephone lease.

Paul Bates

October 2007

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Nov 17th, 2007 at 11:56am
The comments on this article are flooding onto the Mail website ;---

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=494586&in_page_id=1774&in_page_id=1774&expand=true#StartComments  

A sample of what is being said : ---

Anyone who believes that a GP is looking after their interests is very deluded. GP's repeatedly take the easy option even when it comes to diagnoses and patient Care. I am lucky I changed from a practice that was a disgrace to a practice that actually cares I now have a Great GP.

- Andrew Downie, Teddington Middlesex

Since doctors were given their new contracts from new labour, they have had a sniff of the trough, and,like their masters, now want to get their snouts in as deep as possible.
These people should hang their heads in shame.

- Dapa, Chester, UK

Pure greed.

- Mark, Harrogate, Yorkshire

My greedy GP wanted 20 quid to sign an insurance claim for a hospital stay, it was only for £50!

- Johngee, London, England.

How can this benefit practices and patients, it's another rip off. At one time, our surgery would answer the phone within a minute, now after getting a new building with an annoying television echoing around it all the time, the phone may be answered in fifteen minutes if you are lucky enough not to be cut off before they decide to answer.

- Peter, Spalding

Why not include in this campaign the phone rip off in NHS hospitals? These 'bandit' phone companies should be put out of business.

- Terence, Hereford, UK

"Practices get a more efficient system and patients get through more quickly and spend less time on the phone, which has reduced the cost of calling the surgery for many patients."

What a load of rubbish, patients actually pay more for the privilege of waiting just about as long as always!

- Sid, Cornwall

This new statement by the DoH yesterday that "We do not expect GPs to ... be entering new ones (contracts) that would involve patients being charged more than for a local call." is a most significant milestone in the total banning of higher cost phone numbers for GPs. This means that no GP can now enter into a new contract which involves the use of an 0844 or 0845 number. A victory for the campaign against an obscene rip-off perpetrated on the sick, old and poor. Doctors must take note and act accordingly. They must start funding their new phone systems in a proper legitimate way.

- George, Home Counties


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Nov 17th, 2007 at 11:59am
More public comments on the Mail website : ---

Scandalous that already grossly overpaid GP's can fleece us for phoning them to make an appointment. They'll be charging us for sitting in the waiting room next.

- Kp Nuts, Thornbury, UK

"..A spokesman said the system benefitted patients because it allowed them to be placed in a queue.."

Err, I'd rather hear an engaged tone than be connected to a queue and pay for the privilege of hearing piped messages/music for 3 to 4 minutes, and PAY for it all as well. These G.P's are onto a nice little earner on top of their wildly inflated salaries, all at the expense of their patients. How greedy and diabolical of these G.P. surgeries.

- David, UK

Our library here in Hampshire has this 'new, improved service' for residents, with an 0845 number. No doubt we are being fleeced with that, on top of the £3 million spent on a library and council tax having doubled.

- Bryan Lawrence, Gosport UK

It is a pity that Network Europe Group's perception of patient satisfaction does not concur with that of the patients whose interests they hold in contempt. Meanwhile, the company has provided an 0800 number for its customers, so at least it does not cost any money to berate them for finding this unique opportunity of exploiting the sick.

- David Elliott, Brighton, UK

Kick out the spivs and wideboys and return to a proper state funded National Health Service is the answer to this problem.

- David, Andorra La Vella, Andorra

Some while ago, my father-in-law, who lives 50 metres away from his doctors surgery in kent walked there to make an appointment, only to be told that these were only given by telephone so he had to return home and then spend money to get the appointment he wanted. What arrogant people make these rules?

- Kevin Fletcher, France

Yet another rip-off that the Labour and Ofcom will fluster and bluster about then ignore.

Many overseas phone companies won’t connect to 0844 numbers as they are “premium”. So if you are sick abroad and a doctor needs to contact your doctor in a hurry . . . well more money for a £110,000 doctor comes first.

What is so sad is that people put up this.

- David Lewis, Staines, UK

So now our so called 'professionals' have joined the "Feed the Greed" club ... I thought better of GPs - obviously I was wrong. No wonder ordinary decent true Brits are leaving the country in droves.

- Kathy Doyle, Wisbech UK

The doctors surgery I worked at installed an 0870 telephone number and once the patients realised how expensive it was instead of phoning they would come to the surgery. So every morning there were huge queues of people waiting outside most of which were not happy so the poor receptionists had to take the brunt of the complaints not the practice manager who had installed the system.

- Shirley, Wimborne

What a scandal.

Why is the British consumer treated like fish in a barrel? Everyone has their hands in our pockets.

There simply is no honour left.

- Dino Fancellu, Epsom

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Nov 17th, 2007 at 12:00pm
More public comments on the Mail website : ---

Doctors dont want to know you when you reach the age of 70 anyway.

- Reg, Aylesbury, Buck's

My local hospital has an 0845 number. It takes ages to get through to any ward or department.

- Jane, England

The GP's have contracts with the Health Service. Don't reason with them, don't try to change their minds, WRITE IT INTO THE CONTRACT. Or is that too simplistic for the huge intellects in the Department of Health to grasp?

- Peter, SW France

Just how many times exactly are we expected to pay for services that we already pay dearly for but some seldom use?
People will either die or call 999 first because they cannot afford to call Premium lines.
I live alone on a low income and I would not use these numbers; I pay in advance for my calls but the package doesn't include Premium numbers.
This government has spawned a nation of fraudsters by their own fraudulent example.

- Peg, Surrey

My parent's health centre do not even have a letterbox so I could not cancel an appointment without making a phone call during the day.

- Jackie, Leicester

Is there any part of our lives where we do not get ripped off ?

- Kathleen, Wakefield, England

I feel it right we should, ALL OF US, have to pay at least something to see a GP.
This method of fund raising is underhand and therefore unprofessional.

- Nick, Bedford UK

I would rather get an engaged tone than pay 5p per minute to be in a queue! Then have to chose from 6 or 7 'options' and wait again.
Rip off the sick and vunerable again.

- Sue, Wigan

I would have to take out a loan, just for one call.

- Bob, Northants

Yes please scrap the premium phone numbers. The rich get richer and the poor ger poorer. Its not fair.

- Sally Solomon, Wareham, UK

I have been extremely annoyed about these 084 & 087 numbers sometime and have refused to use them except for the Doctors as I have to use them for repeat prescriptions for my Diabetes. It is a further diabolic 'tax' - Many Government departments use these numbers as well with no warning of charges. Personally I pay a standard fee for all 01 & 02 numbers only to have another £5.00/month being added on by these sort of numbers. Its a disgrace and typical of all these 'con' tricks now used in this Country.

- Kenneth Stephenson, Hinckley , Leicestershire

The whole issue of 08x numbers needs a public enquiry. Second level phone companies make a lot of money from them, and many public bodies (now including the greedy medical profession) are cashing in.

No phone call in the UK at any time has a cost of more than 1p/min. Even calls to the USA cost only about 2p/min. All the rest is just profit. Ask your doctor where the other 39p is going to. If pressed he will tell you that he gets a top notch phone system 'free', that is, you and I are paying his practice overheads as well as the 08x company. Nice one, doctors. Pity we have no choice as consumers. But then the NHS knows that already, only too well.

- Colin, Shrewsbury UK

The health centre at Barrow-on-Soar Leicestershire does this and there is usually a long wait.

- Ian, Barrow-on-Soar, Leicestershire

The moral of this is don't use your mobile to phone your GP!

- Liz, UK

They should be banned from doing this !

- Mike, Kensington, London


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 19th, 2007 at 2:24am
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article2896435.ece

From The Times, November 19, 2007

GPs told to avoid premium numbers

David Rose

<<
Doctors should no longer be using 0844 telephone numbers that charge patients extra to call their GPs, the Department of Health has said.

The Government said that GPs should be using alternatives to the numbers, which are up to 4p a minute more expensive to call from a BT landline than a standard local call. Practices can also receive a rebate on incoming 0844 calls.

The Times reported in July that more than 1,200 doctors’ surgeries are using the numbers, prompting a campaign by consumer lobbyists who say that GPs are unfairly profiting from patients’ calls.

In a statement to primary care trusts, the Department of Health said: “We do not expect GPs to break existing contracts, but they should not be entering new ones that would involve patients being charged more than for a local call.”

Michael Kennedy, a member of the saynoto0870.com internet forum, said: “GPs who have contracted to use these revenue-sharing numbers may well be in breach of their contracts because they are precluded from charging patients.”
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 19th, 2007 at 2:34am
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/18/ndoctors218.xml

(THe Telegraph seems to have got its 844 and 845 numbers mixed up)

Doctors profit from patients' phone calls

Last Updated: 4:36pm GMT 18/11/2007

<<
Millions of patients are being forced to pay 40p a minute to phone doctors.

More than 1,500 GP practices in England have installed 0845 numbers, flouting government guidance which says the NHS should not charge more than local phone rates.

Katherine Murphy, from the Patients Association, said it was "an absolute scandal. You ring up and you are confronted with a long menu of options. And all the time it is costing an absolute fortune. What happens to that extra money? Is it being invested in services. I don't think so."

The Department of Health tries to discourage GPs from using high-priced numbers. But because family doctors are private operators, ministers cannot stop them making a profit from calls.

One in five practices use 0845 codes which cost 40p a minute from a mobile. Service provider Network Europe Group, which installed 1,200 of the phone systems, said patients benefited as they were placed in a queue instead of getting an engaged tone.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 21st, 2007 at 12:01am
Posted here and in the parliament thread:

House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 19 Nov 2007 (pt 0032)

19 Nov 2007 : Column 602W

Greg Mulholland: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) how much his Department estimates GP surgeries receive in revenue from calls to 0844 revenue sharing numbers; [164453]

(2) how many GPs' surgeries in each primary care trust area use 0844 revenue sharing telephone numbers; [164454]

(3) through what mechanism GP surgeries receive payment from calls to 0844 revenue sharing numbers. [164455]

Mr. Bradshaw [holding answer 15 November 2007]: We do not collect information centrally on the use of 084 telephone numbers.

The provision of telephone services for patients and the public is a matter for the local national health service. The Department did however issue guidance in December of last year clearly setting out that patients should not be charged more than the equivalent of a local call.

When will HMG start replacing should with must?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 21st, 2007 at 1:10am
http://www.marstonmedicalcentre.co.uk/patient_survey.htm

Marston Medical Centre

Patient Survey 2007/8

Telephone

Your comments

• The new, longer phone number is difficult to remember
• The new phone number is more costly and less user friendly
• Why change a phone number that was easily remembered?
• I don’t like the new telephone system

Our response

We know the change in telephone number has been unpopular and we did not change it without consideration.

Our old switchboard was on it last legs and we needed to find a replacement. Nearly every system we looked at now provides the facility of offering options for where you wish your call to be directed. The service we chose offered the best range of options for our surgery set up and whilst we would have preferred to keep the old number we had to change to move onto a new network with our new supplier.

The 0844 is a local call number it is not a premium rate line.

The new system does provide both the patients and practice staff with benefits. Patients no longer get the engaged tone and know they are being held in a queue rather than having to constantly re-dial during busy periods. They can also cancel appointments when we are closed.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 22nd, 2007 at 12:46am
http://www.thisisdorset.net/display.var.1849201.0.gp_practices_defend_using_0844_numbers.php

GP practices defend using 0844 numbers

By Joanna Codd

<<
LOCAL GP practices have been defending their use of non-local telephone codes after an attack from the Patients' Association.

The association says one in five practices is using 0844 numbers, which can cost as much as 40p a minute to call from a mobile telephone.

Two and a half years ago, the government banned NHS organisations from setting up new premium (09) and national rate (087) telephone numbers for patients contacting local services.

But Katherine Murphy from the Patients Association said even the 0844 number flouts government guidance that the NHS should charge no more than local rates.

"You ring up and are confronted with a long list of options. And all the time it is costing an absolute fortune," she said.

Judith Young, practice manager at the Talbot Medical Centre in Wallisdown, Bournemouth, which has an 0844 number, said its Network Europe Group service helped patients get through to the right person at the right time.

The switch had been made to improve the service for the group's 16,000 patients. "We have had much-improved access to the doctor on the telephone," she claimed.

The Holdenhurst Road surgery, which also has an 0844 number, said patients seemed to feel they were getting a better service, but if new guidance came out, it would look again at its system.

A spokeswoman for Ofcom said: "The cost of calling an 0844 number can certainly be more than calling a geographical number, but that would depend on the package you're on and the line you are calling from.

"Sometimes there can be problems phoning from abroad and these numbers don't tend to be included in discounts.

"Guidance given by the Central Office of Information says public sector bodies should be looking at normal 01 or 02 numbers."

She added that Ofcom had also issued 13 million new 03 numbers, as now used by the Ministry of Defence and RSPCA.

Customers calling them are charged the same as a local call whatever kind of line they are ringing from.

7:00pm Wednesday 21st November 2007
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Nov 22nd, 2007 at 9:36am
The replies on the ThisIsDorset site by the public are pretty unanimous in their wholehearted opposition apart from Mike in Branksome (who sounds like an NEG salesman).  None of the names obviously appear to be people connected with this website so it would seem that the worm is finally beginning to turn.


Quote:
Posted by: accountability, Chichester on 7:38pm Wed 21 Nov 07
These numbers are a complete rip-off and do not lead to a better service than previously. I am led to believe that even if the number is engaged you get charged.

Posted by: OldGiraffe, Poole on 7:43pm Wed 21 Nov 07
Luckily I can still walk to my local surgery on Canford Heath to make an appointment

!Quote | Report this postPosted by: Kevvo on 10:31pm Wed 21 Nov 07
This Country is going down the Toilet Profit before care shame on the GP,s concerned or more likely the administration Managers. Cure People not con them

Report this postPosted by: ALL SEEING EYE, POOLE on 11:17pm Wed 21 Nov 07
I live on Canford Heath and use the surgery. We have a 0844 number and after VAT is added it is over 50p a call, so most calls are going to cost £2-£3 pounds each!! With Doctors earning over £100,000 a year you think they would absorb the cost - after all they don't work weekends and always having time off and have their flash cars parked outside!! With Doctors earning over £100,000 a year you think they would absorb the cost - after all they don't work weekends and always having time off and have their flash cars parked outside!!

Posted by: Poole man in France, Paris on 6:13am today
When I come across these "premium" numbers I take my business elsewhere wherever possible. Sometimes they cannot be avoided, but that leaves me with a very bitter taste against the organization using them. I should like to recommend a website which often helps - saynoto0870.com.  I have just visited saynoto0870.com and see there is a petition to sign against this abusive use of premium numbers by health providers. It already has over 17,000 signators. So let's make our feelings known and sign up.

.Quote | Report this postPosted by: 2Much, New Forest on 6:57am today
The GP is a public service..it shouldn't be allowed to be a sneaky money making racket! (i take it they get a share of the calls from BT) I'm fortunate that my GP doesn't do this..but if it did..i would protest and get as many other patients as i could to protest too.

by: Mike, Branksome on 8:39am today
If my kids were ill I'd be quite happy to pay 20p to an 0844 number rather than have the stress of the redial button when they're engaged. The consultation with your GP is FREE, move abroad and you'll pay. Get over having to pay a few pence for a phone call.
If my kids were ill I'd be quite happy to pay 20p to an 0844 number rather than have the stress of the redial button when they're engaged. The consultation with your GP is FREE, move abroad and you'll pay. Get over having to pay a few pence for a phone call.Quote | Report this postPosted by: Phil, Poole on 8:42am today
You might be able to find an alternative local number on the www.saynoto0870.com website. For instance, it lists Canford Heath surgery as 01202 777777. (I don't know if this works.)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Nov 27th, 2007 at 11:41am
Source: Lynn News
Published: 27 November 2007

http://www.lynnnews.co.uk/news/Doctors-new-39phone-service-slammed.3523239.jp

Doctors new 'phone service slammed

By Amy Collett

<<
A WEST Norfolk doctor's practice has been accused of "robbing its patients" after introducing a new telephone number which charges up to 40p a minute.

Patients at Vida Healthcare's Gayton Road Health Centre in Gaywood and Carole Brown Health Centre in Dersingham are being charged more when they ring to make an appointment after GPs switched their local rate number to an expensive 0844 number.

The new number has been slammed by Gayton Road patient and former health authority chairman Roy Spencer, of Lynn.

"Not only does the call now cost more but we have to deal with an automated phone system making our calls last longer and therefore costing more," he said.

Mr Spencer, who was chairman of the former West Norfolk and Wisbech Health Authority 20 years ago, said the move was particularly unfair to the elderly and vulnerable.

"The more you accept these type of things the more it's going to cost us in the end. So much for a free health service. Doctors should stop robbing their patients."

The new number was installed earlier in the year, but Mr Spencer said as no letters were sent to patients he only discovered the change when he made an appointment last week.

It is thought the two surgeries are the only ones in West Norfolk using an 0844 number, which costs 5p a minute from a landline and 40p from a mobile. This compares to a local rate of 3.25p a minute.

When the Lynn News phoned Gayton Road on Wednesday, it took more than two minutes of going through options and being on hold to speak to someone.

By the time the call ended, about the time it would take to make an appointment, it had taken about three minutes – a cost of around £1.20 on a mobile.

In 2005, the Department of Health issued guidance to GP surgeries about the use of high-cost numbers following comSplaints that some surgeries were using premium-rate 0870 numbers, which are even more expensive. The 0844 number, although not technically premium rate, is still much dearer than a local call.

But as GP surgeries manage their own business, the NHS cannot force them to change.

Graham Dickerson, managing partner of Vida Healthcare, which operates both Gayton Road and Carole Brown surgeries, said their phone system has been approved by the DOH and is used in around 1,200 practices across the country.

He admitted mobile suppliers charge high rates to 0844 numbers, as they do many numbers, but said: "That's not really my problem."

He said the system, which handles 25,000 calls a month, was brought in as a direct result of patients' comments about phone access, with many saying they would rather wait in a queue than having to keep re-dialling. The surgeries' two patient groups were also involved.

Jill Brock, chairman of Gayton Road's Patient Participation Group, said posters asking people to attend a meeting to discuss the new number were put up and letters were sent out with repeat prescriptions, but only two of the centre's 17,000 patients turned out.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 28th, 2007 at 2:00am
http://www.thisisexeter.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=136993&command=displayContent&sourceNode=231418&home=yes&more_nodeId1=137002&contentPK=19082593

ROW OVER COST OF 0844 PHONE NUMBER TO CALL DOCTORS

22:40 - 27 November 2007

<<
A medical practice in Exeter has been accused of breaking Government guidelines over the way patients are charged to phone the surgery.People phoning Heavitree Practice at Heavitree Medical Centre for an appointment or an inquiry have to use an 0844 number, which charges them up to 5p per minute from a landline - more than a local rate call.

Patients and healthcare groups have criticised the surgery, arguing the cost of calling the phone line undermines the principles of a free NHS.

The phone system is also against Department of Health guidelines which make it clear patients should not be charged more than the cost of a local call when ringing their GP.

But the surgery in South Lawn Terrace has defended its use of the phone system, saying it does not make a profit from it and it was introduced to improve service to patients.

By phoning the number, people are offered a range of options to enable them to be put through to the right person.

It is is one of a growing number of surgeries throughout the UK to use a private contractor to operate an 0844 phone line.

Known as revenue-sharing telephone numbers, the systems often work by splitting income from calls between the contractor and the practice.

Patients of the surgery the Echo spoke to were critical of the phone system and the service it provided.

Sheila Milton-Head, 68, from Ringswell Park in Wonford, said: "It's a bit much and I don't agree that patients should be charged more to phone."

Saffet Temizbas, from Heavitree, said: "We were kept waiting on the phone for 15 minutes and it was so frustrating we decided to come here on foot instead."

Janet Gubb, 69, of Thornpark Rise, Heavitree, said: "It's a long number and you are put on hold for a long time with music before you are put through. I can't understand why they have that sort of number and I don't like to think it is charging me more."

Michael Summers, vice-chairman of the Patients' Association, said: "The NHS is intended to be free and patients shouldn't have to pay more for it in dribs and drabs, as they do with 0844 numbers."

Dr Anna Morris, from Heavitree Practice, said yesterday she couldn't be certain of the call charges as the practice manager was away but she believed calls from a landline to the 0844 number were the same as to a standard landline and mobile tariffs were as standard.

She said the system was introduced in December, 2006 after a survey of patients showed a new phone system was needed to improve efficiency.

She said: "You are never going to have a system everyone is entirely happy with and there have been some complaints about mobile phone tariffs to the number, but generally the feedback has been positive."

Dr Morris said patients were invited to comment on the system through feedback forms.

A spokeswoman for Ofcom said under the standard BT Together Option One, the price of a call to an 0844 number was up to 5p per minute, compared to 3p for a call to a 01 or 02 number.

Health minister and Exeter MP Ben Bradshaw said: "The Government made it clear last year that people should not be charged more than for a local call when they ring their GP."

A Department of Health spokesman said it would be writing to primary care trusts in December to ask surgeries not to use 0844 numbers but he said some had entered into agreements with which could last several years.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Nov 28th, 2007 at 12:21pm

idb wrote on Nov 28th, 2007 at 2:00am:
A Department of Health spokesman said it would be writing to primary care trusts in December to ask surgeries not to use 0844 numbers but he said some had entered into agreements with which could last several years.


Talk about shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted!  Also if the NHS could previously force all doctors surgeries using 0870 numbers to suddenly stop using them at the same time and move to 0844 surely they have the precisely the same power to force them to renegotiate their contracts with their telecoms suppliers after a certain date so that they can only use 03 numbers.

If renegotiating these contracts to use 03 numbers costs them more money tough.  Its entirely their own fault for entering the contracts in the first place and the costs of funding the reneogotiation should come out of GP salaries at the practices involved to punish them for their own combined greed, stupidity and incomptence.

Of course no doubt we can hardly expect the top management of the NHS who are still holding out against providing an 01,02 or 03 alternative number for NHS Direct to be prepared to do the right thing by their patients. :o >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Nov 28th, 2007 at 1:14pm
I agree with NGMsGhost. It would seem completely wrong that if 0844 numbers are not banned for all GPs but only those who haven't gone over yet then it means the greedy GPs get away with it and might encourage others to sign up quickly to avoid the ban.

This was a risk they took when taking out the contract and should suffer the consequence for their greed. If they were mislead by NEG then they should take any loss they incur up with them.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Dec 4th, 2007 at 12:18pm
http://www.northantset.co.uk/news/Patients-pay-more-for-calling.3551428.jp

Patients pay more for calling doctor

By Simon Hughes

<<
PATIENTS in Corby and Wellingborough are having to fork out more money to see their doctors after surgeries installed 0844 telephone numbers.

Four surgeries use the system, resulting in higher costs for patients who want to book an appointment.

Woodsend Medical Centre and Forest Gate Road Medical Centre in Corby have 0844 numbers as do Redwell Medical Centre and Albany House Medical Centre in Wellingborough.

Depending on the supplier, calls can cost up to 10p a minute from a landline and up to 35p from a mobile.

Michael Summers, trustee of the Patients' Association, said: "I think it's inappropriate and my understanding is although those numbers were designed to be helpful, it's not effective and doesn't really speed up the calls.

"It seems wrong that patients are having to pay for a free NHS through their taxes and then pay extra through these calls."

Corby councillor Ray Lilley has demanded to know when the surgeries will change back and accused them of penalising pensioners and young families.

Max Hand, manager at Albany House Medical Centre, Wellingborough, said the 0844 system only charges an extra 1p a minute for most people calling on a landline.

He said: "The additional money goes to the operator, not to us. It's a moot point as to whether a queueing system is better – we think it is because patients don't get an engaged tone now.

"Otherwise it's a complete lottery and this is a fairer system."

Linda Whitehead, manager at Woodsend Medical Centre, said the 0844 number was installed because people complained about the old booking system.

A Department of Health spokesman said: "We do not expect GPs to break existing contracts, but they should not be entering new ones that would involve patients being charged more than for a local call."

Mary Leggart, a patient at The Medical Centre in Forest Gate Road, Corby, said: "I didn't realise that it was more expensive to call. I think it's awful. It should all be the same cost at all the surgeries."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Dec 5th, 2007 at 9:23pm

idb wrote on Nov 22nd, 2007 at 12:46am:
http://www.thisisdorset.net/display.var.1849201.0.gp_practices_defend_using_0844_numbers.php

GP practices defend using 0844 numbers

By Joanna Codd

After a helpful briefing to the journalist, a follow up to this article has been published:

Calls to get tough on surgery phone lines


A subsequent further briefing has been provided to point out that:

1. it is Alan Johnson, the Secretary of State for Health, who believes that GPs are breaching the terms of their contract,

2. at least one local MP (a former shadow Chancellor) has written to the PCT about this matter, and

3. it is the Prime Minster who is hosting the petition.

The journalist has been urged to rely on worthy and local sources, and vica versa.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Dec 13th, 2007 at 12:38am
http://www.ilfordrecorder.co.uk/content/redbridge/recorder/postbag/story.aspx?brand=RECOnline&category=postbagilford&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=postbagilford&itemid=WeED12%20Dec%202007%2016%3A52%3A26%3A927

NHS phone line is hitting the needy
12 December 2007

<<
IT IS with concern that I note the North East London Mental Health Trust has, since June, used the geographic number 0844. This system is designed by a private company.

People may not be aware that this telephone number is more expensive than the 0845 number and inevitably includes revenue sharing.

The profits of each call - instead of an engaged tone, callers are kept on line until the call is answered - are shared between the company, which gets the lion's share, and the health trust that uses this system.

This is a charge to patients trying to access services and makes a mockery of the statement that the "NHS is free at the point of delivery".

This particular change of use has been brought in by stealth and affects most radically the poorest in our society. Those who are on benefits, who are pensioners, and the chronically ill.

Many of whom are unable to afford a phone and make do with public call boxes, or the occasional use of a pay as you go mobile, where the call will be prohibitively expensive.

I would urge those who are as disconcerted as I am about this, to make representations to their MP or to the Patients Advice and Liaison Service at their local hospital.

DIANA NESLEN

Address supplied
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Dec 14th, 2007 at 10:44am
http://www.lynnnews.co.uk/news/More-anger-over-Gaywood-and.3586937.jp

More anger over Gaywood and Dersingham GP calls

By Amy Collett

<<
A DOCTOR'S practice which introduced a new phone system charging people up to 40p a minute has sparked more complaints from patients.

Patients at Gayton Road Health Centre in Gaywood and Carole Brown Health Centre in Dersingham are having to fork out more money to see their doctor after the surgeries switched their local rate number to a more expensive 0844 number.

The move sparked a complaint from Gayton Road patient and former health authority chairman Roy Spencer, as reported in the Lynn News last month.

Now more patients who were unaware of the change or the higher call charges until they read our story and checked their phone bills are outraged as well.

Gayton Road patient Elise Swansborough (51) has complained to Vida Healthcare, which operates both surgeries, Norfolk Primary Care Trust and North West Norfolk MP Henry Bellingham and is also considering starting a petition calling for the local number to be reinstated.

Miss Swansborough, of Lime Kiln Road, Gayton, said charging patients more to phone their GP was "unethical and wrong", and undermines the principles of a free NHS.

"If the phone system they had before didn't work then they should find some other way of resolving it rather than making their patients pay more," she said.

It is thought the two surgeries are the only ones in West Norfolk using an 0844 number, which costs 5p a minute from a landline and 40p from a mobile. This compares to a local rate of 3.25p a minute.

Gayton Road's Patient Participation Group said the surgery tried to consult patients before the new number was introduced earlier this year by putting posters up and sending out letters with repeat prescriptions.

But patient Jeannette Fine, of Gaywood, said as someone who doesn't need to visit the surgery very often, she did not see any posters when she was there and didn't receive a letter with any of her repeat prescriptions.

In a letter to the Lynn News, she said: "I had no idea that the new number, besides being less convenient to use than the old, cost me more. I suspect that the majority of healthier patients at these surgeries, like myself, never had any notification of the change, let alone its cost implications."

Vida Healthcare has defended the new system, saying it does not make a profit from it and it was introduced to improve service to patients.

Managing partner Graham Dickerson said: "The new system was brought in as a direct result of the comments patients made about telephone access to the surgery. For example patients told us they would rather wait in a queue than having to keep redialling."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Dec 14th, 2007 at 10:46am

idb wrote on Dec 13th, 2007 at 12:38am:
http://www.ilfordrecorder.co.uk/content/redbridge/recorder/postbag/story.aspx?brand=RECOnline&category=postbagilford&tBrand=northlondon24&tCategory=postbagilford&itemid=WeED12%20Dec%202007%2016%3A52%3A26%3A927

NHS phone line is hitting the needy
12 December 2007

<<
IT IS with concern that I note the North East London Mental Health Trust has, since June, used the geographic number 0844.


WHOOPS!!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jan 4th, 2008 at 5:17pm
More local media coverage

See posting to Surgeries charge more for calling

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 16th, 2008 at 11:12pm
RETHINK ON GPS AND HIGH-COST CALLS

09:00 - 16 January 2008

http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=176452&command=displayContent&sourceNode=134483&contentPK=19562589&folderPk=78482&pNodeId=134462

<<
Gp surgeries in Notts are being urged to review their use of high-cost telephone lines.

The Evening Post revealed last month some practices had started using numbers which allowed them to take a share of the profits from every call.



Now health bosses have arranged a series of meetings with GPs to review use of the 0844 numbers.

Ten surgeries are using the dialling code, which costs about 5p a minute from a standard BT line, almost double the usual 3p charge - and can cost as much as 50p a minute from a mobile phone.

Initially, health trusts said they were powerless to stop GPs using the 0844 code, as they were "independent contractors".

But in a U-turn, the Nottingham and county primary care trusts (PCTs) have promised further action.

In an e-mail seen by the Post, county PCT chief executive Wendy Saviour said: "I read the article in the Evening Post and we will be pursuing this issue though our primary care contracts function within the PCT. It is clearly something we need to try and resolve."

A spokeswoman for Mrs Saviour's trust added: "We are pursuing this with the local Strategic Health Authority to ascertain whether there will be any national directives."

Meanwhile, a spokeswoman for Nottingham City PCT said: "We will be meeting with the practices concerned to discuss the use of 0844 numbers, and to agree the best way forward."

Neither the NHS nor telecoms watchdog Ofcom have the power to dictate what telephone lines are used by GPs.

Both Ofcom and the PCTs, which run health services, said they recommended surgeries did not use the numbers.

Annesley Woodhouse GP Dr Greg Place said: " I think doctors should not be using 0844 or any other form of number which means the patients have to pay more than the standard rate."

clare.boyd@nottinghameveningpost.co.uk
>>


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bazzerfewi on Jan 17th, 2008 at 7:03am
Hi I think this is fantastic and a stride in the right direction, can we lobby the Practice Managers and the relitive body within the health authorities.

I think if as many practice managers an relevant departments within the health authorities were contacted it may force their hand.

I am not a telecoms techi but surely they can use 03 numbers for the same purpose.

If somebody points me in the right direction I will do my bit.

Baz

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jan 17th, 2008 at 9:24am

bazzerfewi wrote on Jan 17th, 2008 at 7:03am:
... can we lobby the Practice Managers and the relitive body within the health authorities.
Lobbying can only properly come from those to whom the respective body is accountable. It is however proper to provide briefings to anyone, especially those able to lobby, such as MPs and local media.


bazzerfewi wrote on Jan 17th, 2008 at 7:03am:
I am not a telecoms techi but surely they can use 03 numbers for the same purpose.
NHS providers (and indeed all providers of public services) who require a non-geographic number should now only be using 03. There are many who use non-geographic numbers when this is not actually necessary, although it is not always easy to determine where this is true.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Jan 17th, 2008 at 10:06am

bazzerfewi wrote on Jan 17th, 2008 at 7:03am:
[..] surely they can use 03 numbers for the same purpose.


Well, from what we understand, their new systems run entirely on VoIP. There is absolutely no excuse for NEG to not switch them straight over to 03. The most that the surgeries would have to pay would be a minimum fee to actually run the 03 number, but there would (or at least should!) be no incoming call charges.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 18th, 2008 at 1:29pm
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/New-phone-system-a-boost.3686317.jp

New phone system a boost for patients

By Kaye Henry

<<
A NEW phone system installed at a South Tyneside medical practice will give patients better access to services.

Trinity Medical Centre is introducing a new phone service at its surgery in Laygate to help speed up call handling and improve access to services for its 6,200 registered residents.

The new system is being introduced on Thursday, and from then, patients will have a new number, 0844 815 1005, to call.

Margaret Weaver, business manager at Trinity Medical Centre, said: "Like many GPs, our patients can find it difficult to get through to us at peak call times.

"Our current system can't cope with the high volume of calls we get at certain times of day, which means that our patients may get the engaged tone when calling us, particularly first thing in the morning.

"Our new system has additional lines and uses call automation to make call handling more efficient."

The system,known as Surgery Line, is especially developed for doctors' surgeries and has been installed at several GP practices in North East England and in about 1,200 across the UK.

A new modern switchboard with headsets, handsets, call recording facilities and safety equipment for staff are included.

Ms Weaver said: "We are always looking at ways to improve our service for patients, and we are confident that our new phone service will ease communication with us.

"Our patients should now find it quicker to speak to the department that they need, with extra lines for callers."

The new phone number will be charged at lo-call rates of 4.2p per minute, which is equivalent to BT most common standard rate and so shouldn't cost patients any more.

To make the changeover as smooth as possible, patients dialling the old number in error will hear a recording with details of the new number.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Golf_Paul on Jan 18th, 2008 at 4:03pm
http://www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=136730&command=displayContent&sourceNode=136541&contentPK=19586506&folderPk=79656&pNodeId=243835



'IMMORAL GP CALL PRACTICE MUST GO'

18 January 2008



A controversial phone system that charges patients to call their doctor is to be discussed in the House of Commons.

The 084 number, which is used by 11 doctors' surgeries in East Yorkshire, charges patients up to 5p a minute from land lines and 40p a minute from mobile phones.

Its use was first reported in the Mail after 72-year-old patient Ian Burns, of Patrington, was charged 50p for one call, during which he was placed on hold for 10 minutes.


The system, operated by Surgery Line, has been branded unfair by patients and health watchdogs and Health Secretary Alan Johnson, MP for Hessle and West Hull, has issued firm advice to GPs not to charge patients more.

Beverley and Holderness MP Graham Stuart has secured a Commons debate on the controversial numbers.

The motion, backed by 59 MPs, describes the system as "unsatisfactory" and calls on Mr Johnson to put an end to it.

Mr Stuart said: "These call charges have caused a great deal of hardship and worry to many people, especially the elderly and disabled, and it's about time we saw the back of them. Unfortunately, the Government is dragging its heels and refusing to act.

"Instead, it's content to blame the health trusts. It's up to Mr Johnson to put an end to this immoral practice and that's what I'll be calling for in Monday's debate."

Under the Surgery Line system, callers do not receive an engaged tone if the line is busy, but are placed in a queue and given a list of options to choose. However, the call does not tell people their bills are rising while they are on hold.

Before the system was introduced, people calling surgeries on a Kingston Communications line could do so for free and BT customers would have been charged 3p a minute at peak times and 4.5p for up to an hour off-peak.

The revenue-sharing numbers, as they are known, also allow practices to generate up to 2p a minute income from each call.

A number of other service providers, such as dentists, opticians and pharmacists, have also moved to 084 numbers.

The latest guidance from the Department of Health is that GPs should not enter new contracts with providers. It also recommends GPs should consider 03 numbers, which cost the same as a geographic call regardless of what type of line the call is made from.  




Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jan 18th, 2008 at 4:37pm

Golf_Paul wrote on Jan 18th, 2008 at 4:03pm:
Beverley and Holderness MP Graham Stuart has secured a Commons debate on the controversial numbers.


http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmagenda/sa80121.htm


Quote:
Summary Agenda Monday 21 January 2008

At the end of the sitting

Adjournment Debate: 0844 revenue-sharing telephone numbers (Mr Graham Stuart) (until 10.30 p.m. or for half an hour, whichever is later).

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jan 18th, 2008 at 5:08pm

idb wrote on Jan 18th, 2008 at 1:29pm:
The new phone number will be charged at lo-call rates of 4.2p per minute, which is equivalent to BT most common standard rate and so shouldn't cost patients any more.

This is yet another surgery which has been mislead on call costs. As well as it not being "standard" (and it has never been), it is quoted exclusive of VAT.


Quote:
To make the changeover as smooth as possible, patients dialling the old number in error will hear a recording with details of the new number.


"Patients who dial the 01 number in error (sic) should now ring the 0844 number, for which you will be charged for NHS services."

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bazzerfewi on Jan 18th, 2008 at 5:38pm
I feel very strongly about doctors ripping patients off so in protest I have changed my Doctors to one with an std number

I URGE YOU ALL TO DO THE SAME WHERE POSSIBLE IN PROTEST AGAINST THE PREMIUM RATE 08 CHARGES LEVID  

Baz

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Jan 18th, 2008 at 7:57pm
All very well if you have the choice, but in my neck of the woods, EVERY practice has  ditched the geo numbers.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Jan 19th, 2008 at 8:59am
Maybe everyone with these rip off practices should deregister enmass, informing them and the PCTs why we are doing it, because as I understand it the doctors get paid for every person registered, therefore if most of the patients deregister, their pay will drop, shouldn't take to long for them to get the message.

And don't forget if you are ill you can go to any surgery even if you are not registered with it if you are not registered any where.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bazzerfewi on Jan 19th, 2008 at 9:13am
Hi Derrick

Very Good Suggestion - but rather that deregister would it not be better for the patients to contact their practice in writing expressing their grievances and maybe suggest to other patients that they do the same maybe get up a petition. I think if enough letters landed on the GPs desk they would sit up and listen.

I am now going to contact my G.P. and let him know why I have left.

Baz

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Jan 19th, 2008 at 9:58am
Hi Baz,

I think they would take more notice if it hit them in THEIR pockets, I don't think they would take notice of petitions.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jan 21st, 2008 at 12:34pm
HOUSE OF COMMONS ADJOURNMENT DEBATE
0844 REVENUE SHARING TELEPHONE NUMBERS
MONDAY 21 JANUARY 2008


Graham Stuart MP will introduce a debate on this topic at the end of today’s sitting in the Commons chamber.

This will commence after any 10:00 pm divisions at the conclusion of the debate on Europe.

The debate will last for 30 minutes. Mr Stuart may take interventions from other members. A minister will reply on behalf of the government.

This is simply a discussion; the only vote will be “that this house do now adjourn”.


The debate will be broadcast by BBC Parliament and by Parliament Live

A record will be found in Hansard from 8:00 am on Tuesday morning

Members may wish join efforts to encourage participation by MPs and coverage by the media.

Links to the published proceedings will be published in the Parliamentary update thread.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 31st, 2008 at 12:34am
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/Surgery-defends-new-call-system.3727349.jp

Surgery defends new call system

By Kaye Henry Health reporter

<<
PHONE bosses and health chiefs today defending a new call system installed at a South Shields doctors' surgery.

Earlier this month the Gazette revealed how Trinity Medical Centre in Laygate has ditched its 0191 phone number, replacing it with Surgery Line.

The new number aims to improve access and speed up call handling for the 6,200 residents registered with the practice, and includes a new modern switchboard and call-recording facilities.

But Surgery Line, which adopts an 0844 number, has been at the centre of a national controversy.

Revenue sharing 0844 numbers have been criticised by campaigners and branded a 'scandal' during a House of Commons debate.

MPs raised concerns at an adjournment debate last week, stating that calls to GPs cost more using these numbers, and that doctors were making a profit from the extra costs.

But service provider Network Europe Group (NEG) and Trinity Medical Centre have denied the allegations.

Patients were previously paying 3.6p per minute (plus VAT) and a connection fee of about 4p (plus VAT) calling from an 0191 number.

They say the new lo-call 0844 number costs 4.9p per minute (including VAT) from landlines, although costs from mobiles will vary.

NEG says charges are about the same for an average three minute call as there is no connection fee.

Alistair Campbell, of NEG, said a proportion of the costs do go back to the practice to fund the new systems but stressed surgeries were not profiting from patients.

He said: "For some it will be cheaper, for some fractionally more, but for most there is no difference.

"The average call length of calls to surgeries has gone down after 0844 numbers are installed.

"Patient surveys show a significant improvement in patient satisfaction after 0844 numbers were installed.

"If patients were being ripped off and held in long queues, this would certainly not be the case."

Margaret Weaver, Trinity Medical Centre business manager, added: "We have been assured by Surgery Line that calling from a land line will not cost the patients any more money than from a BT line and the cost from a mobile is out of our control and down to the supplier.

"The practice is committed to delivering high quality services to our patients and we feel this new phone system may actually cost patients less as the calls will be handled quickly and efficiently.

"Patients will not get the engaged tone and patients will not be kept on hold.

"As with all our services to patients, we will evaluate and constantly monitor to make sure we deliver these standards."

She added the new telephone system was discussed by the surgery's Patient Involvement Group.

Dorothy Robertson, chairman of South Tyneside District Hospital's Public Patient Involvement (PPI) forum and a patient at Trinity, was consulted on the system.

She said: "There's been a lot of discussion on this. I'd previously been led to believe it was more expensive, but I now know it's no different unless calling from a mobile.

"There is going to be a tremendous advantage for the surgery and for the patients."

Department of Health guidance recommends that GPs consider using 03 numbers which cost the same as a geographic call regardless of what type of line the call is made from.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 31st, 2008 at 3:08am
http://db.cornwall.gov.uk/documents/download.aspx?doc=277751

CORNWALL COUNTY COUNCIL

Not Confidential                        

HEALTH AND ADULT SOCIAL CARE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

21 January 2008 Agenda No. 8

CORNWALL AND ISLES OF SCILLY PRIMARY CARE TRUST – USE OF 0844 TELEPHONE NUMBERS BY GP SURGERIES  

RECOMMENDATION

The Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee is asked to note the contents of the Report.

[...]

Cornwall and 0844 use by GPs  

4.1 There has been considerable media debate regarding the use of 0844 (non-geographic) telephone numbers by GP practices (see Appendices 1 - 3 for examples).  

4.2 In Cornwall there are currently 6 (Main Surgery) GP practices using 0844 numbers:

Pelynt Surgery  Branch Surgery  Pelynt, Looe
Drs Fagg,Palmer,Brewer,Goss,Roy,Davies & Geoffrey Main Surgery Polperro, Looe  
Drs Jackson, Charlton, Webster-Harrison, Booth & Rae Main Surgery  Portview Surgery, Saltash  
Drs Ingle, Kersh, Macready, Stephens, Wight, Randell Main Surgery Narrowcliff, Newquay  
The Rame Group Practice Main Surgery Cawsand, Torpoint (Choice of 01 or 02 number in addition to the 0844)
Drs Middleton, Hamilton, Waldron & Partington Main Surgery Par, Polruan Fowey  
Neetside Surgery Main Surgery Bude  

4.3 On 27 November 2007 the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly PCT issued a press release which stated:  

“We feel strongly that patients should not pay higher than normal rates to call GP practices to access local health services. We will discuss this issue with the practices concerned because this is not in line with Department of Health guidance. As a Trust we aim to provide equitable access to services and do not encourage practices which discriminate based on an individual’s financial situation or otherwise.”

4.4 The PCT have committed to ensuring all practices are fully aware of the contents of the Department of Health letter to PCT Chief Executives (Appendix 4) and subsequent correspondence. The PCT will explore reverting to a geographic or ‘03’ with practices who currently use 0844 numbers. The PCT are aware, however, that practices may be tied into contracts with telephone systems suppliers which make an early change to a geographic number unrealistic or have a cost implication.

4.5 The PCT will explore with practices, timescales and cost implications of moving from an 0844 number to a geographic code or an ‘03’ number. This will be completed by 31 January 2008.

Proposals

This report was brought to the Committee at the request of Members. Members are therefore asked to consider whether the report and responses from Cornwall and Isles of Scilly PCT provide adequate reassurance that the issue is being tackled locally or whether further work/ reports are required.  

OPTIONS

The Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee could:
(i) note the report, or

(ii) make recommendations as to how this issue could be pursued with the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly PCT.

RESOURCES

The adoption of 0844 numbers by GPs and any cost implications which arise as a result of any changes would need to be addressed by the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly PCT.  

CONSULTATION/ROUTE  
Public/Other Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Primary Care Trust
Local Member(s)                      
     
   Anticipated Date
Panel    
Committee HASCOSC 21 January 2008  
Executive No  
Council No  

CONCLUSION

The Committee is requested to receive the report and consider whether any further action is required by the Committee.

[...]


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 31st, 2008 at 3:12am
http://www.listermedicalcentre.com/

Notice Board

Change of Telephone Numbers

From Tuesday 22nd January 2008 the surgery has a new telephone number which will be 0844 576 9010.

The new fax number will be 0844 576 9011.

Calls from a BT landline to these numbers will currently be charged at 4.2 pence per minute; calls from other operators may vary.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PLEASE LISTEN to the new menu options or use option 2 for appointments and option 5 for general enquiries.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 31st, 2008 at 3:18am
http://www.derbycitypct.nhs.uk/content/Item%203%20TB%20minutes%206%20Dec%2007.pdf

TRUST BOARD MEETING
6th December 2007
PUBLIC SESSION MINUTES

Trust Board Meeting 3rd January 2008
Agenda item number 3

DERBY CITY PCT

[...]

208.07
Any other Business
208.07.01 0844 Telephone numbers
The question of use by practices of 0844 telephone numbers was raised. Ms Blackshaw reported that a review of use of 0844 numbers was currently taking place, but initial findings seemed to show that benefits in terms of access for patients outweighed the marginally higher cost of such calls. Practices did not benefit financially from the use of 0844 numbers. The review report will be brought to the Board on completion.
Kathryn Blackshaw

[...]


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 31st, 2008 at 3:31am
http://www.reading.gov.uk/Documents/Committee_Services/Housing_Health_Community_Care_Scrutiny_Panel/-2007-2008/071217/item11-PALSReportDecember2007.pdf

BERKSHIRE WEST PCT

Summary:
This report provides statistical data and examples of patient feedback received by PALS during the period 01 April 2006 – 30th September 2007.

[...]

Access to services

These enquiries usually relate to problems with access – these can range from disabled access to premises to more general enquiries about patients’ entitlement to receive NHS services. Enquiries regarding difficulty accessing GP surgeries to make an appointment also fall under this category e.g. patients ringing abroad to 0844 numbers, or being unable to make a pre-bookable appointment more than 2 weeks in advance.

[...]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 31st, 2008 at 3:36am
http://www.barnsleypct.nhs.uk/download.asp?DLID=280

Barnsley LMC Newsletter

[...]

Use of Non-Geographical (‘084’) Telephone Numbers
There have been numerous newspaper articles recently complaining about GPs making
money from 0844 telephone numbers. This is particularly galling as there are many
other NHS services (NHS Direct for one, as well as many hospitals) and other public
services (like the police) that are not using local rate numbers which have not been
picked up by the press.

Firstly, it seems unacceptable that practices be expected to move away from 084
numbers when, only a year ago, practices were encouraged to move to these numbers
when the use of premium rate numbers was banned. Secondly, whilst we fully support
the view that practices should not seek to make significant financial gains from their
telephone systems, there is no evidence to suggest that using an 084 number allows
practices to do this. In fact, many practices using 084 numbers are often able to deal
with their calls more efficiently and quickly, therefore costing patients less overall.

[...]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bazzerfewi on Jan 31st, 2008 at 5:44am

Answer me this, you say that you were encouraged to use 08 number who by, LET ME GUESS THE COMPANY THAT SOLD YOU THE PHONE SYSTEM ;D.  08 numbers when used by doctors and other such services is unacceptable and it has been lobbied in parliament, the results were very encouraging

You say that you support the fact that significant gains should not be made, well that makes me laugh; D because if that was the case you would use the 03 range of numbers. I am in business myself and if I contacted my customers asking them to subsidize my phone calls they would go else where.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jan 31st, 2008 at 9:58am

bazzerfewi wrote on Jan 31st, 2008 at 5:44am:
Answer me this, you say that you were encouraged to use 08 number who by ...


Sadly, it was the Department of Health and many PCTs! This is why they are slow to admit their mistake, because this would involve accepting at least some moral responsibility to help GPs buy themselves out of their telephone service contracts.


bazzerfewi wrote on Jan 31st, 2008 at 5:44am:
You say that you support the fact that significant gains should not be made

The problem here, as shown by a number of the recent postings, is that NHS patients are being seen as consumers who should not be exploited by GPs to provide excess profit. It is seen as OK for patients to pay if they get "value for money".

This reasonable approach for a business situation IS TOTALLY WRONG in the context of the NHS.

The NHS does not provide "value for money" to patients using its services. It is funded through progressive taxation and provided according to need. Some pay a lot a get little, some pay little and get a lot. That is how it works, many (but not all) of us believe that this is how it should be. Consumerism, which I fully support in the commercial field, cannot apply to public services in general, the NHS in particular.

David

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bazzerfewi on Jan 31st, 2008 at 11:29am
HERE HERE I to fully support private industry I work for myself and that is where my income comes from but I think the line should be drawn when the NHS and related services is used for profit at the cost of patients.

Doctors receive an adequate salary and as I stated in my last communication if I expected my customers to pay more because I installed a new phone system the probability is that they would go else where.

Baz

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 31st, 2008 at 12:37pm
http://www.lcrpct.nhs.uk/site/Internet/PCTStructure/BoardMeetings/2008/0/Paper%20C%20PEC%20report.pdf

LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY AND RUTLAND PRIMARY CARE TRUST
REPORT TO THE TRUST BOARD
10 JANUARY 2008
Tile of the report:
Report from the Professional Executive Committee Chairman
Report by:
Dr C Trzcinski, PEC Chairman
Presented by:
Dr C Trzcinski, PEC Chairman

Summary of key points:

[...]

Premium rate (0845 or 0844) phone numbers

[...]

6. Premium rate (0845 or 0844) phone numbers

The overview and scrutiny committee of the county council has raised concerns over the use of the above telephone numbers by GP surgeries. Following discussion the PEC agreed that national policy should be followed on the issue which is that each practice should decide if they will use these numbers, but no profit should be made. GPs should consider using the 03 numbering range, which were introduced earlier this year.

[...]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 2nd, 2008 at 1:53pm
http://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/Warning-over-GPs-phone-numbers.3736616.jp

Warning over GPs' phone numbers

Danielle Beeton

<<
Doctors' surgeries have been advised against taking up a controversial new telephone system amid fears it is leaving patients out of pocket

Claims have been made that Wearside GP surgeries with 0844 telephone numbers are costing people more to call than the traditional local rate.

Four surgeries in Sunderland and two in Durham currently carry the new number instead of the 0191 code, according to the NHS Choices website.

Those with 0844 numbers have usually implemented a phone system known as Surgery Line, which is usually provided by a company called Network Europe Group (NEG) Limited.

The system allows callers to be placed in a queue so that they do not hear the engaged tone.

According to NEG, calls to 0844 numbers cost patients 4p per minute, the same as the first minute of BT's standard call rate between 6am and 6pm.

But now, claims from MPs suggest the system is actually costing patients up to 4p more a minute and 40p a minute from a mobile phone.

After the issue was discussed in Parliament earlier this month, Wearside resident Patrick Lavelle raised concerns at an integrated board meeting of NHS South of Tyne and Wear.

Mr Lavelle, who intends to stand as an Independent candidate for Sunderland Central in the next General Election, said: "Not only does this pose a challenge to one of the main creeds of the NHS – free at the point of access – but it impacts on the most vulnerable members of society – the chronically ill, young families and pensioners."

Jan Forster, director of the policy unit at NHS South of Tyne and Wear, confirmed that surgeries and primary care trusts had received guidance from the Department of Health not to enter into new contracts.

She said: "There are approximately 12 surgeries in South of Tyne and Wear who currently have 0844 numbers and we are working closely with all of them surgeries to make sure no new contracts are entered into."

She added that primary care trusts would work closely with surgeries who have already entered into contracts, to weigh up the pros and cons of keeping the line.

According to communications watchdog Ofcom, the cost of calling an 0844 number depends on the telephone package, which makes it hard to give a snapshot of the true cost for all telephone users.

But a spokeswoman did confirm that those using BT's Option One package, for example, would pay up to 5p a minute to call an 0844 number, whereas a number with the prefix 01 would cost up to 3p a minute.

She said: "The advice we give to consumers is that they should contact their telecommunications company because they are obliged to make it clear to them what they charge based on the package they are on."

NEG has denied that calls to 0844 numbers cost any more than to normal landline numbers.

A spokesman said: "We have not been told of the guidance. As far as NEG are concerned, we have a formal agreement with the department to provide 0844 numbers to GP surgeries. In fact, it was a move that they instigated.

"Around 10million patients around the UK rely on an 0844 number to reach their GP, with only a very tiny minority – less than 1 in 10,000 – complaining about the cost.

"It would be a total farce and a complete U-turn for the Government to reverse their policy on use of 0844 numbers for GPs.

"The average call to a GP lasts for three minutes. Calls to an 0844 number (or lo-call rate number) cost 12.6p for a three- minute call. Calls to the old number would have cost 15.08p for a three-minute call from a BT landline.

"Calls vary depending on which network is used, but calling an 0844 number is designed to be of roughly the equivalent price. 0844 numbers can cost less and they can cost more but on balance they cost about the same which follows the guidelines issued by the Department of Health."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 2nd, 2008 at 1:55pm
http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/wnnewslatest/display.var.2013449.0.surgeries_stuck_with_the_ripoff_numbers.php

Surgeries stuck with the 'rip-off' numbers
By James Connell

<<
HIGH-rate telephone numbers at GP surgeries have been branded "a rip-off" but doctors face massive fines if they wriggle out of their contracts.

Health Minister Ivan Lewis said GP surgeries such as St John's House Surgery in Worcester and Ombersley Medical Centre could not be forced by the Government to ditch their 0844 numbers.

Your Worcester News has previously highlighted the use of the numbers by both surgeries.

The Ombersley Medical Centre is still reviewing its telephone contract following a survey of patient views in November.

Mr Lewis, who addressed the House of Commons on Monday, confessed he was worried about patients on low incomes, isolated older people and those with chronic conditions being "ripped off or exploited" by having to call 0844 and 0845 numbers to book appointments. He gave a "cast-iron guarantee" that NHS Direct will not have a higher rate telephone number when the new contract is signed.

But he said a promise to get rid of the controversial 0844 numbers at GP surgeries would be "hollow" if they were locked into long-term contracts.

Dr Simon Parkinson, medical secretary for the Worc-estershire Local Medical Committee, represents the interests of the county's 450 GPs.

He said: "The problem for many GPs is that we have entered into long-term contracts in good faith. The contract at my surgery still has five years to go.

"We would be fined thousands of pounds because of the penalty clause if we tried to get out of it."

Dr Parkinson has received no complaints from patients about the telephone line and says it was brought in at his Redditch-based surgery with patient backing to improve the call handling service.

Calling an ordinary landline number with BT or Virgin is either free with an inclusive package or 3.25p a minute but to call to an 0844 number would cost 5p a minute.

The Department of Health advised primary care trusts in December 2006 to take action to ensure that patients calling GP practices do not pay more than they would if they called a local number.

The department suggested GPs did not break existing contracts.

They have recommended that GPs switch to 03 numbers - which cost the same as a local call - when they expire.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 2nd, 2008 at 3:00pm

idb wrote on Feb 2nd, 2008 at 1:53pm:
"The average call to a GP lasts for three minutes. Calls to an 0844 number (or lo-call rate number) cost 12.6p for a three- minute call. Calls to the old number would have cost 15.08p for a three-minute call from a BT landline.
It will be interesting to hear details of NEG's formal agreement with the Treasury for callers to a "lo-call rate number" to be exempted from VAT and that with BT for them to be exempted from the call setup fee. Neither exemption applied to calls to the old number (before the Summer 2007 price change).

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 2nd, 2008 at 4:02pm
Worth restating the lies that NEG continues to publish:

http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/downloads/surgeryline-thelodge.pdf

How your patients benefit

Patients benefit by having their calls
answered more quickly. The engaged
tone becomes rare – even at peak times -
because you are able to handle incoming
calls more efficiently, whilst patient calls
are spread out during the day. Calls to
084 or ‘lo-call’ numbers cost patients 4p
per minute, the same as the first minute
of BT’s standard call rate between 6am
and 6pm. This means that many
patients will actually pay less in total
because their call is answered and
processed more quickly. Significantly, the
cost of calls from mobiles remains
unchanged - these account for around
30% of all calls to surgeries.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 8th, 2008 at 11:35pm
ABOUT TIME TOO.

Hopefully sets a precedent.

http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/Hospital-rings-the-changes.3760443.jp

<<
Hospital rings the changes

A HOSPITAL trust has bowed to public pressure over a change to their telephone number.

The University Hospital of Hartlepool has reverted to its former telephone number following feedback from a number of patients and relatives, over the cost to ring from mobile phones and access from abroad.

The North Tees and Hartlepool Foundation NHS Trust brought in an 0844 number a year ago, because it wanted one single number for the trust's two main hospitals in Hartlepool and Stockton.

But trust chiefs say the 0844 number caused problems for people ringing from abroad to find out how friends and family members were doing, because it was up to the service provider in the country they were calling from to allow the number to be called from outside the UK.

They say there was also some evidence that different mobile phone networks charged heavily for the use of the 0844 number from a mobile phone.

The number for the University Hospital of Hartlepool now reverts back to (01429) 266654, and the University Hospital of North Tees can be contacted on (01642) 617617.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Feb 9th, 2008 at 10:24am

idb wrote on Feb 2nd, 2008 at 4:02pm:
Worth restating the lies that NEG continues to publish:

http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/downloads/surgeryline-thelodge.pdf

How your patients benefit

Patients benefit by having their calls answered more quickly. The engaged tone becomes rare – even at peak times - because you are able to handle incoming calls more efficiently, whilst patient calls are spread out during the day. Calls to 084 or ‘lo-call’ numbers cost patients 4p per minute, the same as the first minute of BT’s standard call rate between 6am and 6pm. This means that many patients will actually pay less in total because their call is answered and processed more quickly.  Significantly, the cost of calls from mobiles remains unchanged - these account for around 30% of all calls to surgeries.

Ignoring the LIE about the cost of calling an 0844 number as opposed to an 01 or 02 number from a mobile, there they go again - quoting rounded down (the real cost is 4¼p/minute ex-VAT) ex-VAT prices for their 5p/minute 0844 numbers to confuse the issue.  How many members of the public pay for their calls ex-VAT?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Feb 10th, 2008 at 11:59am

idb wrote on Feb 8th, 2008 at 11:35pm:
ABOUT TIME TOO.

Hopefully sets a precedent.


HALLELUJAH!

I think that anyone now who is trying to get hold of surgery numbers or convince their practices that 0844 numbers are a bad thing should definitely refer them to that article.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 11th, 2008 at 11:50pm
http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/Surgeries-hang-on-over-phone.3764149.jp

Surgeries hang on over phone switch

CITY surgeries are "reluctant" to switch to 0844 numbers until complications caused by the new system have been solved.
Out of 28 practices in Peterborough, four have introduced the system – forcing patients to pay a higher rate than a typical local call.

However, the 24 remaining surgeries have reportedly put the brakes on swapping 01733 for 0844, because the system has run into difficulties.

The revelation came to light in a report submitted to Peterborough City Council's health and adult social care scrutiny panel.

The report, written by Peterborough Primary Care Trust (PCT), said: "Recently, one practice experienced difficulties with the telephone system supplier, and the remaining Peterborough practices are observing the outcomes closely.

"We understand that the majority of the Peterborough practices are now reluctant to put in place the new system because of the difficulties experienced."

Suppliers of the 0844 telephone system advertise the software as free, which means that while the NHS does not bear a cost, the patient does.

Numbers which begin with the digits 0844 are charged at 5p a minute – a higher rate than regular local numbers – while callers from mobiles could be charged up to 40p a minute.

The report admitted that the "minimal extra fee" generated an income for each individual practice, but "profits were not actually very high and each has assured us that this is being used to support patient care".

Councillor Keith Sharp, a member of the health and adult social care scrutiny panel, said: "I would rather practices didn't use 0844 numbers, because it is the patient who is penalised."

In October, North West Cambridgeshire MP Shailesh Vara wrote to telecommunications regulator OFCOM, the PCT and the Department of Health, urging them to intervene in the interests of patients.
Mr Vara said he hoped a "sensible outcome" would ensure patients were not hit in the pocket.

A PCT spokeswoman said the organisation could not control whether individual practices changed to a 0844 system or not, but "may encourage and support practices to consider very carefully any changes to their telephone systems which incur red patient charges".

The health and adult social care scrutiny panel will meet again on February 19, in the Bourges and Viersen rooms, town hall, starting at 7pm.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 14th, 2008 at 1:20pm
http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=35&storycode=4117287&c=2

GPs must tell patients about 0844 call cost

<<
Practices which use 0844 telephone numbers must ensure that patients are advised of the cost of calling, the BMA is warning.

The association issued the guidance after mounting pressure from patient lobby groups to outlaw the numbers, which are used by up to 1,500 GP practices. Calls to 0844 'local rate' numbers can cost up to 20p a minute from mobile phones.

The BMA advised: ‘Where 0844 numbers are used by practices, there should be mention of the charge for phone calls in the practice’s information leaflet.

‘While patients’ telephone providers may have a variety of charges, in any practice information the price relevant to most consumers should be stated.'

‘Probably few practices are aware of this aspect of advertising practice,’ it added.

Last month the Government announced a clampdown on 0844 numbers, claiming it was not ‘consistent with best professional practice’ to charge patients above the local rate. A number of PCTs have also launched reviews on the use of the numbers, while more than 28,000 people have now signed a petition on the Downing Street website claiming the use of the numbers ‘penalises the poor and elderly’.

A Department of Health spokesman said that information was currently being gathered on the use of 0844 numbers, with a report due at the end of March.

‘We do not expect GPs to break existing contracts, but they should not be entering new ones that would involve patients being charged more than for a local call,’ he said.

GPs should consider switching to 03 numbers which cost the same as a geographic call regardless of what type of line the call is made from, the spokesman added.
>>


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 23rd, 2008 at 1:13pm
http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/localnews/display.var.2059048.0.block_on_toprate_gp_lines.php

Block on top-rate GP lines
By Independent reporter

<<
MEMBERS of the Enfield Over-50s Forum are celebrating a major step forward in their battle to stop GP surgeries making extra money by using premiumrate telephone numbers.

The Forum has been complaining for many years to Enfield Primary Care Trust (PCT) to stop surgeries from using the 0844 number altogether, as they feel it completely goes against the principles of a National Health Service.

The Forum argued that the PCT had been reluctant to act and should have made more effort to resolve the situation.

But in a recent letter the PCT informed the Forum that it has now written to all 62 surgeries in the borough warning that the it does not approve of them using these premium rate numbers.

The 13 surgeries currently using 0844 numbers have also been informed by Rob Lee, associate director of Primary Care in Enfield, that the Department of Health is currently acquiring evidence to decide if the use of 0844 numbers should be banned altogether.

Long-serving Forum chairman Monty Meth said that he was delighted by the letter.

He said: "Surgeries should not be allowed to boost their income by taking a cut from the cost of each incoming 0844 call, particularly from vulnerable, elderly and disabled people on low incomes."

0844 calls can cost 4.2p a minute on a BT line and up to as much as 40p a minute when using a mobile phone.

There have even been cases where patients have paid over £3 to contact their own GP and Mr Meth is hopeful that such practices will soon be banned.

The news was announced at a Forum reception at the Civic Centre on Tuesday night and came on the same night that it was announced that target member numbers had been achieved for 2008.

l If you are interested in finding out more about the Enfield Over-50s Forum call 020 8447 8841, email tony_watts@blueyonder.co.uk or write to the secretary at Enfield Borough Over-50s Forum, Salisbury House, Bury Street West, London, N9 9LA.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Feb 23rd, 2008 at 2:06pm

idb wrote on Feb 23rd, 2008 at 1:13pm:
http://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/localnews/display.var.2059048.0.block_on_toprate_gp_lines.php

0844 calls can cost 4.2p a minute on a BT line and up to as much as 40p a minute when using a mobile phone.

There we go again, guoting the cost excluding VAT.  How many members of the public get to re-claim VAT on their telephone bills?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 28th, 2008 at 12:00pm
http://www.spaldingtoday.co.uk/news/Patients-angry-over-higher-call.3823292.jp

Patients angry over higher call charges

By Adam Uren

<<
Patients are finding their bank balances are taking a hit due to a Spalding doctors' surgery's new phone system.

Munro Medical Centre in West Elloe Avenue changed its number from a local 01775 code to an 0844 code in December, which brought in a virtual queuing system to stop engaged lines.

Now patients say they are being kept waiting while calls are answered and are being charged up to 5p a minute.

Phoning the medical centre costs slightly more than a standard BT call, around 4p, and patients say they are kept on the line longer than under the old system.

Those who are paying a monthly tariff in which they receive free local and national calls are being charged for ringing the surgery, when they would not previously have paid at all.

Deeping St Nicholas resident Gerald Gray (72) could not get through to the nurse.

He said: "It costs more to ring the new number than the old one and I had to ring four times before I got an appointment. It's not any quicker. On the old number you could press "5" and you could get callback but that won't work on the new number. You have to hang on until they get round to you."

David Allen (71), of Matmore Gate, Spalding, pays a monthly fee to TalkTalk for local and national calls but was amazed when he found a £2 charge on his phone bill after phoning the medical centre seven times last month.

He said: "It's not a lot of money but many people have to ring regularly. What with electricity and gas going up too it's a bit much for the pensioners."

Practice manager Debbie Herd said: "Some phone bundles do not include 08 numbers so our number doesn't come under the free minutes. There's a misconception that the 0844 number is premium rate but it's not. It is similar to standard tariffs. General comments from patients have been positive and although there have been some who have not managed to get through, most are dealt with more quickly."

The centre receives about 1p per minute each call because of the 0844 system. This goes towards paying for the phone equipment.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Feb 28th, 2008 at 8:22pm

idb wrote on Feb 28th, 2008 at 12:00pm:
Practice manager Debbie Herd said: "Some phone bundles do not include 08 numbers so our number doesn't come under the free minutes. There's a misconception that the 0844 number is premium rate but it's not. ...

I refer Ms Herd to a dictionary. The word "premium" means "additional sum of money" rather than "expensive".

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 29th, 2008 at 1:24am

Dave wrote on Feb 28th, 2008 at 8:22pm:
I refer Ms Herd to a dictionary.

Ms Herd's problem is not with a dictionary, but with telephone tariff tables. This is shown by the press release on the practice website.


Quote:
“there has been some misrepresentation in the press about the cost of calling an 0844 number”, comments Debbie. “In fact, it is not a premium rate number and costs 4.2p per minute to call. This is comparable to BT’s standard local tariff which costs 4.26p per minute plus VAT

I am very ready to agree with the point about misrepresentation in the press. The "Spalding Today" article suggests "up to 5p per minute" when 5p per minute, plus a 6p connection charge is the minimum that any patient would pay.

The name of the author of the press release is provided at the foot of it.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Tippy on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 10:28am
idb,

How can you state that sugery line is cost effective when Doctors are being tied into a long term contract, patients are being ripped off by having to use an 084 number at higher rates than normal charges.

Most telephone systems will offer the same functionality and more that surgery line does without the need to change the number and cause confussion to the elderly.

You also state that calls are answered more quickly and therefore save patients money, this is not the case.

I deal with PCT's in the north west regarding their telecoms and I can assure you that most doctors are not happy with surgery line and some that have had it installed want it removing.

If anyone knows of a surgery looking into surgery line or are not happy with it please let me know and I will try to help and show them the correct way of operating their telecoms.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 12:33pm

Tippy wrote on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 10:28am:
idb,

How can you state that sugery line is cost effective when Doctors are being tied into a long term contract, patients are being ripped off by having to use an 084 number at higher rates than normal charges.

I think you need to read idb's posts again. idb posts media articles and the text of them is between "<<" and ">>". I presume you are referring to the first post on this thread which was by idb. He quotes from NEG's website, to which he has posted a link.


Tippy wrote on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 10:28am:
You and your staff benefit When a surgery switches to an 084 number, NEG will install and maintain the most efficient communications system on the market. You specify exactly what equipment you want to receive (from handsets to switchboards) for no extra charge. With your own 084 number, you keep about 2p from every call to re-invest in your practice, instead of BT making all the profit from calls to your surgery.

How your patients benefit Patients benefit by having their calls answered more quickly. The engaged tone becomes rare – even at peak times - because you are able to handle incoming calls more efficiently, whilst patient calls are spread out during the day. Calls to 084 or ‘lo-call’ numbers cost patients 4p per minute, the same as the first minute of BT’s standard call rate between 6am and 6pm. This means that many patients will actually pay less in total because their call is answered and processed more quickly. Significantly, the cost of calls from mobiles remains unchanged - these account for around 30% of all calls to surgeries.

The phone system that won’t test your patients “I’ve met a number of practice managers who think that Surgery Line sounds almost too good to be true,” says Chapman, “but after it’s been installed, they realise that NEG delivers everything we promise, and more.”

So what are you talking about here? If this is your own words, you seem to have changed your tone. I suspect this is a quote, but you haven't put it in a quote box or referred to the source, unlike idb.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 12:53pm
I am puzzled because Tippy has now edited his/her post following mine in which I have pointed out that idb is against the Surgery Line system on the basis of 0844 "revenue sharing" numbers. I would have thought that the word "propaganda" in the thread title would have made this obvious.

Evidently not as Tippy has now edited his post and removed the quote from NEG which he eluded to say where it was from. The part attacking idb remains.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 1:28pm

Tippy wrote on Mar 3rd, 2008 at 10:28am:
idb,



I deal with PCT's in the north west regarding their telecoms and I can assure you that most doctors are not happy with surgery line and some that have had it installed want it removing.

If anyone knows of a surgery looking into surgery line or are not happy with it please let me know and I will try to help and show them the correct way of operating their telecoms.



Maybe you could have a look at my surgery and PCT,(Central Lancs) who are using 0844 and will not acknowledge my emails, even though before Christmas the surgery said they could not alter anything until after Christmas, well we are definitely after Christmas now.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 7th, 2008 at 10:54pm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=528602&in_page_id=1774

Patients charged up to 40p a minute to call family doctors
By JAMES TOZER

Last updated at 20:49pm on 7th March 2008

<<
Patients are being charged up to 40p a minute to call their GP despite official guidance that family doctors should not use higher rate phone lines.

Around one in ten practices can now only be reached by using 0844 numbers.

They cost more than ordinary landlines, and doctors pocket money from every call.

Ministers have called on surgeries to switch back to normal-rate numbers.

Despite personal intervention from Health Secretary Alan Johnson, more GPs are signing up to the system.

Although phone tariffs for calling 0844 numbers vary widely, typical charges are 5p a minute from a landline, compared with just over 3p a minute to ring a normal-rate number, rising to up to 40p a minute from a mobile phone.

No figures for the total income brought in by the scheme have been published, but based on a surcharge of 2p per minute, even if the average call lasted just 60 seconds it would be in the region of £4million a year.

The surcharge is paid directly to surgeries. GPs say they don't make a profit from the 0844 numbers because they spend the money on installing and operating the now phone systems to replace their antiquated systems.

The move to higher rate phone lines comes at a time when GPs' salaries have increased by almost 60 per cent in four years to an average of £113,000 a year.

This week they agreed a new contract that will require them to open their surgeries for longer or take a pay cut - the deal came after the National Audit Office said the previous one struck in 2004 had been a bad deal for taxpayers.

The Department of Health wrote to all primary care trusts - which oversee local health budgets - this week saying there have been "a number of concerns" about 0844 numbers.

It reiterated guidance from 2006 that practices should not be entering into new contracts to use them and should instead set up numbers beginning 03 which cost no more to call than ordinary, local numbers.

Yesterday, Mr Johnson went further, saying that while he couldn't force GPs to comply, "if we have to take further measures, we will, because we want to get them to move across to 03 numbers".

His stance is backed by the communications watchdog Ofcom, which says public bodies should not use numbers beginning 08 unless they also offer conventional numbers as well.

The Department of Health is examining the issue and expects to announce later this month whether action will be taken.

One of the leading firms in the field, Network Europe Group, claims to have signed up 1,200 of the 10,000 GP practices in the UK and that calls are running at 17million a month.

Katherine Murphy, of the Patients' Association, said: "So much for the NHS being free at the point of need - surgeries shouldn't be forcing patients to use expensive phone lines.

"It's very confusing for elderly patients, and if you're calling from a mobile it can be quite costly as well."

Dr Richard Vautrey, deputy chairman of the British Medical Association's GPs committee, said: "There are undoubted benefits to patients from these systems, and it would be a retrograde step to get rid of them.

"There is no doubt that these numbers provide a much better level of patient satisfaction and improved call-handling."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 8th, 2008 at 12:26am
http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=35&storycode=4117779&c=2

Pressure grows on GPs to ditch 0844 surgery numbers
08 Mar 08

<<
One in three GP practices in some parts of the country now use the controversial 0844 ‘local rate’ telephone numbers.

New data compiled from the NHS Choices website by campaigners against use of 0844 numbers is being used to increase the pressure on practices to move back to standard local numbers.

The figures show 807 practices across England currently use the 0844 ‘local rate’ numbers, which can cost up to 20p a minute from mobile phones.

The area of greatest use was in Calderdale PCT, where 33% of practices use the numbers, while at least one in five practices use the numbers in a further ten PCTs.

Some 19 PCTs did not have any practices using the numbers.

A Department of Health report into the use of 0844 numbers is expected to be published at the end of this month.

Current Department of Health guidance states that while GPs are not expected to break existing guidance, they should not enter into new ones which charge patients more than they would pay for a local call.

Campaigner David Hickson claimed that NHS GPs using the numbers could be in breach of their contract because of the revenue collected from patients – but said he was optimistic about the Department’s response.

‘I think when we look at the politics of this, Alan Johnson as a man hates this, and if it was entirely in his hands he’d be round every GP surgery tomorrow pulling them out,’ he said.

Last month the BMA warned practices using the numbers that they should ensure patients were advised of the cost of calling, and that the charges should be listed in practices’ information leaflets.

Top five PCTs using 0844 numbers

Calderdale PCT – 33%
North Lincolnshire PCT – 29%
Isle of Wight PCT – 26%
North Somerset PCT – 25%
Wakefield District PCT – 25%
>>


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Mar 8th, 2008 at 9:38am

idb wrote on Mar 7th, 2008 at 10:54pm:
Dr Richard Vautrey, deputy chairman of the British Medical Association's GPs committee, said: "There are undoubted benefits to patients from these systems, and it would be a retrograde step to get rid of them.


Quite Unbelievable.  No wonder this problem persists when this is the attitude of one of the senior members of personnel at the BMA.

Once again the attitude is that patients are like prison inmates who should do as we the BMA and GPs tell them and are not valued customers who we are lucky to have the business of and who might easily go elsewhere if we do not keep them happy.

This is at the heart of what has always been wrong with the UK's GP service is set up.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 11th, 2008 at 12:28am
http://www.ehiprimarycare.com/news/3545/johnson_steps_up_pressure_on_0844_numbers

<<
Johnson steps up pressure on 0844 numbers
11 Mar 2008

Health secretary Alan Johnson has stepped up the pressure on practices using 0844 telephone numbers as campaigners draw up a list of more than 800 surgeries with such numbers.

The health secretary, who is MP for Hull and Hessle West, criticised the use of 0844 numbers in his local paper as the Department of Health’s consultation on use of the numbers ends this month.

Practices have switched to 0844 numbers as part of schemes which provide them with more modern telecoms systems and the BMA claims that many practices using 084 numbers are often able to deal with their calls more efficiently and quickly, therefore costing patients less overall. However patients will normally pay 5p per minute when using such numbers compared to lower local call costs which may also be free as part of telephone call packages. The DH wants to see greater use of new 03 numbers which cost the same as a local geographic call number.

Earlier this month Mark Britnell, commissioning director, wrote to PCTs http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Lettersandcirculars/Dearcolleagueletters/DH_083282 instructing them to issue an alert to practices over the investigation into 084 numbers.

He told PCTs that the investigation would conclude by the end of this month and the government would then decide if further action was necessary.

He added: “I would like to re-iterate the government’s position that patients

should not be expected to pay more than the equivalent of a local call, and ask you to consider what action would be necessary to ensure that this is achieved. This will be particularly relevant to primary care service providers who are considering contracting or re-contracting for the provision of an 084 number system.”

Johnson told the Hull Daily Mail “We don't want to have a service here where we tell GPs who are all privately employed how to run their businesses. But what we do is we send out guidance and the guidance we have recently sent out was very clear about not using these 084 numbers."

The current consultation is a result of an adjournment debate held in January on the use of 084 numbers in which health minister Ivan Lewis said that it was “entirely unacceptable” for patients to be charged more than the local rate for contacting their GP surgery. Graham Stuart MP told the House of Commons that as many as 1500 practices use 084 numbers.

Mr Johnson told the Hull Daily Mail: "We are having this consultation and the clear inference there is that if we have to take further measures, we will, because we want to get them to move across to these 03 numbers."

In the meantime campaigner David Hickson, who previously led a campaign to prevent companies making ‘silent’ telemarketing calls, has drawn up a list of 807 surgeries in England which use 084 numbers, compiling the information from the NHS Choices website.

He has made the list available to MPs and some local newspapers have used it to publicise the names of practices using 084 telephone numbers. Hickson’s lists shows Leeds PCT has the greatest number of practices using 0844 numbers, a total of 27, while Calderdale PCT has the greatest percentage of practices using 0844 numbers, a total of 33%.

Hickson believes that use of such numbers breaches clause 483 of the GMS contract which prohibits receipt of remuneration from patients and says Alan Johnson also backed that view in the House of Commons debate in November.

He told EHI Primary Care: “GPs must use the best technology and systems available to provide the best possible service to patients within their budget. Service improvements cannot however be used as an excuse for departing from the fundamental principle that NHS services are provided "free at the point of need".

Last month the BMA’s GP committee advised practices using 084 numbers that they need to publicise their use of such numbers and the costs involved on practice leaflets.

© 2008 E-HEALTH-MEDIA LTD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 11th, 2008 at 12:30am
http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Lettersandcirculars/Dearcolleagueletters/DH_083282?IdcService=GET_FILE&dID=161190&Rendition=Web

Richmond House
79 Whitehall London
SW1A 2NL
Switchboard: 020 7210 3000

To: PCT Chief Executives
Gateway: 9483 3 March 2008
Dear colleagues,

Use of ‘084’ telephone numbers by local NHS services

On the 19 December 2006, the then Health Minister Lord Warner wrote to PCT Chief
Executive’s advising them that Ofcom had introduced a new county wide number
range – ’03’. He also set out the advantages associated with this new number range
and asked PCTs to ensure that patients telephoning practices do not pay more than
a local geographical telephone number. The letter also asked local NHS services to
consider the Central Office of Information (COI) guidance on telephone numbering
when deciding what telephone numbers to use.

I am now writing to ask you to alert primary care service providers that there have
been a number of concerns raised about the use of 084 telephone numbers. The
Department is currently gathering evidence and views on this subject, and will
consider whether further action is necessary once that process is concluded. I
expect this process to be completed by the end of March 2008.

In the meantime, I would like to re-iterate the Government’s position that patients
should not be expected to pay more than the equivalent of a local call, and ask you
to consider what action would be necessary to ensure that this is achieved. This will
be particularly relevant to primary care service providers who are considering
contracting or re-contracting for the provision of an 084 number system.

Yours sincerely

Mark Britnell

Director General, Commissioning & System Management


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 12th, 2008 at 3:00am
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/consumer/article.html?in_article_id=432560&in_page_id=5

40p a minute to phone your doctor

James Tozer, Daily Mail
9 March 2008

<<
Patients are being charged up to 40p a minute to call their GP despite official guidance that family doctors should not use higher rate phone lines.

Around one in ten practices can now only be reached by using 0844 numbers.
They cost more than ordinary landlines, and doctors pocket money from every call.

Ministers have called on surgeries to switch back to normal-rate numbers. Despite personal intervention from Health Secretary Alan Johnson, more GPs are signing up to the system.

Although phone tariffs for calling 0844 numbers vary widely, typical charges are 5p a minute from a landline, compared with just over 3p a minute to ring a normal-rate number, rising to up to 40p a minute from a mobile phone.

No figures for the total income brought in by the scheme have been published, but based on a surcharge of 2p per minute, even if the average call lasted just 60 seconds it would be in the region of £4m a year.

The surcharge is paid directly to surgeries. GPs say they don't make a profit from the 0844 numbers because they spend the money on installing and operating the now phone systems to replace their antiquated systems. The move to higher rate phone lines comes at a time when GPs' salaries have increased by almost 60 per cent in four years to an average of £113,000 a year.

This week they agreed a new contract that will require them to open their surgeries for longer or take a pay cut - the deal came after the National Audit Office said the previous one struck in 2004 had been a bad deal for taxpayers.

The Department of Health wrote to all primary care trusts - which oversee local health budgets - this week saying there have been 'a number of concerns' about 0844 numbers.

It reiterated guidance from 2006 that practices should not be entering into new contracts to use them and should instead set up numbers beginning 03 which cost no more to call than ordinary, local numbers.

Yesterday, Mr Johnson went further, saying that while he couldn't force GPs to comply, 'if we have to take further measures, we will, because we want to get them to move across to 03 numbers'. His stance is backed by the communications watchdog Ofcom, which says public bodies should not use numbers beginning 08 unless they also offer conventional numbers as well.

The Department of Health is examining the issue and expects to announce later this month whether action will be taken.

One of the leading firms in the field, Network Europe Group, claims to have signed up 1,200 of the 10,000 GP practices in the UK and that calls are running at 17m a month.

Katherine Murphy, of the Patients' Association, said: 'So much for the NHS being free at the point of need - surgeries shouldn't be forcing patients to use expensive phone lines.

'It's very confusing for elderly patients, and if you're calling from a mobile it can be quite costly as well.

Dr Richard Vautrey, deputy chairman of the British Medical Association's GPs committee, said: 'There are undoubted benefits to patients from these systems, and it would be a retrograde step to get rid of them.

'There is no doubt that these numbers provide a much better level of patient satisfaction and improved call-handling.'
>>

~ Edited by Dave: Last few paragraphs of article added

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 12th, 2008 at 10:53pm
http://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/news/Patients39-20p-a-minute-to.3868569.jp

Patients' 20p a minute to ring GP

By Joe Shute

<<
MORE Calderdale patients are being charged above the normal rate to phone their GPs than anywhere else in the country.

NHS figures show a third of GP practices in the district have adopted controversial 0844 telephone numbers that can cost patients up to 20p a minute.

That is the highest percentage in the whole of England.

Michael Snee, chairman of Calderdale's patient and public involvement forum, said he was disappointed with the figures as patients should be able to ring their doctors at a normal rate.

He said: "It's wrong that GPs should be using this number, unless they can say why they are using it.

"Are they using it for the benefit of patients – or are they just making money?"

The numbers are charged at 5p a minute from landlines but can cost up to 20p a minute for patients ringing from mobile phones.

But Rod Mellor, also from the forum, said calls were charged at a low rate and patients had seen an improvement in service since the 0844 lines came in.

A spokesman for a Calderdale practice that uses the number said some of the money from calls paid for the line and equipment needed to run the number. He said surgeries did not make a profit from the lines.

Last month the British Medical Association warned practices to ensure patients were advised of the cost of calling by issuing leaflets.

The figures, compiled by the NHS Choices website, reveal 807 practices across England using the 0844 numbers.

The area of greatest use was Calderdale, where 33 per cent of practices used the numbers. North Lincolnshire was second with 29 per cent.

A Department of Health report into the use of 0844 numbers is expected to be published at the end of the month.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 19th, 2008 at 1:38am
Nottinghamshire Local Medical Committee  

http://www.nottslmc.org.uk/

Date unknown, but must be recent

http://www.nottslmc.org.uk/Portals/2/Important%20announcement%20final%200844.pdf

Can't post the text at the moment as it is 'protected'

Author: someone called Alistair (Campbell??).

The lies continue.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by mikeinnc on Mar 19th, 2008 at 2:28am

Quote:
http://www.nottslmc.org.uk/Portals/2/Important%20announcement%20final%200844.pdf


If there was a prize for bulls**t, this would take it by a country mile........!  :(

Title: Re: NEG NHS Conference Call Service
Post by oldharryrocks on Mar 19th, 2008 at 2:41am
I see that they promote a conference call service called health-exchange for NHS users using an 0844 5p a minute number.Which they claim is a local call. :-? I quote

"each person pays for their leg of the call at BT's standard local call rate of 4.2 pence per minute + VAT "

http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/neg_telecom/health-exchange.html

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Mar 19th, 2008 at 7:30am

mikeinnc wrote on Mar 19th, 2008 at 2:28am:

Quote:
http://www.nottslmc.org.uk/Portals/2/Important%20announcement%20final%200844.pdf


If there was a prize for bulls**t, this would take it by a country mile........!  :(

Set against other published statements from this source, this is relatively free of the component referred to by mikeinnc.

The claim that NEG and Opal Telecom (Carphone Warehouse) are not profit-making organisations is somewhat bizarre and the information provided is highly selective and obviously one-sided. Every provider makes exagerated claims about their product. It is not Surgery Line that is the issue for me, but the improper way in which it is funded and the misinformation and rumours about the way it is funded that have been published by the media.

The important point revealed is that (aside from Telco profiteering) patients are paying "millions of pounds per annum" to their GPs in addition to the cost of a normal telephone call, as this is said to be the cost that would be transferred to the practices if they were to use 03 numbers to provide the same facilities without the income from revenue sharing.

Even if as many patients as is claimed are happy with Surgery Line, the principles of the NHS ("free at the point of need") demand that they may not choose to pay for it through contributions to a revenue sharing arrangement.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Mar 19th, 2008 at 10:35am

idb wrote on Mar 19th, 2008 at 1:38am:
http://www.nottslmc.org.uk/Portals/2/Important%20announcement%20final%200844.pdf

Author: someone called Alistair (Campbell??).

The lies continue.

The Heather Mills school of obfuscation, perhaps?

You have got to admire their utter contempt for the public/reader.  The quote that proved it to me is:


Quote:
0844 numbers are charged at 4.2p per minute + VAT at all times (the same rate as a BT local call when NEG Surgery Line was launched in 2003).

They overlook how devious making cost-comparisons in 2008 using figures from 2003 proves them to be.

The fact that 0844 numbers charged at ½p, 1p, 2p, 3p, 4p and 5p per minute (incl. VAT) are available but that NEG only uses the 5p/minute variety (and then quotes the ex-VAT price to make it appear less) and the fact that the telecoms industry has moved on in 5 years (BT's July 2004 abolition of the local/national call distinction being one of the most fundamental) are conveniently (and obviously deliberately) overlooked.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by pw4 on Mar 19th, 2008 at 1:17pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Mar 19th, 2008 at 7:30am:
The important point revealed is that (aside from Telco profiteering) patients are paying "millions of pounds per annum" to their GPs in addition to the cost of a normal telephone call, as this is said to be the cost that would be transferred to the practices if they were to use 03 numbers to provide the same facilities without the income from revenue sharing.

I think the author meant "millions of pounds per annum" that [all] GPs [collectively] would have to pay to receive calls on 03 numbers, which I suspect would in each case exceed the revenue currently 'shared' with each user of an 0844 (by way of the 'payment in kind' funding of the system and routing facilities). The cost of acquiring the numbers and the ongoing cost of receiving calls is a disincentive to adopting 03s.

~ Edited by Dave: Quote box tidied up

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by andy9 on Mar 19th, 2008 at 2:18pm
I thought that these numbers were rare around this area, but I've recently noticed a couple of surgeries with 0844 out-of-hours numbers.

Ordinary off-peak calls have never been 5 pence a minute on any BT or rival tariff, and actually even 0870 numbers are cheaper at those times, which shows what blatant liars the 5p/min 0844 providers are willing to be.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Mar 20th, 2008 at 1:47pm

pw4 wrote on Mar 19th, 2008 at 1:17pm:
The cost of acquiring the numbers and the ongoing cost of receiving calls is a disincentive to adopting 03s


It is a sad fact that if patients are not paying for the surgery telephone system, then someone else has to.

The network diversion and queueing facilities provided by the telco on a 03 number would be no different to those on 0844. Any additional revenue to the (TCP) telco would simply be profiteering. There is also the issue of the local equipment at the surgery, which is funded out of the revenue share that would be sacrificed on adopting an 03 number. The "millions of pounds" is therefore the amount of charges that patients are paying to access NHS services, over and above whatever cost they would incur for making a "normal" (geographic) telephone call.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 21st, 2008 at 10:45am
http://www.kenilworthweeklynews.co.uk/newsl/Doctors-surgeries-flouting-rules-by.3899579.jp

Doctors' surgeries flouting rules by charging patients to ring them

By Sundari Sankar

<<
Doctors' surgeries in Warwick district are continuing to use expensive telephone lines in defiance of government guidelines.
Five GP practices in the district are still operating with 0844 telephone numbers - which can cost patients up to 40p a minute.

The Department of Health has repeatedly advised primary care trusts that the use of such phone numbers is unacceptable and ministers have called on surgeries to switch back to normal-rate numbers.

Professor of patient and public involvement at Warwick University Jonathan Tritter said: “The Department of Health guidance is quite clear and it is not appropriate to make patients pay an unreasonable amount to make contact with their GP.

“It’s up to the government, primary care trusts and strategic health authorities to make sure the appropriate changes are made to put a stop to the matter.”

The charge for dialling an 0844 number can be 5p a minute from a landline - compared to just over 3p a minute to call a normal-rate number - rising up to 40p per minute from a mobile phone.

Part of the premium charge invariably paid by the caller to these numbers is passed on the renter of the line. GP surgeries have been accused of using the extra money gained to fund their telephone system.

Communications watchdog Ofcom’s guidelines state that public bodies should not use numbers beginning with 08 unless they also offer conventional numbers.

The surgeries in Warwick district currently operating with 0844 numbers are Dr Clarkson and partners at The Old Dispensary in Castle Street, Warwick, Dr Clowes and partners in Cubbington Road, Leamington, Dr Davies and partners at Abbey Medical Centre in Station Road, Kenilworth, Dr Letocq and partners at Brese Avenue, Warwick and the Priory Medical Centre in Cape Road (pictured), Warwick. Southam Surgery in Stowe Drive, Southam, is also still using the 0844 number.

A spokesperson for Dr Clowes and Partners surgery in Cubbington Road, said: “We have informed our patients via a patient leaflet how much it costs them to call the surgery.

“We deny that it is costing them more than a normal-rate phone call.”

In December 2006 Ofcom introduced a new countywide number range beginning with 03, aiming to put a stop to the use of 0844 numbers in all GP surgeries.

The then Health Minister Lord Warner asked primary care trusts to ensure that patients phoning practices do not pay more than a local geographical phone number.

A spokesperson for Warwickshire Primary Care Trust said: “As individual businesses surgeries can make their own arrangements for booking appointments. We would encourage any surgery to inform their patients of any call charges.”

The Department of Health has been gathering evidence and views on the subject in order to consider whether further action is necessary. A decision was expected to be reached by the end of this month.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 27th, 2008 at 10:45am
http://www.daventrytoday.co.uk/news/Concern-over-GP-phoneline-costs.3917694.jp

Concern over GP phoneline costs

<<
AN INDEPENDENT voice for patients in the Daventry area could be reformed after people voiced fears about the cost of calling a new GP surgery phoneline.

Healthwatch, which was instrumental in saving Daventry's Danetre Hospital in the early 1990s, could be reformed following concerns raised by people about a new 0844 phone number at Danetre Medical Practice.

The practice switched from an 01327 number to the 0844 one this month, allowing patients to call at any time of the day to book, check or cancel appointments.

Calls are charged at 5p per minute from a BT landline, but some are concerned this is another NHS service they are being required to pay for.

Daventry resident John Birch was heavily involved in the original Healthwatch campaign and he is considering starting it up again. He said: "I don't believe the disadvantaged or elderly should be expected or required to pay inflated prices to fund a system that should be well enough funded from the NHS.

"Calling the new number from a mobile for three minutes could cost £1.20, and many people on lower incomes only have mobile phones rather than landlines.

"The new technology is most helpful, but why should it be funded by patients?

"I've had people call me, or stop me in the street about this, but people don't want their names being known because they're frightened of being de-listed by their GP.

"That in the modern age, people are frightened of speaking out – it's awful really."

Now Mr Birch is considering reforming Healthwatch to give people an independent forum to put their views across in the hope that it could challenge the issue over the phone number, but also provide a local, Daventry-focused liaison between Northamptonshire Teaching Primary Care Trust (PCT), which is incharge of GP services, Danetre Hospital and other health services.

Ruth Farthing, manager of Danetre Medical Practice, said: "We found that patients had problems getting through on the telephone to book appointments.

"To address this issue we decided to lease an automated telephone appointment book system that can take four callers simultaneously.

"The new system is expensive to lease and so we have changed our main telephone number to help subsidise the cost. We can assure patients that all revenue raised by the new number is to off-set the cost of this new service."

The Department of Health sent a letter to all PCTs at the start of March saying it was fact-finding about the use of 0844 numbers.

The PCT said other surgeries have been instructed not to sign up to 0844 numbers and that it is expecting more information from the East Midlands Strategic Health Authority soon.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Mar 30th, 2008 at 12:21pm
This is very similar to the previous article:

Source: Northampton Chronicle & Echo

http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/Concern-over-cost-of-calling.3923606.jp

<<
Concern over cost of calling surgery

A HEALTH watchdog in Northamptonshire could be reformed to chase up patient concerns about phonelines in GP surgeries.

Healthwatch, which helped save Daventry’s Danetre Hospital in the early 1990s, could be reformed following complaints about 0844 phone numbers at Danetre Medical Practice.

The practice switched from an 01327 number to the 0844 one this month, after changing to a more efficient call handling system which is becoming increasingly popular at many surgeries.

It charges patients 5p per minute from a BT landline, but patients are unhappy at having to pay for NHS services.

John Birch, who was heavily involved in the original Healthwatch, said: “The new technology is most helpful, but why should it be funded by patients?”

Mr Birch sad he was considering reforming Healthwatch to tackle the issue as he claimed patients were unwilling to speak out.

Ruth Farthing, manager of Danetre Medical Practice, defended its use of the system, which can handle four calls at once and allows patients to call at any time of the day.

She said: “The new system is expensive to lease and so we have changed our main telephone number to help subsidise the cost.

“We can assure patients that all revenue raised by the new number is to off-set the cost of this new service.”

Other surgeries in Northamptonshire have been told not to sign up to 0844 numbers by the Northamptonshire PCT until more information is collected by the East Midlands Strategic Health Authority.

Last Updated: 27 March 2008 5:25 PM
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Apr 4th, 2008 at 7:59am
Just a thought, and I can't believe I'm the first to come up with this but:

If calling from overseas Dr surgeries using NEG give out an 0870 number. Surely this is banned and they should be forced to give out a geo no.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Apr 4th, 2008 at 10:23am

Keith wrote on Apr 4th, 2008 at 7:59am:
If calling from overseas Dr surgeries using NEG give out an 0870 number. Surely this is banned and they should be forced to give out a geo no.

An excellent point.

This would almost certainly be a breach of clause 29A of the GMS contract.


Quote:
29A. The Contractor shall not be a party to any contract or other arrangement under which the number for telephone services to be used by -

29A.1 patients to contact the practice for any purpose related to the Contract; or

29A.2 any other person to contact the practice in relation to services provided as part of the health service

starts with the digits 087 ..., unless the service is provided free to the caller.

A quick check has found that not all those who publish a 0844 main number on the NHS Choices website also advise a 0870 number, however I have a list of around 60 cases to be going on with.

Receipt of remuneration from patients (through the revenue share on a g6 0844 number) is a breach of clause 483 that is presently being disregarded. The fact of a breach of contract may not therefore be seen as being significant. I will nonetheless pursue this matter - unless anyone would wish to PM me asking for all my collected data so that they may do so.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Apr 4th, 2008 at 11:46am
I had already emailed my PCT, but I have done so again with your quote of the contract.

I find it difficult to believe that I'm the first to have thought of this, but if that is the case should not all PCTs be contacted (or even relevant Drs surgeries be contacted. It would blow a hole in the set up if Geo Nos were given out.

Can a single email be sent to them all.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Apr 5th, 2008 at 10:05am

Keith wrote on Apr 4th, 2008 at 11:46am:
I had already emailed my PCT, but I have done so again with your quote of the contract.

I find it difficult to believe that I'm the first to have thought of this, but if that is the case should not all PCTs be contacted (or even relevant Drs surgeries be contacted. It would blow a hole in the set up if Geo Nos were given out.

Can a single email be sent to them all.



I have sent the info to my PCT and surgery weeks ago, but they do not respond!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Apr 5th, 2008 at 1:36pm

Keith wrote on Apr 4th, 2008 at 11:46am:
Can a single email be sent to them all.

Given that use of 0870 numbers is in breach of the GMS contract, it is hardly surprising that very few of these are published by NHS Choices. I have however found 41 of them. Only 2 of these are overseas contact numbers. One could assume that all other 0844 users deny telephone access from overseas to patients and those treating them. For obvious reasons, none publish geographic alternative numbers for this purpose.

An email has been sent to all 28 of the PCT Chief Executives who are apparently openly allowing a breach of the contract, with an appropriate distribution of copies. Both the message and the list are too long to reproduce here.

I have little doubt that this information, whilst from an unchallengeable public source, is far from complete.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Apr 5th, 2008 at 2:01pm
They also breach the contract by use of 0844 numbers as has been commented by others and the minister for health, hasn't stopped them doing it or forced them back to 01 numbers, they are just treating every one with contempt!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 9th, 2008 at 9:30am
http://www.northamptonchron.co.uk/news/Home-flooded-with-calls-in.3960270.jp

Home flooded with calls in phone number mix-up

<<
A Northampton home has been flooded with calls after GP surgeries in the town changed their numbers to an 0844 number.
Chris Gow, who lives in Obelisk Rise, Kingsthorpe, said he had been getting late-night calls since the numbers changed two months ago.

Mr Gow's phone number has begun with the digits 844 for the past 30 years, but said when he complained about the problem it was suggested he got a new number.

He said: "I get dozens of people phoning me trying to get their doctor. It's bad enough they get charged extra to call their doctor but when they call me by mistake they have to pay for that call again."

The new numbers cost 5p to call from a BT landline and more from mobile networks, but GP practices – including Abington Health Centre, Delapre Medical Centre and Danetre Medical Practice – said they helped them handle calls more efficiently.

Mark Leonard, manager of Delapre Medical Centre, said the new system was only possible using 0844 numbers.

"We do a patient survey and the surgery scored low for accessibility because of the old telephone system.

"Since the new one has come in, that score has gone up by about 40 per cent."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 9th, 2008 at 9:32am
http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/news/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=IPED08%20Apr%202008%2023%3A53%3A13%3A450

Two hospital calls cost patient £127

<<
AN ESSEX hospital has sparked outrage after it emerged an epileptic patient was charged £2.59 per minute when he phoned to arrange an appointment.

The “extortionate” rate emerged after Wayne Marshall ran up a £127 phone bill from just two calls to the outpatients department of Broomfield Hospital in Chelmsford.

Mr Marshall, 30, had been trying to rearrange the time of an appointment and was placed on hold when he dialled the 0844 number.

The married father-of-two was left hanging on the telephone for 21 minutes when he made the first call at a price of £55, followed by a 28-minute wait the same day, costing him £72.

Last night the hospital said it only charged local rates of about five pence and could not understand why Mr Marshall had been hit with such a large amount.

Mr Marshall, who is unable to work because of the severity of his epileptic fits, said he would refuse to pay the £127 racked up on March 14.

The Witham man also said he feared others, without itemised bills, may be unaware if they have suffered the same problem.

He said: “I eventually got through on the second call, explained that I needed to change my appointment time and that was it, but when I looked at my bill online, I was absolutely flabbergasted.

“I would have thought it would have been no more than a few quid, even with all the time I spent on hold.

“I have spoken to BT and they have told me that there is no mistake. This is especially bad for elderly people if they do not have an itemised bill as they may be in the dark about how much it is costing them to make these calls.”

He said he was now planning to speak to his local MP, Brooks Newmark, to see if he would support his case.

A spokeswoman for Mid Essex Hospitals Trust, which runs Broomfield, invited Mr Marshall to get in touch with them.

She said: “We have been on the 0844 number for over a year and it is charged at a “lo-call” rate and that is the same from wherever you call in the country.

“If Mr Marshall wants this to be looked into, he can contact the trust and discuss it and perhaps BT should look into this as well.

“We have not had any other comments or complaints since it was introduced.

“It is not premium rate, it is just a non-geographic number, I have no idea why this has happened but if he wants to come to us, we will see what we can do. I don't know if it is down to us or the phone provider.”
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Apr 9th, 2008 at 10:58am

idb wrote on Apr 9th, 2008 at 9:30am:
Mark Leonard, manager of Delapre Medical Centre, said the new system was only possible using 0844 numbers.

And herein this statement is the proof that the Delapre Medical Centre requires patients to pay for the telephone system. Had it used any other NTS number, it, apparently, would not have been "possible".


idb wrote on Apr 9th, 2008 at 9:30am:
"We do a patient survey and the surgery scored low for accessibility because of the old telephone system.

"Since the new one has come in, that score has gone up by about 40 per cent."

It's the modern 21st century way of running the NHS whereby the outcome of "customer satisfaction" surveys can apparently permit NHS providers to charge patients.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Apr 10th, 2008 at 10:46am
Someone has won a battle with their surgery!

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=10053055#post10053055

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Apr 10th, 2008 at 11:48am

Dave wrote on Apr 9th, 2008 at 10:58am:

idb wrote on Apr 9th, 2008 at 9:30am:
Mark Leonard, manager of Delapre Medical Centre, said the new system was only possible using 0844 numbers.

And herein this statement is the proof that the Delapre Medical Centre requires patients to pay for the telephone system. Had it used any other NTS number, it, apparently, would not have been "possible".


idb wrote on Apr 9th, 2008 at 9:30am:
"We do a patient survey and the surgery scored low for accessibility because of the old telephone system.

"Since the new one has come in, that score has gone up by about 40 per cent."

It's the modern 21st century way of running the NHS whereby the outcome of "customer satisfaction" surveys can apparently permit NHS providers to charge patients.



40% of what? I mean if they had one participent in the old survey and two in the new one and the two voted in favour that is a big percentage increase, so numbers would have been more helpful than percentages.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Apr 17th, 2008 at 3:54pm
Just thought I should let people know that I am now in ongoing correspondence with my PCT (Complaints and Legal Affairs) regarding Doctors using 0870 for overseas calls and so far it is looking positive, although I expect it to be kicked into the long grass at some point!

Interestingly they use the wording 'premium rate' for 0870 and were interested in knowing about any doctors using it and would take action if doing so. What they didn't appreciate in the initial correspondence was the 'for use from overseas'. They responded by agreeing that it shouldn't be used from a moral point of view, but were not sure whether this was covered by DofH guidelines. In other word agree with you, but won't do anything about it!

However they passed me to someone else (Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS)) with whom I had a very long conversation and she clearly was no fan of any of these numbers and is going to persue the matter. She even came up with her own arguments as to why these shouldn't be used e.g. Retired people who partly live abroad being very inconvenienced. She will get back to me. I obviously expect her to be blocked, but we shall see.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Apr 17th, 2008 at 4:36pm

Keith wrote on Apr 17th, 2008 at 3:54pm:
Just thought I should let people know that I am now in ongoing correspondence with my PCT (Complaints and Legal Affairs) regarding Doctors using 0870 for overseas calls and so far it is looking positive, although I expect it to be kicked into the long grass at some point!


The main excuse I have seen used by the more slime faced GPs who work at surgeries who unashamdedly use 0844 numbers is that they are not responsible for their patients when they are overseas and thus there is no need to expect the patient to contact them and it is not part of the GP contract etc, etc and thus having and 0870 access for overseas is not covered by DoH rules but merely an additional facility they choose to provide for patient convenience outside their contracts with the PCT etc, etc.  The counter argument is that this is bunkum and that if you are in a serious road accident overseas and unconscious and anyone else travelling with you is unconscious or dead they need urgent access to your medical records to know any forms of treatment they must avoid or things you are allergic to etc, etc.  I don't know how UK NHS hospitals tackle this after someone comes in from a serious RTA unconscious?  Presumably the out of hours emergency number these GP practices have for a group of surgeries (also 0845 or 0870 potentially) does have computer access to patient records for the practice if a hospital calls.  Or are they still all on paper in filing cabinets.  We know there is a plan for a national online medical records facility but it is very controversial (privacy issues) and not yet rolled out.  Bottom line is that there are reasons why overseas medical services might need to legitimately contact your doctor.  Doctor get out - this is not part of the GP contract with the NHS I expect but only an extra courtesy facility.


Quote:
However they passed me to someone else (Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS)) with whom I had a very long conversation and she clearly was no fan of any of these numbers and is going to persue the matter. She even came up with her own arguments as to why these shouldn't be used e.g. Retired people who partly live abroad being very inconvenienced. She will get back to me. I obviously expect her to be blocked, but we shall see.


This is what might make all the difference.  Unfortunately due to the total ineptitude of Ofcom in promoting 03 numbers or ever telling the public that 084/7 numbers are excluded from free/bundled call plans to 01/02 numbers on fixed line/mobile  most of these numpties in the PCTs seem to be clueless and themselves wrongly genuinely believe 0845 and 0870 are normal priced calls.  Financial illiteracy often seems to be a prime qualifying factor for working at a PCT. :o >:( :'(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Apr 17th, 2008 at 5:04pm
This is a step in the right direction isn't it? From my surgery's web site. Now just waiting for the surgery to follow suit...some chance!

New Out of hours number

Out-of-Hours emergency service  If you think you need urgent advice when the surgery is closed, NHS Direct may be able to help on 0845 46 47, but if you are sure that you need medical advice from a doctor about something that cannot wait until normal working hours, please ring 0300 130 1313.  Your call will be taken by Harmoni, who will arrange for a doctor to ring you back and advise how the problem should be dealt with

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by evilmcwoo on Apr 17th, 2008 at 5:10pm

sherbert wrote on Apr 17th, 2008 at 5:04pm:

Out-of-Hours emergency service ... Your call will be taken by Harmoni, who will arrange for a doctor to ring you back and advise how the problem should be dealt with...


I am assuming that this is a company and not some poor girl sitting by the phone from 6pm - 7am hehe

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Apr 17th, 2008 at 5:12pm
It was encouraging that the PCT Legal Affairs person referred to 0870 at 'Premium Rate'. That same term was used today on Working Lunch by the reporter when quizzing someone (see separate posting from me).

It was also encouraging that the PALS person seemed to get excited about this. Who are PALS? What is their role?

In our conversation she used the term local rate for 0845 and apologised commenting that even though she knew this was wrong it was a habit one got into.

However even though it is encouraging that the message is getting across re the true nature of 0845/0844/0870 the posting today from you re the BBC was just so depressing. The guy was so ignorant of the facts. I would be embarrassed to send that out.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on Apr 17th, 2008 at 8:16pm

Keith wrote on Apr 17th, 2008 at 5:12pm:
It was also encouraging that the PALS person seemed to get excited about this. Who are PALS? What is their role?

A cynic would say they appear to have a 'fob off complaints' function.

Quote:
Patient Advice and Liaison Services (PALS) provide information, advice and support to help patients, families and their carers.


See HERE.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 18th, 2008 at 2:41am
http://iclanarkshire.icnetwork.co.uk/eknews/news/tm_headline=gp-i-x2019-m-not-doing-a-number-on-patients&method=full&objectid=20772236&siteid=50144-name_page.html

GP: I’m not doing a number on patients

Apr 16 2008

<<  
PATIENTS at an East Kilbride doctors’ surgery have been assured that a new telephone system will not hit them in the pocket.

Dr Ian Chisholm’s practice at the Alison Lea medical centre in Calderwood is set to introduce a new phone system in an attempt to improve the service for patients.

From May 1, people phoning the surgery will call a number starting with 0845, as opposed to the previous local prefix.

This sparked fears among patients as 0845 numbers cost more than the local rate and often put callers through to a call centre.

Additionally, in many cases the recipient of the call can make a profit, although this won’t be the case at the practice.

Dr Chisholm this week insisted the charges will remain roughly the same and claims patients will see the benefits.

He said: “We are introducing the number from May 1 as part of a new telephone system that will allow us to answer patients' calls faster and more effectively. This is in response to comments from our patient satisfaction survey about how easy it is to contact the practice by phone. With the old system some patients were finding the line frequently engaged. The new system allows calls to be directed appropriately so they are dealt with more efficiently and patients can also indicate if the call is urgent.

"The system is being introduced purely in the interests of improving the service to patients and the practice will not profit from it. The cost 0845 calls are charged at BT’s advertised Lo-Call rate and we hope that by directing calls appropriately we can reduce the call time.

“The average overall cost to callers should be broadly similar to before."

It is notable that this decision was taken by the GP himself and not the NHS.

The use of 0845 numbers by the public sector has sparked controversy, with critics claiming that charging details are unclear.
>>



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Apr 18th, 2008 at 8:03am

Keith wrote on Apr 17th, 2008 at 5:12pm:
Who are PALS? What is their role?

In my experience, some of it very personal, PALS personnel are, like most of those who work in the NHS, genuinely committed to do all they can to help patients on a personal basis. In their case it is with the resolution of issues that patients and the public have with health treatment. They work for the trusts and so have a duty to resolve and dilute complaints, rather than invariably escalating them to cause a review of policy.

We have to face the fact that there is widespread misunderstanding and ignorance about NGNs. Not all of this can be blamed directly on those who show it. I see part of our role as being friendly educators of those who are simply misinformed, whilst we fiercely criticise those who should know better. It is sometimes difficult to know which is appropriate and we have to choose on which side to risk erring. Sometimes we may disagree on the latter point.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 22nd, 2008 at 10:32pm
http://www.huntspost.co.uk/content/hunts/postbag/story.aspx?brand=HPTOnline&category=Postbag&tBrand=HertsCambsOnline&tCategory=PostbagHPT&itemid=WEED22%20Apr%202008%2015%3A59%3A11%3A973

Letters for Huntingdon and the surrounding area

Surgeries' hone numbers should be local


15:58 - 22 April 2008

<<
THE Government has now commented on the use by doctors' surgeries - among others - of non-geographic 0844 numbers and 0870 numbers for overseas calls.

The Government says: "Responsibility for provision of local health services now rests with local NHS organisations, as they have the specific knowledge and expertise that makes them best placed to plan, develop and improve services according to the needs of the local population. The provision of telephone services for patients and the public is therefore a matter for the local NHS.

"However, the message from the Department of Health has made it very clear to NHS organisations that patients should not be expected to pay more than the equivalent of a local call to contact their GPs.

"NHS organisations have a duty to ensure that they provide the best possible service to their local populations. We expect primary care trusts and GPs to ensure locally that telephone systems do not place a financial burden on patients."

Surgeries within Cambridgeshire are still using these numbers. I have asked Cambridgeshire PCT to ensure that this practice stops forthwith or, if not, to say what other action it will be taking over what time scale.

J R OLIVER

Audley Close

St Ives
>>


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 24th, 2008 at 2:35am
http://www.oadby-wigston.gov.uk/Home/Councillors%20and%20Committees/Agenda%20and%20Reports/Council/2007-08/2007-09-18%20Council%20Minutesgal%20.pdf

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE COUNCIL HELD AT THE COUNCIL OFFICES, WIGSTON
ON 18 SEPTEMBER 2007


Present: Councillor J Kaufman – Mayor
Councillor Mrs J M Gore – Deputy Mayor
Councillors: L A Bentley, T S Biring, G A Boulter, J W Boyce, Mrs L M
Broadley, K M A Brown, M O Carrara, M H Charlesworth, Mrs E M
Connell, Ms C L Edmonston, D A Gamble, C S Gore, M Griffiths, P A
Hings, Mrs H E Loydall, K J Loydall, R E R Morris, Mrs S B Morris, S M
Rizvi, P Swift, Mrs R I Sylvester and J Vickerstaff (22)
Mrs P Glasse (Independent Member – Standards Committee) also
attended the meeting.
Officers in Attendance: Mrs A Court, P Johnson, G Waterfield, Mrs S
Cairns, S Lucas and Mrs W Back
Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mrs S A
Dickinson and Mrs L Eaton

[...]

43. NOTICE OF MOTION BY THE MAYOR
The Council considered a Notice of Motion submitted by the Mayor in the following
terms;

“this Council deplores the use of 0844 and other premium rate telephone numbers
used by some of the local NHS medical practices in the Borough (causing additional
and unnecessary expense to patients, whilst at the same time being a source of
income to the medical practice). It calls for the local Primary Care Trust (PCT) to use
its powers and influence to bring an end to this disgraceful practice.

Officers are asked to write to their local PCT in the terms above and to ask their local
Member of Parliament to take this up with the appropriate Government Ministers and
to draw this to the attention of the Liberal Democrat Shadow Health Spokesperson and
the Local Government Association’. The Mayor then spoke in support of this motion
and read out to the meeting an article which formed part of a petition being sent to 10
Downing Street.”

The Mayor moved the motion, which was duly seconded by Councillor J W Boyce.

RESOLVED: That:
(1) The motion be agreed;
(2) If a negative response is received, then this
matter be placed before the Council’s
Overview and Scrutiny Panel for
consideration, and;
(3) This Council also write to Leicestershire
County Council to take up this matter as well.

[...]

>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Apr 24th, 2008 at 8:10am
I note that just like Mole Valley District Council in Surrey Oadby and Wigston Borough Council only uses geographic telephone numbers for its residents and council taxpayers to get in touch with it. [smiley=thumbsup.gif] [smiley=beer.gif] [smiley=dankk2.gif]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 25th, 2008 at 10:58pm
http://www.birminghammail.net/news/birmingham-news/2008/04/25/sickening-price-of-call-to-gp-97319-20819417/

Sickening price of call to GP
Apr 25 2008 By Alison Dayani

<<
CAMPAIGNERS fighting to stop expensive 0844 phone numbers being used by GP surgeries have rapped Birmingham health bosses for dragging their feet.

In December 2006 the Department of Health criticised the use of the numbers, which cost a higher fee of 5p a minute, saying patients should not be "exploited".

Birmingham-born campaigner David Hickson, who previously led a campaign to stop companies making "silent" telemarketing calls, said he wanted more action, now.

"GPs must use the best technology and systems available to provide the best possible service to patients within their budget.

"Service improvements cannot be used as an excuse for departing from the fundamental principle that NHS services are provided free at the point of need."

The British Medical Association claims practices are able to deal with more calls, more efficiently through the 0844 number because it accesses more modern telecom systems.

A spokesman for Heart of Birmingham Primary Care Trust said: "We have received advice from the Department of Health on the use of 0844 and 0845 numbers.

"Patients should not be expected to pay more than the cost of a local call. But patients will find one number change easier to handle than two in short order so we have not yet insisted that services act on this guidance."

Surgeries that use 0844 phone numbers in Birmingham and north Solihull include Fairway Surgery, Bordesley Green East, Yardley; Karis Medical Centre, Waterworks Road, Edgbaston; Tudor Practice, Tamworth Road, Sutton Coldfield; Kingshurst Medical Practice, Gilson Way, Kingshurst; Craig Croft Medical Centre, Castle Bromwich; Soho Health Centre, Louise Road, Handsworth; City Road Medical Centre, Edgbaston; Fernley Medical Centre, Stratford Road, Sparkhill; Enki Medical Practice, Terrace Road, Handsworth; Hobmoor Road Surgery, Yardley.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Apr 25th, 2008 at 11:39pm

idb wrote on Apr 25th, 2008 at 10:58pm:
Sickening price of call to GP

I understand that this article was written from text of email messages to local PCT Chief Executives and from available briefing material, without explicit consent to the text or the use of names.

The version in the printed edition is slightly different, with the "Service improvements cannot be used as an excuse" point set nicely as a response to the (predicted) comment from the BMA. A further point is made by the PCTs, suggesting that they need to pressured by those whom they serve to apply the guidance which they have so far chosen to disregard.

Campaigners currently living in the Birmingham area please note. As the Prime Minister recently reminded us, we no longer have a national National Health Service. Issues that are identical throughout the UK are decided locally, for no good reason.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Apr 26th, 2008 at 8:39am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Apr 25th, 2008 at 11:39pm:
As the Prime Minister recently reminded us, we no longer have a national National Health Service. Issues that are identical throughout the UK are decided locally, for no good reason.

Surely the good reason is so that the Prime Minister and his colleagues can then deny any direct ministerial responsibility for any inadequacies in the locally provided service. ::)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Apr 27th, 2008 at 5:12pm
I'm awaiting feedback still from Surrey PALs on the use of 0870 numbers to contact Doctors from abroad. Will feedback when I have it.

However what exactly is the position now with the DofH response on the use of 0844? What was the exact response and what are the PCTs going to do? Anyone know?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Apr 27th, 2008 at 6:55pm

Keith wrote on Apr 27th, 2008 at 5:12pm:
what are the PCTs going to do? Anyone know?

One suspects that the PCTs will do what they are told, despite the fact that the Prime Minister says that they have all the necessary expertise and authority in respect of the "local national" health service. [url=http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page15215.asp]PM reply to e-petition[/url]

The Department of Health was expecting to complete its gathering of evidence and views by the end of March 2008. Following this, it was to consider whether further action was necessary. No timescale was set for the duration of the consideration or the necessary action. [url=http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Lettersandcirculars/Dearcolleagueletters/DH_083282?IdcService=GET_FILE&dID=161190&Rendition=Web]Letter from Mark Britnell 3 March 2008[/url]

This is inevitably a slow process. These "considerations" are probably continuing. I believe that the DH and the PCTs, and perhaps some others, know that they have made a bad mistake in failing to understand the consequences of allowing and adopting costly revenue sharing numbers. Responsibility (blame) is respectively being passed down and up. An overnight resolution will not be easy to achieve, because of many factors. With the 60th anniversary of the NHS approaching, it must however be in place by 5 July.

As this is a national issue for the National Health Service, a resolution will have to come from the Secretary of State for Health, Alan Johnson. He has already indicated his intention to stop this. [url=http://www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=136265&command=displayContent&sourceNode=136248&contentPK=20086374&moduleName=InternalSearch&formname=sidebarsearch]Hull Daily Mail article[/url]

Johnson must be pressed to honour his promise.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Apr 27th, 2008 at 7:07pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Apr 27th, 2008 at 6:55pm:
An overnight resolution will not be easy to achieve, because of many factors. With the 60th anniversary of the NHS approaching, it must however be in place by 5 July.


I could have sworn I just saw a pig flying by my window out here in the Surrey countryside. ;) ::) ;D

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 28th, 2008 at 11:37pm
http://www.thisishertfordshire.co.uk/news/newsindex/display.var.2231368.0.surgery_denies_premium_rate_claims.php

Surgery denies premium rate claims
By Alexandra Barham

<<
A DOCTOR'S surgery has denied claims that it is using a premium rate phone number to fund its services.

Parkbury House Surgery in St Peters Street, St Albans appears to have turned a blind eye to guidance from Department of Health which urges practices using expensive revenue sharing phone numbers to switch to cheaper landlines.

It is the only surgery in the district to use a phone number with a 0844 prefix, which will cost patients more to ring and could earn the practice a rebate of 2p per minute on incoming calls.

Instead of paying three-and-a-quarter pence per minute for calls to landlines, patients will be charged up to 5p per minute, and up to 40p per minute from a mobile.

But practice manager Andrew Stennett said the 0844 number was introduced last October following months of consultation with patients who complained of a constant engaged tone when trying to book appointments over the phone.

He said the new automated system enables customers to book appointments easily and efficiently just by using their telephone keypad with the premium rate number covering rental and maintenance fees.

He denied allegations that money from patient calls contributed towards costs of the surgery's facilities.

He said: "Patients wanted us to do something about telephone access - this automated system was a way of improving that service.

"The new telephone system enables patients to phone in between 6.30 in the morning and 9.00 at night to book an appointment using their telephone keypad."
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Apr 29th, 2008 at 1:35am
With morons like this guy calling themselves practice managers it is surely obvious the only solution is an outright ban on the use of anything but 01, 02 and 03 numbers to call your doctor.

The government has the same charges for a prescription issued by a doctor across England so how can the cost of accessing your doctor to make an appointment not also be at one consistent price? :-/

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 29th, 2008 at 2:33am
http://www.derbycitypct.nhs.uk/content/Trust%20Board%20papers/April%202008/TB%20minutes%206%20March%2008.pdf

037.08

Matters arising from the minutes

020/08 05.08.01 0844 Telephone Numbers

Mrs Stuckey reported that the PCT written to all practices indicating that no new contracts for 084 numbers should be entered into. With respect to existing contracts between practices and 084 suppliers the Access Taskforce had commissioned a telephone consultancy firm to scope possible options. Updates would be brought to the Board as appropriate.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 29th, 2008 at 3:51am
http://www.helptheaged.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/D8CE643D-591B-4AE1-823E-5502AC20DE47/0/forum_to_forum.pdf


Quote:
ISSUE 34 Mar/Apr 08

Letters

To the Editor

The long-running scandal of GP surgeries all over the country making money from patients, charging to contact them on 0844 numbers, has at long last forced the Department of Health to issue a stop warning. Here is an issue, already affecting one in three surgeries in some parts of the country, where we can help end the practice where patients are paying more than the cost of a local call, plus both VAT and the call set-up fee when calling an 0844 revenue sharing number. Revenue sharing means the patient pays at least 4.2p per minute which becomes 5p (with VAT included). Then there is a call set-up fee (normally 6p) added to the cost of every call. A three minute call therefore costs 21p, well in excess of the cost of calling a local number. And this money is shared between the surgery and the network provider. Using a mobile to phone a surgery 0844 line means even more revenue sharing, as calls can cost 50p minute, and we have cases of up to £4.60 being paid to make a single appointment. We have scored a notable victory in our campaign against local surgeries using these 0844 phone lines. The Enfield Primary Care Trust (PCT) has told us they’ve written to all 62 surgeries in the Borough warning them that the PCT does not support entering into new contracts for 0844 numbers. In the same letter, signed by Rob Lee, Associate Director of Primary Care, the 13 Enfield surgeries already using an 0844 number were told to reconsider the continued use of such a system. We now expect the PCT will order the offending surgeries to write to every patient telling them exactly what they are paying to call them. The Forum has long argued that this rip-off practice is wrong. Surgeries should not be allowed to boost their income by taking a cut from the cost of each incoming 0844 call, particularly from vulnerable elderly and disabled people on low incomes. This is the 60th anniversary year of the NHS and Forums should insist that GPs uphold the founding principle of the health service that it should be free at the point of need. I have argued many times that if Forums acted in a concerted way we would have greater influence, so emulate us!

Monty Meth MBE, Chair, Enfield Borough Over 50s Forum

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Apr 29th, 2008 at 8:22am
The PCTs seem to be saying that no future 0844 contracts should be taken out and they have been saying this for sometime.

Firstly Doctors seem to be ignoring this as plenty of new ones seem to have been announced or are these ones that were in progress?

Secondly this seems very unfair. What it is saying is is you have already exploited your patients then you can carry on doing so. However if you had moral scruples about doing this and so didn't you are now banned from doing so. So those who did so can profit out of it and those that didn't don't and can't.

Those that went over to 0844 should be told to stop and renegoatiate their contracts. If they suffer financial penalties for doing so then so be it. They shouldn't have entered into these contracts in the first place. If they were mislead about this then they can always take legal action.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Apr 29th, 2008 at 1:32pm

idb wrote on Apr 29th, 2008 at 3:51am:
http://www.helptheaged.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/D8CE643D-591B-4AE1-823E-5502AC20DE47/0/forum_to_forum.pdf

ISSUE 34 Mar/Apr 08

Letters

To the Editor

The long-running scandal of GP surgeries all over the country making money from patients, charging to contact them on 0844 numbers, has at long last forced the Department of Health to issue a stop warning. Here is an issue, already affecting one in three surgeries in some parts of the country, where we can help end the practice where patients are paying more than the cost of a local call, plus both VAT and the call set-up fee when calling an 0844 revenue sharing number. Revenue sharing means the patient pays at least 4.2p per minute which becomes 5p (with VAT included). Then there is a call set-up fee (normally 6p) added to the cost of every call. A three minute call therefore costs 21p, well in excess of the cost of calling a local number. And this money is shared between the surgery and the network provider. Using a mobile to phone a surgery 0844 line means even more revenue sharing, as calls can cost 50p minute, and we have cases of up to £4.60 being paid to make a single appointment. We have scored a notable victory in our campaign against local surgeries using these 0844 phone lines. The Enfield Primary Care Trust (PCT) has told us they’ve written to all 62 surgeries in the Borough warning them that the PCT does not support entering into new contracts for 0844 numbers. In the same letter, signed by Rob Lee, Associate Director of Primary Care, the 13 Enfield surgeries already using an 0844 number were told to reconsider the continued use of such a system. We now expect the PCT will order the offending surgeries to write to every patient telling them exactly what they are paying to call them. The Forum has long argued that this rip-off practice is wrong. Surgeries should not be allowed to boost their income by taking a cut from the cost of each incoming 0844 call, particularly from vulnerable elderly and disabled people on low incomes. This is the 60th anniversary year of the NHS and Forums should insist that GPs uphold the founding principle of the health service that it should be free at the point of need. I have argued many times that if Forums acted in a concerted way we would have greater influence, so emulate us!

Monty Meth MBE, Chair, Enfield Borough Over 50s Forum

I am pleased to see that Help The Aged also only use geographic numbers for contacting them.

Or at least that is now the case as I have a sneaking suspicion they at one stage used 0845 numbers.

See www.helptheaged.org.uk/en-gb/WhatWeDo/AboutUs/ContactUs/

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Apr 29th, 2008 at 1:36pm

Keith wrote on Apr 29th, 2008 at 8:22am:
Secondly this seems very unfair. What it is saying is is you have already exploited your patients then you can carry on doing so. However if you had moral scruples about doing this and so didn't you are now banned from doing so. So those who did so can profit out of it and those that didn't don't and can't.

Those that went over to 0844 should be told to stop and renegoatiate their contracts. If they suffer financial penalties for doing so then so be it. They shouldn't have entered into these contracts in the first place. If they were mislead about this then they can always take legal action.


I absolutely agree Keith.

GPs were previously told that they must not go on using 0870 and this was universally complied with when NEG and others switched to using 0844 as a loophole and the DH stupidly believed this was "local rate"

Now the DH is aware 0844 is not "local rate" then why can't they issue an edict requiring doctors on 0844 to all move to 01, 02 and 03 themselves and pick up the cost out of their own already bloated and overpaid pockets.  If these doctors have to take a £5,000 a year pay cut for 5 years to pay for their own previous greed, stupidity, incompetence and dereliction of duty towards their patients then so much the better.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Jon_Dean on Apr 30th, 2008 at 8:31am
Good morning, this is my first post on this forum. I have been following it for a number of months now because - I should mention up front - I have a commercial interest in this area. I'm in telecoms; my company supplies telephone systems to businesses.

I started reading this blog after a small series of events. Firstly my wife and I found our own doctor's surgery difficult to get hold of at peak times. In researching solutions to this problem I discovered that there were several companies using non geographic numbers to provide additional call queuing for surgeries. It must be said that there is some technical benefit to this although the downsides of eternal queuing, increased cost, and lack of trust would obviously seem to outweight it in the eyes of those who count most - the patients (who are also the electorate - a point strangely missed by an ailing government that doesn't benefit financially from these arrangements itself but could easily get some brownie points by doing something about it).

You might be interested in the report that we sent to Alan Johnson as this debate rumbles on:

http://www.ukbusinesstelephonesystems.co.uk/surgery0844.htm

As is plainly obvious though, it is no good waiting for government intervention. So I decided that we should do something about it ourselves. We have come up with a proposition whereby we will supply a specialist telephone system and service to GPs for the same monthly costs as they are currently paying for just their lines, calls & maintenenace. Guaranteed. Thus an effectively free telephone system to improve patient access and they get to keep their existing local telephone number.

You can see a press release here:

http://www.pressbox.co.uk/detailed/Health/We_Couldn_t_Stand_GPs_Phone_Systems_So_We_Started_Giving_New_Ones_Away__190226.html

Like on a mobile phone deal, surgeries need to tie in for a period and there are additional options available at an extra monthly cost. There is no upfront investment required though on anything we do.

The reality is this: doctors have to live life commercially these days. That is why we have this problem in the first place and until it is answered commercially it will not disappear. I hope that this solution now provides them with an answer to their telephony needs without having to resort to charging their patients.


PS: For those that have read this and see it as a plug for our business I apologise. However, for those who see that somebody is prepared to take this issue on commercially, I hope you will help us to ensure surgeries never have an excuse for using non geographic numbers again.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 1st, 2008 at 1:52am
http://www.colefordhealthcentre.nhs.uk/coleford10.html

Phone:0844 477 8692

Coleford Health Centre

Please note that the surgery telephone number is not contactable from abroad/overseas. It us advised that should you require medical advice whilst abroad to fax your query directly to the surgery on 01594 810683.

Jokers

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 1st, 2008 at 11:13pm
House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 30 Apr 2008 (pt 0007)

NHS: Telephone Services

Julia Goldsworthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what guidance his Department provides to (a) primary care trusts and (b) service providers on their use of numbers with the prefix (i) 0845 and (ii) 087. [201794]

Mr. Bradshaw: General medical services (CMS) contractors were banned from using premium rate numbers (09 or 087) via The National Health Service (Primary Medical Services) (Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations SI 2005 No. 893. The ban came into force in April 2005 but did not include 084 numbers.

On 19 December 2006 the Department wrote to primary care trust chief executives advising them that the Department was reviewing the use of non-geographical telephone numbers in light of the consultation carried out by Ofcom; and re-iterating the Government's position that

“patients should not be expected to pay more than the equivalent of a local call”.

The Department is currently gathering evidence on the use of 0844 numbers in general practice and will consider what further action is necessary in light of that evidence.



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 2nd, 2008 at 12:37am

idb wrote on Feb 8th, 2008 at 11:35pm:
ABOUT TIME TOO.

Hopefully sets a precedent.

http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/Hospital-rings-the-changes.3760443.jp
And the associated press release:

http://www.nth.nhs.uk/assets/x/50075

February 6 2008

Trust listens to feedback and reinstates local phone numbers

University Hospital of North Tees 01642 617617
University Hospital of Hartlepool 01429 266654
Reinstated from 31 January 2008

North Tees and Hartlepool Foundation NHS Trust has reinstated its original telephone numbers following feedback from a number of people.

The trust brought in an 0844 number a year ago because it wanted one single number for the trust’s two main hospitals.

The 0844 number caused some problems for people ringing from abroad to find out how friends and families were because it was up to the service provider in the country in question whether they would allow the number to be rung from outside the UK.

There was also some evidence that different mobile phone networks charged heavily for the use of the 0844 number from a mobile phone.

Chief executive Alan Foster said: “After having listened to a number of people’s concerns I felt it was the right thing to do to bring the original phone numbers back in to use.

“I fully appreciate that getting in touch with the hospital, either for yourself or to enquire about a friend or relative, often happens at what is a very stressful time. We certainly don’t want to add to that stress by raising people’s anxieties over the cost of phone calls, which is why I’ve arranged for the phone numbers people have been familiar with to come back into use.”

Ends

For more information please contact Claire Young on 01642 624339


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on May 2nd, 2008 at 2:50am
Good news indeed.

But unfortunatelyt still a case of one down and 9,999 to go so far as the public sector is concerned I fear. :o :'(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on May 3rd, 2008 at 3:12am

NGMsGhost wrote on May 2nd, 2008 at 2:50am:
Good news indeed.

Sadly not quite so good as it should be - see here.

Members may also like to review the following web sites, every one of them directly connected with the hospital trust:

1. NHS Choices search
2. The NHS Choose and Book website
3. The NHS networks list of acute trusts (shows other cases)
4. Radio North Tees (works on MS IE, not Mozilla)
5. The University of Teesside

(Ms Fletcher has been briefed)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on May 3rd, 2008 at 9:38am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 3rd, 2008 at 3:12am:

NGMsGhost wrote on May 2nd, 2008 at 2:50am:
Good news indeed.

Sadly not quite so good as it should be - see here.

Members may also like to review the following web sites, every one of them directly connected with the hospital trust:

1. NHS Choices search
2. The NHS Choose and Book website
3. The NHS networks list of acute trusts (shows other cases)
4. Radio North Tees (works on MS IE, not Mozilla)
5. The University of Teesside

(Ms Fletcher has been briefed)


It sems that this is like a serious case of cancer and that while the primary 0844 has now been removed the secondaries have already spread and established themselves. :o >:( :'(

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 7th, 2008 at 7:23pm
http://www.harlowherald.co.uk/content/hlwherald/news/story.aspx?brand=HLHOnline&category=NewsHarlow&tBrand=HertsCambsOnline&tCategory=newslatestHLH&itemid=WEED07%20May%202008%2017%3A12%3A41%3A483

Anger over 0844 surgery numbers

17:09 - 07 May 2008

<<
DOCTORS' surgeries have been accused of making money out of patients by using 0844 telephone numbers which are not classed as local calls.

Kay Westgate, 68, of Mallows Green, Harlow, contacted the Herald to complain that she has always had free local calls to 01279 numbers.

But since her surgery, the Barbara Castle Health Centre in Broadley Road, changed its number to a 0844 code, she is now being charged.

The previous landline number allowed patients to talk directly to a receptionist at the surgery, whereas the new service offers access to the correct department through a series of menu options.

Mrs Westgate described the changeover as "underhand" and feared that elderly people would be the worst hit when they realised they were paying more to make a doctor's appointment.

She claims that posters in the surgery advertising the new number describe it as "low cost" but does not specify what the cost is.

"When I asked staff what the poster meant by low cost, they said they didn't know how much it would cost," Mrs Westgate said.

"I pay extra so I get free landline calls. When I got my phone bill the four calls I had made had come to 60p which is more than a local call.

"The authority is not letting people know the cost and I know one other surgery has changed its number."

She added: "It's wrong to make money out of the patients, particularly the elderly.

"I don't know if the patients' group know about this or not, but to my mind they've done it very underhand. They may think it's more efficient, but its costing people money."

However, West Essex Primary Care Trust was keen to point out that patients can speak to their GP about the new cost and that some telephone line providers will discount the charge if they recognise the number as a healthcare centre.

A spokesman for the PCT added: "Calling an 0844 number may be marginally more expensive particularly for callers using discounted tariffs. However, some telephone providers will accept 0844 as a discounted number when it is a known healthcare facility.

"There are benefits to these new telephone systems for patients. The caller will have greater ease of access directly to the services they require such as appointments or repeat prescriptions. West Essex PCT encourages all GP practices to discuss changes to telephone systems with patients in advance and to work to minimise the impact on patients."

What do you think? E-mail heraldnews@archant.co.uk
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on May 7th, 2008 at 7:46pm
I'm sorry but the irony of that one cracked me up.

The Barbara Castle Health Centre is the latest villain!  

Barbara Castle, darling of the left wing in the 1960s - and this is happening under our caring ZaNuLabour government!

Classic.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on May 7th, 2008 at 7:52pm

idb wrote on May 7th, 2008 at 7:23pm:
<<some telephone providers will accept 0844 as a discounted number when it is a known healthcare facility>>

Members may be interested to know that the following providers have confirmed that they would of course offer no such special arrangement:

- BT
- Virginmedia
- Orange
- Vodaphone

Others may wish to confirm this with their providers.

I fear that the quoted statement falls well in line with the subject of this thread.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on May 7th, 2008 at 10:16pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 7th, 2008 at 7:52pm:
I fear that the quoted statement falls well in line with the subject of this thread.


There are no mobile providers that include 0844 numbers in bundled minutes.  No need to check as it is self evidently impossible given the laws of economics.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 9th, 2008 at 2:15am
http://www.expressandstar.com/2008/05/09/fury-as-gp-surgeries-profit-from-phone-calls/

Fury as GP surgeries profit from phone calls

<<
A handful of GP surgeries in South Staffordshire are continuing to make money by using premium rate phone numbers, it has emerged.

The numbers, which start with 0844 and cost 5p a minute, work by charging a premium rate to patients and part of the excess cost that a patient pays is paid to the surgeries by the telephone companies.

This has sparked criticism from patients’ groups and even the Department of Health, which in December 2006 said patients should not be “exploited” by the practice.

Health Secretary Alan Johnson has also spoken against the use of premium rate numbers in Parliament, telling MPs that patients should not have to pay more than a local rate call. He added that the use of 0844 numbers could amount to a breach of the GP contract.

While most practices now use local rate numbers, a small number are still using the 0844 numbers, including six in South Staffordshire.

They are Salters Meadow Health Centre, Chase Terrace; Barton-Under-Needwood Health Centre in Barton; Dr I M Turner & Partners in Coven; Dr I M Turner & Partners in Brewood, and The Aldergate Practice and The Hollies Medical Practice, both in Tamworth.
>>


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 14th, 2008 at 11:53am
http://www.harlowherald.co.uk/content/hlwherald/postbag/story.aspx?brand=HLHOnline&category=Postbag&tBrand=HertsCambsOnline&tCategory=PostbagHLH&itemid=WEED14%20May%202008%2011%3A35%3A26%3A917

Letters for Harlow, Bishop's Stortford and the surrounding area

Cut off and charged by surgery


11:35 - 14 May 2008

<<
SIR - Great article on the cover of this week's Herald!

I am a patient at the Barbara Castle surgery and had to call for an appointment last week. I called at 8.30am. First time I was fifth in the line to be answered. Seven minutes past and I reached position one in the queue and was then cut off. I called back and was position 14 - 16 minutes later I was cut off again. Perhaps the surgery was not open so early, but I should have not sat on hold for so long to be cut off.

So at 5p a minute I paid £1.15 for nothing. What a good idea!

A few years ago I received a letter from my doctor telling me that 'To improve the service we offer the patients we will no longer be open on a Saturday'. Perhaps changing to 0844 also improves the service, but not for the patients.

Interestingly the PCT says they don't benefit from 0844, but in-fact they do get a kick back from the call charge along with phone companies.

Name and address supplied
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 15th, 2008 at 11:48am
http://www.harlowherald.co.uk/content/hlwherald/news/story.aspx?brand=HLHOnline&category=NewsHarlow&tBrand=HertsCambsOnline&tCategory=newslatestHLH&itemid=WEED14%20May%202008%2015%3A35%3A22%3A917

No call discounts for patients

07:33 - 15 May 2008

<<
TELECOM companies will not discount patients who ring doctors' surgeries with new 0844 codes.

Last week the Herald reported that the Barbara Castle Health Centre, in Broadley Road, had recently changed its phone number from an 01279 local code to an 0844 number.

This means patients who received free calls to 01 and 02 numbers are now charged for ringing the surgery.

A spokesman for West Essex Primary Care Trust responded by saying that some telephone providers will accept 0844 as a discounted number when it is a known healthcare facility.

However, the Herald has been contacted by a number of people who have spoken their telephone providers and have been told that they do not offer this discounted service.

John Smoleskis told the Herald: "I was also told that if I told my telephone line provider, they would add it as a free call.

"This is untrue. I have spoken to Virgin Media (my telephone provider) and BT. Neither provides this service.

"I also asked about the call charges to 0844 numbers. Virgin charges a 5p connection charge then 5p per minute, and for a regular landline call there is no connection charge and it costs 4.3p per minute."

K Garrod, also a Virgin Media user, added that they were also told that there was no discount for 0844 numbers and was then told to write to the Customer Care Team.

Another reader, who did not wish to be named, added: "Perhaps the PCT would like to explain which telephone providers will accept 0844 as a discounted number when it is a known healthcare facility. I bet they can't."

Arthur Bennett, 70, of Red Willow, contacted the Herald to explain that when he tried to complain about the change in number, he couldn't speak to anyone and had to put his complaint in writing.

"I phoned the doctor's to make an appointment and I got an answerphone which you go through and press buttons, then I got music, then I got a recorded message saying 'I'm sorry lines are busy please call back'," Mr Bennett said.

"I walked to the surgery to make the appointment and when I was there the surgery manager was standing there, so I asked to speak to her and the receptionist said 'is it a complaint' to which I said yes, and she said 'you have to put it in writing'."

Liz McGranahan, locality director for Harlow for West Essex PCT, said: "Changes to phone systems are a matter for the practice and decisions are not taken by the PCT.

"We are not aware of any other surgeries that are planning to change their phone numbers to 0844 and encourage all our practices to discuss changes of this nature with their patients in advance and to minimise the impact of such changes on patients."

A spokesman for Network Europe Group, which supplies business phone systems said that service providers do include 0844 numbers in their packages from "time to time" and that "Virgin Mobile have in the past included these".

What do you think? E-mail heraldnews@archant.co.uk
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on May 15th, 2008 at 2:00pm

idb wrote on May 15th, 2008 at 11:48am:
A spokesman for Network Europe Group, which supplies business phone systems said that service providers do include 0844 numbers in their packages from "time to time" and that "Virgin Mobile have in the past included these".


NEG talking out of their backsides again then?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 16th, 2008 at 3:35am
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article3941474.ece

Hospitals make money on patient phone calls

David Rose

<<
At least a dozen NHS hospital trusts are using “revenue-sharing” telephone numbers to earn money from patients' calls, The Times has learnt.

Some trusts have switched to numbers with an 0844 or 0845 prefix, which are up to 30p a minute more expensive to call than a standard local number. Hospitals can also receive a rebate on incoming calls by using the numbers, which one trust said was used to help it to meet “savings targets”.

More than 1,500 doctors' surgeries are using the more expensive numbers, despite ministers' declarations that patients should pay no more than the cost of a local call to phone their GPs. Calls to 0844 numbers cost 5p a minute from a landline and 40p from a mobile, although the exact cost varies depending on the tariff or package of the caller.

Doctors have claimed that their rebate of about 2p a minute on every call is used to cover the costs of improved telephone services, but consumer lobbyists say that health services are profiting unfairly from patients' calls.

In an e-mail seen by The Times, John Maddison, finance director of the North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust, confirmed that the trust had previously received “a modest income” from its 0844 number.

The decision to switch to the number was made “reluctantly” to assist in meeting “savings targets”, he said. The trust, which serves a catchment population of 365,000, switched back to using local geographic numbers in January.

Other hospital trusts still using 0844 numbers for their switchboards, appointment booking and other inquiries include Mid Essex, Mid Yorkshire, Northumbria, and South Tyneside.

At least eight other trusts are using 0845 numbers. NHS Direct, the national health advice line, also uses an 0845 number.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on May 19th, 2008 at 6:51pm
http://www.lauramoffattmp.co.uk/news?PageId=720a6fc6-fb0b-1204-c990-3935cb1addac

<<
Success with the 0844 Campaign

Laura Moffatt MP has been campaigning on behalf of Crawley people to stop local GP surgeries using premium rate 0844 numbers.

“There is no way any public service should be making money out of people ringing them and no way people should have to pay any kind of premium rate to contact that service.” Said Laura. “So I was appalled to see that so many Crawley GPs were using the more costly 0844 telephone numbers particularly when it has been against Department of Health guidance since 2005

“I have written several times over two or three months to the Chief Executive at West Sussex PCT to urge him to address the matter with local GP surgeries. I am pleased to report that that persistence has finally paid off as they have issued strong guidance to local GPs. Congratulation to West Sussex PCT and my thanks to all those people who raised this issue with me.

“I sincerely hope that Crawley (or other) GPs will discontinue this practice as soon as possible, particularly as it appears they should be able to migrate to an 0344 number (which is charged at a normal landline rate) instead.”

If you would like to read all about Laura's campaign and view the documents please click HERE.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 21st, 2008 at 12:41am
http://www.harlowherald.co.uk/content/hlwherald/postbag/story.aspx?brand=HLHOnline&category=Postbag&tBrand=HertsCambsOnline&tCategory=PostbagHLH&itemid=WEED19%20May%202008%2016%3A19%3A31%3A370

- Letters for Harlow, Bishop's Stortford and the surrounding area

No discounts for patients

16:19 - 19 May 2008

<<
SIR - I e-mailed you last week regarding the story about doctor's surgery phone numbers and I wrote to Virgin Media. I received a reply thanking me for my letter and advising me of the following:

"We request you to visit our website for the call charges for the number 0844 and other too (http://allyours.virginmedia.com/pdf/uk_non-geographical_calls_a.pdf).

"We understand that some providers offer discount over some specific number like 0844 and etc.

"However, we are sorry to inform you that currently we do not have such an offer, in future if there are any changes for the call rates for specific numbers, we will get back to you by relevant media."

The grammar was good for a giggle although it doesn't quite beat the letter I had from another top company which apologised for "any incontinence caused"!

Mrs K Garrod, by e-mail
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 30th, 2008 at 1:12pm
http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=35&storycode=4119278&c=2

Ban on surgery 0844 numbers 'highly unlikely'

30 May 08

By Steve Nowottny

<<
The Department of Health is set to back down from banning the use of 0844 numbers in GP practices, the country’s biggest supplier has claimed.

The Department’s long-awaited report into the issue – originally due to be published at the end of March – had been expected to clamp down on use of the numbers, which can cost patients up to 20p a minute to call from mobile phones.

But NEG Surgery Line, a national provider of telephone systems and a major contributor to the Department’s review, told Pulse it was ‘highly unlikely’ 0844 numbers would be banned.

NEG spokesperson Kath Simons said the company had submitted a comprehensive report to the Department of Health in December, setting out the case for keeping the numbers. ‘The department then decided to do its own analysis, but only contacted 30 surgeries in the whole country, so maybe it had already made up its mind to go through the motions,’ she said.

The Government had indicated in January it intended to take a tough line, health minister Ivan Lewis warning it was not ‘consistent with best professional practice’ to charge patients more than the local rate.

But Leeds LMC recently met with NEG, and is now advising its practices that it does not expect the threatened ban on 0844 numbers to proceed.

Consumer lobbyists reacted angrily to the claims, and said they were confident ministers would take action. Campaigner David Hickson said: ‘If Alan Johnson has this before him, I can’t see him defending a situation where we allow people to carry on with 0844 numbers.’

But Ms Simons said her company had dozens of practices willing to use an 0844 telephone system, but many were instructed by PCTs to await the outcome of the review. We are pushing for it to come to a conclusion, as we do feel in a state of limbo.’

Dr Peter Jolliffe, chief officer of Devon LMC, said the Government should tackle the use of premium-rate numbers by hospital trusts and NHS Direct before targeting GPs.

‘They cannot have one rule for GPs and another rule for hospitals,’ he said. ‘Take the plank out of your own eye before you address the mote in other people’s.’

A Department of Health spokesperson said that ‘information gathering’ for the report was still ongoing, and that no publication date had been set.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on May 30th, 2008 at 8:38pm

idb wrote on May 30th, 2008 at 1:12pm:
Ban on surgery 0844 numbers 'highly unlikely'

An interesting piece. One wonders why NEG would be keen to publicly anticipate that the outcome of the evidence gathering exercise will be a decision by the government to reverse its current declared policy, rather than taking effective action to implement it.

If NEG personnel wish to argue that patients should pay towards the provision of NHS services as they use them, then let them say so honestly and openly; their views as citizens are no less valid than those of any others. The benefits of the Surgery Line system could be provided equally effectively using 03xx numbers, and thereby funded properly. I must question why NEG, as a body, is entitled to express an opinion on how the money used to pay for its systems and services is obtained. If it has an interest, this is surely improper.

It is Opal Telecom, a division of Carphone Warehouse, that mostly provides the 0844 numbers used by GPs. I see no good reason why 03xx numbers (perhaps the 0344 equivalents) could not be used. The money presently being improperly obtained from patients would perhaps have to come from somewhere else. If so, I see a number of possible sources and would not wish to express a clear opinion about exactly how this burden should perhaps be divided.

If the DH is correct in saying that its exercise is still continuing, then effort must be focussed on finding a way of getting the GP practices that are currently breaching the principles of the NHS back in line. Once such a path is open to them, there should be no difficulty in adding all revenue sharing ranges to the list of those explicitly prohibited by the terms of the GMS contract.


In the meantime, the Pulse article provides evidence of a potential U-turn by the government. Its present policy, stated in a letter from Mark Britnell and numerous written answers is that “patients should not be expected to pay more than the cost of a call to a local number”. Tolerance of the “g6” 0844 numbers used to fund Surgery Line, would require this to be reversed. We also have the reported quote from Alan Johnson – “I’ll end GP call charges”.

I hope that others will join me in attempting to draw this Pulse article, and the threat of a U-turn that is implied, to the attention of all those concerned about this matter. If it is widely known in advance that the government is planning a U-turn, by reversing rather than implementing its present policy, then this may make such a move more difficult to achieve.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 31st, 2008 at 2:28am

idb wrote on May 30th, 2008 at 1:12pm:
http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=35&storycode=4119278&c=2

Ban on surgery 0844 numbers 'highly unlikely' [...]

But Leeds LMC recently met with NEG, and is now advising its practices that it does not expect the threatened ban on 0844 numbers to proceed. [...]

>>


http://www.leedslmc.org/VP0805.pdf

LMC ViewPoint

The Newsletter of Leeds Local Medical Committee May 2008

0844 NUMBERS

There is currently much debate and speculation surrounding the use of 08 numbers in general
practice, and in particular 0844 numbers. A number of practices in Leeds use 0844 numbers and
have seen an improvement in telephone access as a result, with fewer patients having to wait long
periods waiting for a call to be answered. Leeds LMC met with NEG, the company that supplies this
service to a number of practices in Leeds and invited them to answer some common questions to try
and set the record straight.

Question: Does the use of 0844 numbers by GPs follow government guidelines?

Answer: Yes

Fact: In June 2007 the Secretary of State for Health confirmed that the use of 0844 and
0845 numbers is sanctioned by government policy. Presently, there is currently a
review on the use on 08 numbers (inc NHS Direct’s 0845) and the DH is working in
conjunction with NEG. This review has taken place since Christmas and a statement is
due out within the next few weeks. It is highly unlikely that 0844/45 use will be
banned, it is possible that guidelines will be issued to those who do have a 0844/45
number in place (ie that the number must be advertised in the practice leaflet, website
etc. (Ref Hansard . 19 Jun 2007 : Column 1638W NHS: Non-Geographic Numbers)

Question: Will I be expected to change my number to 03?

Answer: 03 numbers are not yet in full circulation. The receiving party, ie the practice, has to
pay to receive calls (ie practice will pay approx 1.5-2ppm for each call it receives).
These facts were not realised last year when they were initially suggested by the DH
and NEG regards this as an unrealistic options for surgeries.

Question: Why can’t NEG tell us how much the 0844 costs from a mobile?

Answer: Quite simply the cost is determined by the mobile provider and not NEG. As there are
thousands of different rates, which change all the time, there is a too higher risk of
supplying incorrect information. Also, an individual’s mobile package depends on their
own call pattern, so while a provider (e.g. Vodafone) may include 0844 numbers for
free for one patient, they may not do so for another. It is down to the individual to
negotiate the best package for them – as we all do for our gas, electricity and land
lines.

0844 and 0845 numbers (i.e. NHS Direct) are lo-call rate, not premium rate numbers.
The cost on average is the same as the current local rate cost to call the practice.
Surgery Line charges 4.2p per minute, 2p of which is returned to the practice and is
ring fenced to co fund equipment and software that specifically improves patient
access and care. The only stipulation of the Department of Health is that practices
can not make a profit from the 0844 revenue. Any excess revenue (not income), can
however, be used towards additional services, such as Jayex wallboards, Disaster
Recovery, Patient Partner (the ability for patients to book, cancel and amend appts
24/7), or Automatic Patient Check-in screens.
GP




Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on May 31st, 2008 at 2:42am

idb wrote on May 31st, 2008 at 2:28am:
The Newsletter of Leeds Local Medical Committee May 2008

Most of this is complete drivel.

My detailed response will (I hope) be one of many sent to the Leeds LMC, the GPC (BMA), Leeds PCT, Pulse, other media and other interested parties.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 31st, 2008 at 2:43am
These are the NEG liars responsible for continually churning out BS relating to this monstrous rip-off:

http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/about/management_team.html

The NEG Management Team

Leslie Jacobs MLIA (DIP). CEMAP – Non Executive Chairman

Leslie has spent in excess of 20 years advising both companies and individuals. He is qualified to advise on both investment and borrowing. His nature as a planner has assisted many companies to achieve their potential. Leslie Jacobs assisted the management buy out that took place in October 2004 and looks forward to assisting the company in achieving their future goals. He is currently the Managing Director of an Insurance Brokerage, Director of a Mortgage Brokerage and a fully qualified Financial Advisor and Pension specialist. He says "Everyone can get anything that they want in life as long as they make a logical plan first"


Dean Rayment – Managing Director

Dean is one of NEG ’s longest serving employees who joined the company in 1993 leaving 3 years later to co-fund Mediacom Global Communications Ltd. In a twist of fate NEG acquired Mediacom during an acquisition programme in 1999 and Dean rejoined NEG as part of earn-out arrangement and decided to stay. In the summer of 2002 Dean was appointed to the board accepting the position of Customer Accounts Director responsible for the management of the existing client base and internal marketing. In October 2004 after an MBO (Management Buy Out) Dean was appointed to Managing Director of NEG . Dean lives in Essex with his wife Rosie and is a keen sportsman enjoying golf, skiing and most water sports.

deanr@networkeuropegroup.com

Craig Hughes – Engineering Director

Craig Hughes joined NEG after 14 years in the Royal Air Force as a Telecommunication Engineer. He subsequently gained extensive experience in data, satellite and voice communications. He left the RAF finishing at the rank of Non Commissioned Officer after completing a tour at the Defence Crisis Management Centre in Whitehall. Craig joined NEG As the Nortel Product Manager, with his wealth of experience he was soon promoted to Engineering Manager. In 2003 Craig was rewarded for all his hard work with promotion to the position of Group General Manger. In October 2004 as part of the Management Team Craig became Engineering Director of NEG after an internal Management By Out. Craig has settled down in Essex and is a very keen sportsman and continues to participate in his love for the sport of rugby.

craigh@networkeuropegroup.com

Scott Russell – Non-Executive Director

In 1992 Scott Russell founded Network Europe Telecommunications ltd growing the company organically and through strategic acquisitions to become one of Europe’s premier suppliers of business telephone systems. In the Autumn 2004 Scott stepped down as Managing Director of NEG after successfully spearheaded the sale of the highly profitable Network division to Cable & Wireless’s largest international business partner, then orchestrating a consolidation and Management buyout of the remaining group companies. Scott is now a respected industry consultant regularly contributing to several leading telecommunication publications and has appeared on both television and radio. He lives in rural Suffolk with his wife and two boys, is a keen sportsman and private pilot, and strongly believes "if you look after your customers, they'll look after you"





Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 31st, 2008 at 2:54am
http://www.gloslmc.com/newsletters/previousyears/December%2007%20Newsletter.pdf

GLOUCESTERSHIRE LOCAL
MEDICAL COMMITTEE
DECEMBER 2007 Edition

0844 NUMBERS - A FURTHER
COMPLICATION


Twenty-three of our 83 practices in
Gloucestershire now use 0844 series phone
numbers. These are cheaper for customers
than 0870 series numbers would be, but,
unlike the 0870 numbers, 0844 numbers
cannot receive phone calls from abroad.
Practices should consider how often patients
may wish to contact them from abroad
when weighing up whether to change phone
systems. Practices already involved in 0844
could invest in an extra 01 series phone
line, but there is a risk that it would become
widely known and used by those who are in
UK, thus nullifying the advantages of the
integrated phone system.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 31st, 2008 at 2:57am
http://www.gloslmc.com/newsletters/previousyears/Sept%2007%20Newsletter.pdf

GLOUCESTERSHIRE LOCAL MEDICAL COMMITTEE
SEPTEMBER 2007 Edition

USE OF 0844 NUMBERS

A dozen of the 83 practices in Gloucestershire
have gone over to 0844 numbers. Basically
every practice has to run efficiently and
legally, and has to make its own decisions to
do so. However, there is a nationally
orchestrated campaign to outlaw the use of
such numbers by GPs. There is a petition to
the Prime Minister, which can be viewed via
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/NGN-use-by-GPs/
which is gathering about 300 signatures a day
and is due to complete on 15 Feb 08. In July
07 27 MPs (including the MP for Cheltenham)
signed an Early Day Motion condemning GP’s
use of non-geographical numbers. The
essence of the objection is that patients
ringing these practices are paying more than
those who ring GPs with a geographical
number, that some of the extra goes back to
the practice and, since the phone call may
involve consultation, it could be said that the
patient is indirectly paying for treatment,
which is contrary to the GMS contract. It
matters not to the activists that the amount
of extra paid is usually minimal. They do not
take account of the fact that, although it costs
more to ring an 0844 number from a mobile
(typically 12p a minute against 5p a minute
from a land-line) the GP practice phone bills
are also going up all the time as more and
more patients prefer to be called on mobile
phones. Can the GP refuse to call them? No.
Your Secretary went in to bat on BBC Radio
Glos breakfast radio on Tuesday 11 Sep.
There was an article in the Citizen on 12 Sep
which was even-handed. Since then things
have gone quiet, but it may rear its head
again. A briefing note is attached.

0844 ‘LO CALL’ RATE NUMBERS

There have been some concerns expressed on the radio about GP Practices that use 0844
numbers. 11 GP practices in Gloucestershire PCT area have chosen to use advanced telephone
systems in their practices, with 0844 numbers. The phone company pays the practice 1.2p a
minute for incoming calls, to a maximum that equals the rent received, so they can never make a
profit out of it. Doctors want to run efficient practices that do the best for their patients.

Advantages of the system are:

• Patient satisfaction – many complain in surveys that they don’t like hanging on waiting
for the phone to be answered or being caught in a traditional phone queuing system. You
are through at once to the 0844 system and can get to the top of the queue if you have a
medical emergency. From what we hear, patients prefer this and are prepared to pay for it.

• Quick routing to the right person – saves receptionist (and therefore the patient’s phone
bill) about 90 seconds.

• Renting the phone system on which the number is used allows the practice to spend the
thousands of pounds that a new system costs on improved patient care and equipment
instead.

Significant points:

• NO PROFIT. GPs are debarred by their contract with the phone equipment supplier from
making a profit. The proportion of the call fee received by the phone company that is paid
back to the practice cannot exceed the rent that the practice pays the company for use of
the system.

• ACTUAL INCREASES IN COST GENERALLY SMALL The cost per minute is greater to the
person making the call, but:

o Increased cost is offset by the speed of call. But even supposing the calls were
the same length, from a landline the cost per minute (VAT inc) is 4.9ppm as against
the (VAT inc) BT landline call 6.49ppm for the first minute and 3.95ppm thereafter.
On 3 minutes the call costs 15p on 0844 and 14.5p on 01~ numbers. The average
length of a call is 147 seconds.

o Mobile networks guilty. There are cases of higher charges. (e.g. some old age
pensioners who only have pay as you go mobile phones. For them the cost is about
35p a minute, but they have the choice of whether to go PAYG or contract.) On
contract you can usually get 0844/5 numbers onto ‘favourites’ etc thereby avoiding
those costs. The increased cost charged by mobile networks for phoning 0844
numbers benefits only the mobile networks.

• EFFICIENCY Government insists that GPs must run an efficient business, and this is one
strand in making it so.

• Why pillory GPs? Many large organisations in Gloucestershire (POLICE, NHS DIRECT,
BRITISH GAS, GLOUCESTERSHIRE PCT, LIBRARY) use 0844 and 0845 numbers. (Some like
the RSPCA use the much more expensive 0870 numbers)

Summary. GPs make no profits from the system and use it to produce a more efficient service for
patients, which they approve of.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 31st, 2008 at 3:03am
http://www.barnsleypct.nhs.uk/LMC/LMC%20Newsletter%20032008.pdf

Barnsley LMC Newsletter

I S S U E 1 2 M A R C H / A P R I L 2 0 0 8

0844 numbers - information for surgeries

There was a recent parliamentary debate on the charges patients are
paying when ringing practice 0844 numbers, in particular when they are
using mobile phones. We have since looked into this matter further. It
would appear that where 0844 numbers are used by practices, there
should be mention of the charge for phone calls in the practice's
information leaflet. There is no need, however, for a message on the
actual telephone system itself. While patients' telephone providers may
have a variety of charges, in any practice information the price relevant to
most consumers should be stated. We are aware that there are probably
few practices aware of this aspect of advertising practice so we would
ask LMCs to cascade this information.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 31st, 2008 at 3:05am
http://www.cambridgeshirepct.nhs.uk/documents/Publications/GP%20Bulletin/03_June_2007.pdf?preventCache=03%2F09%2F2007+10%3A58

GP Practice bulletin

0844 Telephone Numbers ...

Following several queries, here is some background information about 0844 telephone numbers. Practices
should be aware there is increasing local and national interest in this issue from patients and the public

Key Message:

There is currently no reason why practices cannot use 0844 numbers but this may be about to change

In 2005 DoH announced a ban on expensive telephone numbers that charge patients over the odds to call
NHS services in their area. Since that time, the only special service numbers the NHS has been able to
use are freephone numbers or those that offer patients a guaranteed low rate call, such as 0845 or 0844
numbers. NHS Direct and many of the local County Council services are provided via an 0845 number

Also in 2005, the DoH announced plans to review the use of non-geographical numbers in practices,
including whether such numbers should be used at all. It suggested practices bear this in mind if
considering a move to non-geographical numbers such as 0844

The review was to follow an Ofcom www.ofcom.org.uk consultation on proposals to change the regulatory
regime that supports Number Translation Services, including the 0844 number range.

The review has not yet happened but the DoH has confirmed it still plans to undertake it

Actions following the Ofcom consultation, do not include changes for 0844 numbers at present but
complaints and other indicators will be monitored to see if consumer concerns arise

Ofcom indicated that, at present, it is inappropriate for public bodies to use 0844 numbers exclusively (i.e.
without at a minimum giving equal prominence to a geographic alternative) when dealing with people on
low incomes or other vulnerable groups

It is also consulting on a proposal to provide a new 03 number range for those wanting to use a nongeographic
number but not requiring a revenue share. It believes this range, on which revenue sharing
would be banned, would be well suited to the requirements of public bodies currently using 0844 numbers.

In 2006 the DoH advised PCTs about the 03 number range charged to the consumer at the same rate as a
geographical number, which could be included in any inclusive or low-cost packages offered by landline or
mobile phone companies.

It drew the PCTs attention to the Central Office of Information (COI) guidance www.coi.gov.uk and asked
that PCTs ensure practices consider carefully the best option for their patients who should not have to pay
over the odds to contact their local services. The guidance states that 0844 is still an appropriate tariff but
can be charged at up to 5p per minute which may be seen as a barrier to some individuals. It notes that
revenue share on 0844 is possible but should be avoided by public sector bodies to avoid criticism

It advised individual practices should decide their patient’s best interests but suggested this will normally
be the lowest call cost i.e. geographic or 03 numbers. Practices might like to look at the various sources of
patient feedback to establish levels of satisfaction with telephone access

Although the list of eligible public bodies on the Ofcom website does not appear to include GP practices,
Ofcom have verbally confirmed that practices are eligible to use the 03 number range

The most recent DoH communication to PCT chief executives can be found on the DoH website
www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Lettersandcirculars/Dearcolleagueletters/DH_064287

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on May 31st, 2008 at 4:23am
Great work IDB - some interesting material.

Readers should recognise that LMCs exist only to represent the interests of GPs. They are therefore bound to see issues only from the side of the hard-pressed and much-criticised GP - that is their job - do not expect balance. Repeating falsehoods is however another matter.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 31st, 2008 at 4:46am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 31st, 2008 at 4:23am:
Readers should recognise that LMCs exist only to represent the interests of GPs. They are therefore bound to see issues only from the side of the hard-pressed and much-criticised GP - that is their job - do not expect balance.
Indeed, and nothing wrong with representing GPs' interests.


SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 31st, 2008 at 4:23am:
Repeating falsehoods is however another matter.
The source for such falsehoods is, presumably, NEG and its Joseph Goebbels-esque propaganda machine.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on May 31st, 2008 at 8:36pm
"the same length, from a landline the cost per minute (VAT inc) is 4.9ppm as against the (VAT inc) BT landline call 6.49ppm for the first minute and 3.95ppm thereafter.
On 3 minutes the call costs 15p on 0844 and 14.5p on 01~ numbers. The average length of a call is 147 seconds"

Surely this piece of information is incorrect. It includes the connection charge for the 01 number but not the connection charge for the 0844 number?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on May 31st, 2008 at 9:13pm
I have sent the following email to the 2 relevant ministers.


Alan/Ivan,

I have been involved in the campaign against the misuse of 08xx numbers
since the use of an 0870 helpline number after the London bombings in
2005.

I have no financial interest whatsoever but I am concerned by any sort of
exploitation especially of the vulnerable in society.

I should also like to declare I have no objection whatsoever in the use of
proper premium rate numbers (09) provided they are used in the
appropriate context.

I understand that the Department of Health is currently carrying out a
review of the use of 0844 numbers by GPs.

I could provide a detailed argument here as to why I object to the use of
these numbers by GPs and will do so if you wish me to do so.

However instead can I recommend that you and your colleagues access
the web site www.saynoto0870.com and take part in the debate there to
obtain evidence.

There are a number of very knowledgeable people on this topic who
debate there. They obviously tend to be of like minds but none have a
financial interest unlike the those arguing from the opposite view point.

Can I also emphasis that any evidence you are given is tested. We have
certainly become aware of some very significant misrepresentations of
the facts in particular with respect to call pricing (eg excluding vat or
connection charges when comparing prices), the misuse of the term local
rate and claims of 0844 numbers being included in call packages when
they are not.

My greatest concern is for the poorer members of society who use PAYG
mobiles or payphones who pay very high rates for calling 0844 number
and are now left in a queue rather than getting an engaged tone so build
up bills of several pounds for each call. I also have grave concerns about
getting in contact with your GP when abroad which is now impossible with
0844 numbers and if an alternative is provided it is usually an 0870
number or fax number, both of which are useless if you are phoning from
your mobile while away, which is the most likely scenario.

In case you are also not aware can I also draw your attention to
www.pulsetoday.co.uk where NEG have pre-empted your review. Quote:

"The Department of Health is set to back down from banning the use of
0844 numbers in GP practices, the country's biggest supplier has
claimed.
 
....NEG Surgery Line, a national provider of telephone systems and a
major contributor to the Department’s review, told Pulse it was ‘highly
unlikely’ 0844 numbers would be banned. "

I look forward to hearing from you and hope you participate in the debate
on www.saynoto0870.com

Regards Keith

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on May 31st, 2008 at 10:48pm
I think a few quid wagered on a deafening silence from the ministers would be worthwhile

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on May 31st, 2008 at 11:06pm
Let's not be too cynical :)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jun 1st, 2008 at 12:03am

Heinz wrote on May 31st, 2008 at 10:48pm:
I think a few quid wagered on a deafening silence from the ministers would be worthwhile

You may not get good odds, but I hope that NEG are wrong and you win your bet because efforts to find a solution are indeed continuing.

It may be frustrating, and some degree of cynicism is justified, but a complete solution to this matter could never have come quickly. I would not expect anything definitive to be said until the solution has been found and set ready for implementation. Nothing is guaranteed, however those who hope for a preservation of the status quo have more to fear from a delay than those who wish for change.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jun 4th, 2008 at 6:30am
A further specialist media piece is found in E-Health Insider Primary Care - DH 'highly unlikely' to ban 084 numbers

Members may wish to follow the link to read the full article, including the quoted comments of a campaigner; however the topic of this thread is “NEG propaganda”.


Quote:
Kath Simons, spokesperson for NEG Surgery Line, told EHI primary Care: “The over-riding fundamental factor is that Surgery Line does work, the vast majority of patients prefer to use it due to the improved access and that practices love it - 1300 practices would not be wrong.”

Simons said the company was pushing the DH to come to a conclusion as it had “tens of practices” wishing to use Surgery Line but hesitant to do so because they were being advised to put their plans on hold by PCTs.

I have two points to make.

Firstly, there is none of the familiar attempt to claim that patients do not incur additional cost to access Surgery Line using 0844 numbers. That is how Surgery Line is presently funded. If that point has now been ceded, then progress is being made. The next step is an admission that Surgery Line would work equally well on 03xx (or perhaps even geographic) numbers.

Secondly, there is a valid political argument that patients should contribute towards the cost of NHS services as they use them, so long as these charges are clearly declared. I passionately disagree, and suspect that the GP partners in most of the 1300 practices, and many of their patients, would also subscribe to the principle of “free at the point of need”. I have never argued that Surgery Line does not provide benefits to patients and practices. It could continue to do so, if a proper way of funding it could be found.

I believe that as an interested supplier to the NHS, NEG should keep out of the politics of how it is funded. So long as NEG receives fair remuneration for what it provides, it should be content. NEG, and its partner Opal Telecom (part of the Carphone Warehouse Group), should currently be focussing their efforts on how this valued system may be funded properly for both new and existing customers. The Department of Health and GPs should also be engaged on this point.

The same applies to all other NHS services currently provided on 084x numbers.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Jun 16th, 2008 at 5:16pm
Well I have to say 'to all intents and purposes' Heinz was right because quite frankly I would have prefered silence to this reply I got 16 days after I sent my email.

No attempt has been made to answer my email. It is a stock reply. No mention of the review taking place. Says they are not collecting data on the use of 084x. Well how the hell are they going to make a decision then or as I suspect this is just the old response that used to be sent out months ago without any attenpt to update it.

What is the point of reiterating the old stuff of not expecting patients to pay more than a local call when this is not happening and also to expect local PCTs to sort it out when they clearly are not doing so and they know it.

I would have appreciated at least 1 minute being spent on the reply to me.

And interestingly an email is obviously deemed to have been sent when it is read!

Dear xxxxx,

Thank you for your email of 2 June to Alan Johnson about the use of 084 telephone numbers by GP practices.  As you will appreciate, Mr Johnson receives a large amount of correspondence daily and it is not always possible for him to answer all of his letters personally.  I have therefore been asked to reply on his behalf.

The Department appreciates your concern about the issue of GP practice telephone numbers, and does not want to see people charged excessively for contacting their GP.

In 2006, former Health Minister Lord Warner issued a letter to all Primary Care Trust (PCT) Chief Executives, which asked them to:

...consider what actions (they) need to take locally to ensure that patients telephoning practices do not pay more than they would if they called a local geographical telephone number.

The Department does not collect information on the telephone numbers in use by local GP practices.  It is aware that some practices across the country are using 084 numbers, but the Department does not expect patients to have to pay more than the cost of a local call.

Ministers believe that decisions about local services are best taken locally, where the local situation and local priorities are best understood.  NHS organisations have a duty to ensure that they provide the best possible service to their local populations.  It is for PCTs to consider what is in their patients’ best interests.  However, the Department expects PCTs and GPs locally to ensure telephone systems do not place a financial burden on patients.

Yours sincerely,

Kate Roy
Customer Service Centre
Department of Health

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Jun 17th, 2008 at 8:19am

Originally I sent a rather grumpy response to the email rec'd (I hate it when you put thought and effort into something and no effort is put into responding). This morning I sent the following more thoughtful reply.

And whoops I have just noticed I have 2 point a) :o
                          ---------------------------------------------

As you will know form my original reply to your email I was rather annoyed
by getting a standard (and out of date) reply to my email. This rather
discourages the public from getting involved in public matters. It was very
disheartening.

Having thought about this I would like to ask some specific questions:


a) Do you know when the DofH review on GPs use of 0844 numbers will
be completed? I believe it was originally due for this March.


a) You say the department does not collect information on the telephone
numbers in use by local GP practices . How on earth are you carrying out
the review if you haven't done this?


b) You state "In 2006, former Health Minister Lord Warner issued a letter
to all Primary Care Trust (PCT) Chief Executives, which asked them
to:...consider what actions (they) need to take locally to ensure that
patients telephoning practices do not pay more than they would if they
called a local geographical telephone number."

PCTs are currently not doing this. The not unreasonable reason given is
that they are waiting for the DofH review to report. What is your comment
on this please?


c) You state that "... the Department expects PCTs and GPs locally to
ensure telephone systems do not place a financial burden on patients."

This is not happening with 0844 numbers. In particular for the most
vulnerable who use payphones or PAYG mobiles who now pay very high
costs indeed to call GPs. Neither the GPs nor the PCTs are acting to
stop this.

Surely this means that the DofH must act. What is your comment to this
please?


If you could give a specific reply to points a), b) and c) I would appreciate
it.

Thank you. Keith

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jun 17th, 2008 at 11:21am

Keith wrote on Jun 17th, 2008 at 8:19am:
This morning I sent the following more thoughtful reply.

Yes, I too have a library full of correspondence including exactly those same comments from the DH. Your reply is well to the point.

The DH response has not yet been updated because there has not actually been any significant change of policy position. A big mistake was made in 2005 by believing that 0844 numbers were charged at a "guaranteed low rate" - see news release. This led to their use actually being encouraged. The error has now been recognised by the DH, but not yet acknowledged as such. I have attempted to get the author of this phrase in advice to the government to own up, but without success. With a different team of ministers in place it is however more important to look forward.

The evidence gathering will lead to something being said or done. This could be as early as this afternoon when there is an opposition-led debate on Primary Care in parliament - Health Ministers will be answering questions from 2:30, the debate will follow at around 3:40 - see agenda.

Whilst ministers are considering what to do one cannot expect departmental officials to give a running commentary on their thought processes. The fact that the exercise was extended from its original planned conclusion may be a positive indication that the issue is being looking into seriously. A degree of cynicism is always justified and we must never expect to get everything that we want, however I am mildly optimistic.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Barbara on Jun 17th, 2008 at 7:05pm
I don't know if anyone else saw the item on BBC Look East a few minutes ago (about 6.45pm) regarding the use of 0844 by doctors' surgeries.  I am going to email them immediately after I finish this post as there were a number of errors in the report (eg it only costs more to call 0844 from a mobile not from a landline - do these people not do research?, no mention of costs from payphones or the revenue share accruing to doctors).  The report concluded with a statement to the effect that we will all just have to get used to calling GPs on 0844!  

I do think it very important, particularly in view of the amount of hard work put in by very knowledgeable members of this forum, that one of thes experts with far greater knowledge of the subject than I have contacts BBC Look East to ensure they have the full facts and that our side of the case is put, preferably in a follow up news item (I did get the impression this is has been raised on a previous occasion recently but I have been on holiday and may have missed it).   I will refer them to this thread on this forum site but do think this is a good opportunity to get some media coverage for the problems.      

The contact details are tel 01603 619331 (NOT the 0845 they give on the programme!) and email: look.east@bbc.co.uk

Thank you.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jun 17th, 2008 at 7:43pm
Barbara,

In view of your own longstanding involvement on this website and your clear cut passion for the cause I do not personally consider you to be any less of an expert on this matter than the rest of us.

At the end of the day the BBC likes to cover stories from real local people affected by the issue who live in the area affected by their news item.  You are that person and so are far more relevant for the BBC to take comments from than those of us who live the other side of London or in London.

Also I have a very urgent deadline coming up on Thursday and so I don't think I could take the time to write a long response to BBC East.  You may find the contents of some of the below recent email sent today to the Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman to be of assistance in presenting the arguments to BBC Look East.

I would advise not getting in to the pence per minute argument as pricing varies by telecoms provider.  Instead stick to the argument that the calls are not part of calls packages on landlines or bundled minutes on mobiles.  As long as you do that then most of the above arguments about the Ombudsman's 0845 number also still apply.


Quote:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject:      Inappropriate Use of 0845 Number by Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman
Date:      Tue, 17 Jun 2008 10:48:21 +0100
To:      complaintsaboutphso@ombudsman.org.uk, trish.longdon@ombudsman.org.uk
CC:      ann.abraham@ombudsman.org.uk, bill.richardson@ombudsman.org.uk, philip.aylett@ombudsman.org.uk

Dear Ms Longdon,

Inappropriate Continued Use of 0845 Contact Telephone Number by Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman Contrary to the Recommendations of Ofcom, Sir David Varney and The Central Office of Information's Better Practice Guide for Government Contact Centres

I wish to complain in the strongest possible terms about the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman's continued use of an 0845 telephone number (0845 015 4033) for contacting it despite the advice and recommendations of the Central Office of Information's Better Practice Guide for Government Contact Centres (Third Edition) and Sir David Varney's report - Service Transformation - a better deal for citizens and businesses, a better deal for the taxpayer.  The Ombudsman is also ignoring repeated advice from Ofcom that it would be most appropriate for public sector contact centres to switch to using its new 03 phone number range, although in the case of the Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman there appears no good reason why your office could not simply display its underlying 020 geographic phone numbers since you do not appear to operate across multiple regional call centres (a primary reason historically in the government sector for using an 0845 non geographic number).

The reason 0845 is objectionable is because these numbers are excluded from inclusive bundled call plans such as BT's Unlimited Anytime Plan or TalkTalk's Talk 3 plan and are also not included in bundled mobile phone packages taken up by many mobile phone users who can make unlimited calls to numbers starting 01, 02 or 03 out of their bundled minutes allowance.  However numbers commencing 080, 084 and 087 are not included in these packages and are always charged per minute in addition to their monthly mobile phone subscription.  The most expensive mobile phone tariffs charge up to 40p per minute to call 0845 when in the UK.  Also under Vodafone's Passport tariff deal one can call a normal UK number starting 01 or 02 out of bundled minutes plus a 75p service fee when roaming in many EU countries but a call to the Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman's 0845 number will cost 75p per minute + connection or a staggering £45.75 per hour to call while roaming in those same countries with the same phone.  It is obviously possible to envisage some circumstances in which UK citizens might need to contact the Parliamentary & Health Service Ombudsman whilst overseas.

The recommendations in Sir David Varney's report can be found in Chapter 7 of his report at www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/4/F/pbr06_varney_review.pdf  The chapter starts on P.53 of the report (P58 of the pdf file) and the most relevant recommendations about government contact centres are in paragraphs 7.24 and 7.30 of his report.

You can obtain a copy of the Central Office of Information's Better Practice Guide for Government Contact Centres (Third Edition) at www.coi.gov.uk/documents/gcc-third-edition.pdf  If you refer to paragraph 3.51 on p35 of the guide (p36 of the PDF file) onwards you will see that there is a large amount of material there that is relevant with respect to the use of the 0845 number by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman and why your use of 0845 is likely to impose arbitrary and excessive costs on many callers, including the poorest members of society who often do not have access to a landline phone and instead use Pay As You Go mobile phones.  As discussed these Pay As You Go mobile phones can charge up to 40p per minute to call 0845 on some tariffs.  Yet a normal number starting 01, 02 or 03 can be called on the same Pay As You Go phones for as little as 15p for a call of up to 60 minutes at some times of day.  This is not possible for 0845 numbers.

The other following references showing concerns about inappropriate use and misuse of 084 and 087 prefixed phone numbers may also be of assistance to you in your investigation:-


Continued/............

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Jun 17th, 2008 at 7:46pm
Continued From Above/.....................


Quote:
The other following references showing concerns about inappropriate use and misuse of 084 and 087 prefixed phone numbers may also be of assistance to you in your investigation:-

The view of a county council trading standards department about price misdescriptions of these numbers:-

See para 1.3 on page 1 of www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/oftel_0845/responses/leicester_cc.pdf

and

the view of the then CEO of BT Retail (now the new CEO designate of the whole of BT), Ian Livingston, regarding inappropriate use of 084 and 087 numbers:-

http://business.scotsman.com/business/BT-calls-on-Ofcom-to.2642029.jp

and

two guidances from the Advertising Standards Authority

www.asa.org.uk/cap/news_events/news/2005/Hanging+on+the+telephone+on+and+on+and+on.htm

www.asa.org.uk/cap/news_events/news/2005/Stop+the+call+confusion.htm

and

the Current Parliamentary Early Day Motion signed by 86 MPs expressing concern about the substantial additional cost of calling benefit helplines using 0845 numbers, especially from mobile phones.

http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=35520&SESSION=891

an earlier Parliamentary Early Day motion deploring the use of 0870 telephone numbers by government departments

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

and

Two other guidances from the Committee of Advertising Practice of the Advertising Standards Authority

www.cap.org.uk/cap/news_events/news/2005/CAP+rings+the+changes+for+telecoms+providers.htm


www.asa.org.uk/cap/advice_online/ad_alerts/Advertising+0845+and+087+numbers.htm

and finally Pages 5 and 6 of the below minutes from my own district council - Mole Valley District Council (on which I was formerly a local district councillor) where in 2005 we agreed to adopt policy to stop any further or future use of 0845 and 0870 numbers.  See Minute 141 (Motion 2/2005 on P.5 of the PDF) at :-

www.molevalley.gov.uk/media/pdf/1/s/Council_Minutes_190705.pdf

I hope you will investigate this matter thoroughly as I am very disappointed indeed to see the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, of all bodies, still using one of these covert premium rate non geographic numbers as its main point of telephone contact.

I look forward to hearing from you regarding this matter.

Yours faithfully,

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jun 17th, 2008 at 9:02pm

Barbara wrote on Jun 17th, 2008 at 7:05pm:
I don't know if anyone else saw the item on BBC Look East a few minutes ago (about 6.45pm) regarding the use of 0844 by doctors' surgeries.  I am going to email them immediately after I finish this post as there were a number of errors in the report (eg it only costs more to call 0844 from a mobile not from a landline - do these people not do research?, no mention of costs from payphones or the revenue share accruing to doctors).  The report concluded with a statement to the effect that we will all just have to get used to calling GPs on 0844!

I've just watched the report. Unfortunately it doesn't appear to have its own link, so you will have to go to the main BBC Look East page and skip to 16 minutes in. The report was by Joel Mapp.

It made no mention of charging patients and the NHS not being "free at the point of need". The queuing is what is riling patients.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jun 18th, 2008 at 12:28am

Barbara wrote on Jun 17th, 2008 at 7:05pm:
I don't know if anyone else saw the item on BBC Look East a few minutes ago (about 6.45pm)

Thanks to those who have posted on this. I have now seen it.

There are two essential flaws in a very brief report.

1 - The assumption that Surgery Line needs a 0844 number. (A 03 number would work equally well)

2 - The statement "from a landline it's the same". (Call type "g6" calls are invariably more expensive)

There are other issues in this story to be followed up.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jun 18th, 2008 at 10:37am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jun 18th, 2008 at 12:28am:
There are other issues in this story to be followed up.

The new telephone number for "Biggleswade Health Centre", two practices run by Dr Kirkham & Partners, is 0844 576 9041. This is not shown on NHS Choices, nor even on the practice website.

The claim of 180 practices using 0844 numbers "in our area" by BBC Look East can be set against the fact that only 92 practices serving PCTs covered by the East Anglia SHA publish such numbers on NHS Choices. Noting the Biggleswade example, could this suggest that the problem is actually much more widespread than we and the Department of Health recognise?

There was an item on this story in a local newspaper in February. It does not mention the telephone number and so may have evaded attempts at media monitoring.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jun 19th, 2008 at 11:58pm
http://www.thecomet.net/content/comet/news/story.aspx?brand=CMTOnline&category=newsbiggles&tBrand=HertsCambsOnline&tCategory=newslatestCMT&itemid=WEED19%20Jun%202008%2010%3A19%3A09%3A517

Phone outrage - pensioners complain about hidden cost of health care

10:17 - 19 June 2008

<<
A HEALTH centre has denied accusations that its new phone system is causing pensioners to wait as long as 45 minutes before calls are answered.

One pensioner revealed he was told he was 60th in a queue and hung up because he was aware of the costs he might face.

This week the Biggleswade and District Pensioners' Association issued a damning statement accusing the Biggleswade Health Centre in Saffron Road of placing an unnecessary financial burden on the elderly with the new system.

"The new number is considerably more expensive to call from landlines and can cost up to 40p a minute using a mobile phone," said the association.

"Many patients will have contracts with telecom suppliers allowing them to call 01767 numbers either free or as part of a call allowance. This does not apply to the 0844 number at the surgery.

"Since the new telephone system has been installed we have received reports from patients saying they have experienced waiting times of up to 45 minutes in getting through.

"The association considers this practice especially penalises the poor, elderly and other persons who do not have access to a home phone and must rely on a public phone box or mobile phone.

"It is an additional and unnecessary burden and cost on illness and is counter to the principle that healthcare should be free at the point of delivery."

Association committee member David Hopton was the unfortunate pensioner who was informed he was 60th in a queue waiting to talk to the surgery.

Mr Hopton, 77, who lives in Upper Caldecote, said this week: "I rang the surgery shortly after 8am only to be told I was 60th in the queue so I hung up. This upset me because I was aware of the extra costs that can be 6p a minute.

"Many pensioners just don't realise how much it is now costing to call the surgery. Pensioners are being squeezed on all fronts and it is not fair when it comes to health."

Health centre manager Jenny Morley said the centre denied the allegations that were being made by the association.

"I would dispute patients are waiting as long as 45 minutes. The perception of how long people are waiting on the phone is wrong," said Mrs Morley.

"The decision to change our phone system was not one that was taken lightly but it was taken to improve services at the centre.

"The cost of the new system is 1p a minute more than it was but patients are getting a better service. We have had a lot of compliments about the new system.

"We have had many discussions with the pensioners' group and have tried to be up front with them about the changes.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jun 20th, 2008 at 12:00am
http://www.biggleswadetoday.co.uk/bigg/Protest-over-health-centre-phone.4197885.jp

Protest over health centre phone changes

<<
A pensioners group calls for a public meeting

A pensioners' group has vowed to start a campaign to combat changes to a health centre's phone number.

Biggleswade and District Pensioners' Association has spoken out agains the change to the Saffron Road health centre in Biggleswade, which now uses an 0844 number - as reported in the Biggleswade Chronicle in February.

It says the new system, which adds callers to a queue, is adding unnecessary burden and cost on illness.

Chairman Ken Lynch said: "I want to talk to Biggleswade Town Council to see if we can arrange a public meeting because lots of people are having problems. We want to make sure that justice is done for the senior citizens and everybody.

"Healthcare should be free to the point of delivery, which it isn't now."

For the full story see the June 20 edition of the Biggleswade Chronicle.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Barbara on Jun 23rd, 2008 at 9:26am
I know that a number of other forum members contacted BBC Look East after the news item last Tuesday and I was wondering if anyone has had any response from them, I know I haven't other than the auto acknowledgement.   It does seem wrong that a programme from an organisation such as the BBC which is supposed to have a reputation for accurate reporting of facts can make errors and misrepresentations and then do nothing when these are brought to their attention.   I wonder if anyone has any thoughts on this, bearing in mind that, if people believed that news report, they will be dialling 0844 from a landline thinking it costs the same as landline call to a geo no, and that was only one of the errors!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jun 27th, 2008 at 10:26pm
Source: Bedford Today

http://www.bedfordtoday.co.uk/bed-news/Doctors39-surgeries-39ripping-off39-patients.4225995.jp

Doctors' surgeries 'ripping off' patients with premium rate call lines

Published Date: 26 June 2008
By Paul Fisher

<<

Six practices in firing line but claim their 'hands are tied' over contracts

Doctors' surgeries using premium rate telephone numbers, have been accused of "ripping off" patients.

Six surgeries in Bedford, Kempston, Flitwick and Ampthill use 084 telephone numbers, which healthcare bosses and councillors have expressed concerns about.

Calls made to these premium rate lines incur a connection charge of six pence and then cost five pence per minute, regardless of any inclusive or low-cost call packages offered by telephone operators.

Dr Basra's surgeries in Bushmead Avenue, Ampthill Road and Victoria Road, Bedford, Dr Ling and Partners, of The Highlands, Flitwick, Cater Street Surgery, Cater Street, Kempston, and Houghton Close Surgery, in Houghton Close, Ampthill, all use 084 telephone numbers.

Coun Nicky Attenborough (Con, Kempston East) said: "It's absolutely ridiculous. Why would a doctor's surgery have a premium rate line?
"We all know 084 numbers are expensive, I look at a 084 number and immediately don't want to ring it.

"It's just not on, I feel people should not be afraid to phone their surgeries. People are being ripped off."

Ofcom, the independent regulator and competition authority for the UK communications industries, investigated the use of 084 numbers in 2005.

It subsequently introduced 03 telephone numbers in 2007, which are charged at geographical rates, such as 01 and 02 numbers, and are included in inclusive or low-cost call packages.

Baron Norman Warner, a former health minister, wrote to all Primary Care Trusts (PCT) in December advising them against using 084 numbers and recommending surgeries use a geographic number or a 03 number to ensure patients do not pay more than necessary.

But Bedfordshire PCT, which oversees the running of doctors' surgeries, said it is powerless to interfere.

A spokesman said: "As a PCT we hold contracts with GPs.

"These contracts list a range of numbers, like premium rate 09 numbers, which surgeries are not allowed to use, but they do not cover 084.

"Because of this there is nothing we can do. When this issue came to our attention we wrote to all surgeries advising them the Department of Health were looking into the matter and not to install 084 numbers.

"I have heard some of these 084 deals are long term tie-ins though, which could cause problems for surgeries."

He added: "We are obviously concerned and made our point of view plain to GP practices, but they are independently contracted."

Dr Satwinder Singh Basra, said there was nothing he could do about his surgeries' telephone lines.

He added: "We cannot get out of the contract with the telephone company. It is a five-year contract, which we have had since 2005, our hands are tied.

"It provides a good service to the patient, you ring one number to talk to three surgeries and it's not that expensive.

"All over the country these numbers are used, I do not know why there is so much fuss, it's not for our profit."

The Department of Health is currently gathering evidence and views on the use of premium rate lines in doctors surgeries and will consider whether further action is necessary once that process is complete.

>>

Not for profit for the doctors (apart from allowing them to offset the cost of the system). But the telcos are making more profit from the use of 0844 numbers as they are a very inefficient method of transferring payment from caller to receiver.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Jul 2nd, 2008 at 12:35pm
Is it worth getting a campaign up to get patients to swap their GP from those who use 0844 to those that don't?

I appreciate that for most people this isn't practical, but having done a very back of the envelope calculation I suspect that a GPs surgery only needs to lose a handful of patients to lose out financially and may be change their ways for the benefit of everyone.

GPs claim they are busineses. Let's see how they like proper competition.

For me it would be inconvenient, but if I thought others were going to do it I would go for it and it would prevent those GPs who benefit from the swap from moving to 0844.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 2nd, 2008 at 2:36pm

Keith wrote on Jul 2nd, 2008 at 12:35pm:
Is it worth getting a campaign up to get patients to swap their GP from those who use 0844 to those that don't?

I can see the point, however I have a big problem with this approach. Whilst not wishing to deny any patient their right to change to another GP, I would oppose any campaign to persuade them to do so on the basis of improper charges.

In return, patients who were happy to pay a little extra in order to benefit from a more sophisticated telephone system could be encouraged to move in the opposite direction. This is what some mean by "patient choice". Furthermore, if this point was pressed, every patient who did not move away from a surgery that imposed improper charges would be counted as consenting to them.

I am campaigning to save the NHS as being "free at the point of need" for all, regardless of how much patients are willing and able to pay for treatment. If patients start selecting on the basis of cost then this battle will have been lost.

Please do not feel that the valid points made are being dismissed out of hand. There are however broader considerations. A decision to change surgeries is one that any patient may make on whatever grounds they believe to be significant. I do not believe that this is something that should be either encouraged or discouraged.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 3rd, 2008 at 8:32am
"Lord Darzi will answer your questions on the Downing Street website this Thursday morning"

http://www.webchat.pm.gov.uk/index.asp?webchatID=73

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 3rd, 2008 at 10:20am
http://www.daventrytoday.co.uk/news/Phone-number-scrapped-after-calls.4248225.jp

Phone number scrapped after calls from patients

<<
A CONTROVERSIAL phone number has been dropped by a Daventry GP practice after finding patients were waiting in queues and being cut off.

Danetre Medical Practice, in London Road, has switched back to its old 01327 703333 number after finding a new automated phone booking system, using an 0844 number to pay for it, did not meet expectations.

The practice started using the 0844 in March saying it would improve patient service by automatically allowing people to book, check or cancel appointments at any time of the day.

However a number of people objected to the new number saying it would cost more than calling a 01327 number, especially for those on free local call packages or those who only had a mobile.

Practice manager Ruth Farthing said: “Patients just couldn’t get through and we could not work out whose fault it was.

“We had BT here, the software people here, and the 0844 number people here just trying to work out what wasn’t working.

“The suppliers could see people weren’t using the number because they just couldn’t get through so they released us from the contract, which was for three years.”

An online system which patients can register with to pick their own appointments, check and cancel them, which was introduced at the same time has proved a success and continues to run and the practice is keen to get more patients using it to help free up the phones.

John Birch was one of those who opposed the 0844 number. He said: “I think Danetre have handled the situation very professionally after receiving what must have been a great number of complaints and realised they’ve been sold a pup that doesn’t work.

“As a patient at the practice I can say the online system is a wonderful improvement and although the 0844 number solved the problem of hundreds of patients calling at once, I think the idea of revenue-sharing phonelines wasn’t the right way to do it.”
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 4th, 2008 at 1:33am

idb wrote on Jul 3rd, 2008 at 10:20am:
<<
Danetre Medical Practice, in London Road, has switched back to its old 01327 703333 number after finding a new automated phone booking system, using an 0844 number to pay for it, did not meet expectations.
...
“As a patient at the practice I can say the online system is a wonderful improvement and although the 0844 number solved the problem of hundreds of patients calling at once, I think the idea of revenue-sharing phonelines wasn’t the right way to do it.”
>>

This is great victory against the improper practice of using revenue sharing numbers to fund improvements to NHS services. It is clear that advanced telephone systems can be provided on geographic numbers.

The point that is highlighted does however suggest that NGNs can provide additional capacity for queuing calls, and this may have been sacrificed in this case. It may therefore be that we should be tolerant of the need for 03xx numbers to be used in some circumstances, where special features are required but revenue sharing is unacceptable.

There are examples of geographic numbers being used for high volume response lines, however these are rare and there may be special circumstances or special techniques used to enable this.

(I do not know the answers, I simply suggest that we keep an open mind about the technical benefits of NGNs and press for use of 03xx where benefits are claimed to exist.)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 13th, 2008 at 2:16pm
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/health-news/2008/07/13/patients-being-ripped-off-by-gp-phone-charges-91466-21331577/

Patients being ripped off by GP phone charges

Jul 13 2008 by Gavin O'Connor, Wales On Sunday

<<
PATIENTS making calls to book an appointment at a surgery are being charged at least FIVE times the normal rate through expensive phone lines.

A Wales on Sunday investigation into the costs of making a call to a GP surgery has led the Welsh Assembly Government’s health chief to launch her own probe after complaints that patients were being ripped off.

As patients are unable to call in to the surgery to make an appointment in person, they are forced to make a phone call, with many getting stuck in long queues.

The 0844 number is used by dozens of health centres around Wales and is among the most expensive available.

Opposition AMs have also slammed the system and said surgeries should provide the cheapest service possible.

Some surgeries use the number, which is seen as the most practical and efficient, as a revenue generating enterprise. However, patients using the 0844 numbers to make an emergency appointment can sometimes be left in a queue for more than 20 minutes.

Ofcom, the independent authority for the UK communications industry, has advised public bodies use a cheaper 03 system, but cannot enforce it.

“It’s up to the surgery itself, we do not regulate them,” said a spokeswoman. “Any company or business can take them on. However, for services for the NHS, we have encouraged clinics to talk to the Department for Health to use the cheaper 03 numbers.

“We allocate numbers in blocks of thousands and it’s then up to businesses and communication providers which ones they take. In terms of the 0844 and 0845 numbers, they can be very useful for routing calls and call management systems.

“The 0844 numbers can be up to 5p per minute from a landline, but obviously more expensive from a mobile. We would advise customers to find out the cost of calling these numbers before doing so. Companies can also alert the public what the costs are but, again, we can’t enforce that.”

Wales on Sunday conducted a sweep of all the 22 local authorities in the country and found 31 health centres used the 0844 number.

Some practice managers admitted the system helped to generate funds, while others were unaware of the costs patients were faced with.

In Pembrokeshire, a quarter of all surgeries use the 0844 number.

Bernardine Rees, chief executive of Pembrokeshire Local Health Board, confirmed the number of practices using the expensive tariff and said the system was not encouraged.

“The LHB has no control over which number an individual practice chooses to use it, as they are private contractors,” she said.

“We understand practices negotiate their own business plan before installation of the 0844 telephone number, directly with the telephone company.

“The LHB does not encourage practices to use 0844 numbers.”

Wales on Sunday contacted all of the surgeries using the 0844 number in Pembrokeshire, but only one would comment.

That was from Sue Dooley, practice manager at Saundersfoot Medical Centre in Westfield Road, who, through her secretary, said she did not want to talk about the use of the number.

Criccieth Health Centre in Gwynedd has the 0844 system supplied by Network Europe Group Technologies (NEG).

The company runs an enterprise called NEG Surgery Line which boasts millions of patients as users.

Sally Lloyd-Davies, Criccieth practice manager, said: “We can’t deny there is some comeback (financially) with the system.

“But you can argue it saves in other areas which attract costs.

“There have been complaints but we’ve answered every single comment successfully and there is clear information about the cost of making the calls to the surgery.”

Wales on Sunday made several attempts, over three days, to contact NEG to discuss the popularity of 0844, but nobody was made available for comment.

In South Wales, Rhymney Health Centre is supplied the number by a communications company called Redstone.

Cheryl Meyrick, practice manager at the surgery, said: “We did have the 0870 number, which the Assembly said we could have, but because of the extra costs, we were told not to use it any longer.

“That’s why we took up the 0844. It benefited us immediately because we suddenly had five lines coming in, instead of the one.

“It is state of the art equipment and we signed a five-year contract which has three years to run.

“But I thought it was on a par with the 01 number in terms of cost. I didn’t realise the difference in costs from mobiles and landlines to the number.”

Wales on Sunday also made several attempts to speak to Redstone about the 0844 package, but nobody was made available for comment.

Sarah Thomas, practice manager at Nantymoel Surgery in Bridgend, said: “When we had the old system in place we were unable to cope with the volume of calls so we had to go for the most effective service we could find – the one which could offer a direct transfer for out-of-hours calls.

“The previous system caused absolute chaos during the mornings.

“This current phone contract expires next year and we’ll be looking to upgrade again.”

Three years ago, Dr Brian Gibbons, the then Health Minister for the Assembly, introduced a ban on premium- rate numbers.

...

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 13th, 2008 at 2:17pm
...

After being alerted to the issue by Wales on Sunday, a spokesman for the Welsh Assembly Government said it would now investigate the matter because of the expensive cost still being met by patients.

The spokesman said: “The Welsh Assembly Government issued guidance to GP practices to move from these premium rate numbers to the low-call 0844 or 0845 numbers which would cost a maximum of 5p per minute from a landline.

“These numbers also make it easier for patients to contact their GP with access to more advanced telephone systems, including the ability to be automatically transferred to appointments or other teams within the practice.

“However, we have received complaints that people using mobile phones instead of a landline to call these numbers are charged a higher rate and Health Minister Edwina Hart is looking at this and considering what action can be taken to alleviate this issue.”

Jenny Randerson, the Welsh Liberal Democrats health spokeswoman, said: “This use of expensive numbers was meant to be phased out and this current situation is not good enough.

“Surgeries need to provide the cheapest service possible.”

Jonathan Morgan, shadow health spokesman for the Conservatives, said: “The Assembly Government is right to have a look at this.

“When the GPs’ contract was drawn up it promised greater and easier access to GPs and the whole idea is to expand primary care.

“It is not acceptable for any surgery to opt for a telephone system which costs more than the standard system.”

'I made three calls to my surgery... they cost me £7'

ONE furious patient said she spent 20 minutes on her mobile phone in a queue waiting to put through.

The mum of three, who did not want to be named, said: “I only realised how much I was spending on the calls after my mobile phone top-up credit nearly ran out.

“I called Morlais surgery in Merthyr Tydfil from my landline at 8.30am to book an emergency appointment, but 20 minutes later, I was still being held in the queue.

“I had to hang up because I needed to take the children to school, but called the number later on, on my mobile.

“When I checked what credit I had left, it had gone down from £3 to 11p and I wasn’t on for that long.

“Days later, my landline provider informed me about the high cost of the 0844 calls. During the month, I’d made three calls and I was charged about £7.

“When I explained this was the GP’s surgery, she said it was a disgusting amount to be charged just for trying to book an appointment.

“It shocked me, because I didn’t realise how much it cost.”

Another young mum who contacted the surgery said: “Last week, I was number 60 in the queue, waiting to make an emergency appointment.

“You’re worried about getting to see a doctor but, at the same time, you’re thinking about how much you’re bill is going to be.”

Wales on Sunday contacted Morlais Medical Practice in Merthyr Tydfil to ask about the use of 0844, but nobody was made available for comment.

...

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 13th, 2008 at 2:18pm
...

Surgeries under fire...

The Welsh surgeries using the 0844 numbers, according to the Local Health Board websites, are:

CARDIFF

Grange Surgery, Clare Road, Grangetown 0844 477 1890.

Butetown Health Centre, Loudoun Square, Butetown 0844 477 1891.

The Health Centre, Cambridge Street, Grangetown 0844 477 1892.

The Surgery, St David’s Court, Cowbridge Road East 0844 477 8713.

The Surgery, Salisbury Road, Cathays 0844 477 8714.

Riverside Health Centre, Canton Court, Wellington Street 0844 477 8710.

Branch Surgeries at Penhill Road 0844 477 8709.

PEMBROKESHIRE

Argyle Medical Group, Argyle Street, Pembroke Dock 0844 499 6946.

St Clement’s Surgery, St Clement’s Road, Neyland 0844 499 6950.

St Oswald’s Surgery, The Parade, Pembroke 0844 499 6946.

Saundersfoot Medical Centre, Westfield Road, Saundersfoot 0844 477 2447.

The Surgery, The Norton, Tenby 0844 477 3187

WREXHAM

Borras Park Surgery, Borras Park Road 0844 477 8601.

CEREDIGION

Meddygfa Teifi Surgery, New Road, Llandysul 0844 815 1117.

BRIDGEND

Oak Tree Surgery, Whitethorn Drive, Brackla 0844 477 1795.

Nantymoel Surgery, Nantymoel 0844 477 0923.

The Medical Centre, Heol Yr Onnen, Pencoed, Bridgend 0844 477 8890.

RHONDDA CYNON TAF

The Medical Centre, Tredegar Avenue, Llanharan, Pontyclun 0844 477 8792.

CAERPHILLY

Meddygfa Tridwr, Thomas Street, Abertridwr 0844 477 8635.

Pontlottyn Surgery, Stuart Street, Pontlottyn, Bargoed 0844 499 8414.

Abertysswg Community Centre, Community Centre, The Green, Rhymney 0844 499 8414.

LLANDUDNO

The Medical Centre, Plas Penrhyn, Penrhyn Bay 0844 477 3342.

CONWY

Medical Centre, York Road, Deganwy 0844 477 3343.

GWYNEDD

The Health Centre, Criccieth 0844 576 9087.

Ty Doctor, Ffordd Dewi Sant, Nefyn 0844 815 1166.

Bron Meirion, Penrhyndeudraeth 0844 477 2493.

CWMBRAN

Llanyravon Surgery, Llanyravon Way, Torfaen 0844 477 8630

VALE OF GLAMORGAN

Albert Road Surgery, Albert Road, Penarth 0844 477 5191.

Redlands Surgery, Redlands Road, Penarth 0844 477 3591.

BLAENAU GWENT

Six Bells Medical Centre, Eastville Road, Six Bells, Abertillery 0844 477 8564.

MERTHYR TYDFIL

Morlais Medical Practice, Ty Morlais, Berry Square, Dowlais 0844 477 2483.

The standard cost, from a BT landline, is:

0800 and 0808, free of charge

0845 calls, charged up to 3.95p per minute.

0844 calls, up to 5p per minute.

0870 calls, up to 7.9p per minute.

0871 calls, up to 10p per minute.

Calls to these numbers are chargeable at higher rates from mobile phones, but the price differs depending on which company is providing the service. Calls to 03 numbers cost no more than calls to numbers beginning 01 and 02, about 1p or less, and are included in any inclusive call minutes or discount schemes. The person you are calling is also prevented from earning a revenue share of the call costs.

gavin.o’connor@mediawales.co.uk

>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 16th, 2008 at 12:25am
http://www.managementinpractice.com/default.asp?title=Ministerstoprobecomplaintsoverhighcostofcallingsurgeries&page=article.display&article.id=12389

Ministers to probe complaints over high cost of calling surgeries
Tuesday 15th July 2008

<<
The Welsh government is investigating after a newspaper inquiry showed that patients telephoning to book a GP appointment are paying at least five times the normal rate through premium phone lines.

Wales on Sunday revealed that the 0844 prefix, used by dozens of health centres around Wales, costs callers up to 5p per minute from a landline, and considerably more from a mobile phone. Communications regulator Ofcom advises public bodies to use the cheaper 03 prefix, but cannot insist they do so.

"It's up to the surgery itself, we do not regulate them," an Ofcom spokeswoman told the newspaper. [ie it's nowt to do with us, even though we created this problem in the first place] "Any company or business can take them on. However, for services for the NHS, we have encouraged clinics to talk to the Department for Health to use the cheaper 03 numbers.

She said that numbers were allocated in blocks of thousands and that it was up to businesses and communication providers which ones to take. The 0844 and 0845 numbers were useful for routing calls and call management systems, she added.

The Welsh Assembly Government had previously advised GP practices to move from premium rate numbers to the cheaper 0844 or 0845 numbers. Health Minister Edwina Hart is now to launch her own probe following the complaints.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 16th, 2008 at 2:24am
I do not normally contribute in this way, however the following may be of interest to forum guests and members:

http://www.bedsonsunday.com/bedsonsunday-news/displayarticle.asp?id=330435

Bedfordshire on Sunday – 13 July 2008

<< Number's up for GPs using costly codes

MP Nadine Dorries has slammed GPs surgeries for profiting from telephone calls from their patients.

Several GP practices in the county only provide 084 numbers for patients wishing to contact their surgery.

These numbers are charged at higher rates than the geographical rate.

Surgerys that use 084 are:

Dr Basra, with practices at Bushmead Avenue, Bedford and Victoria Road, Bedford

Dr Kirkham and partners, Biggleswade Health Centre, Saffron Road, Biggleswade,

Dr Ling and partners, The Highlands, Flitwick

Dr Marner and partners, Cater Street, Kempston

Houghton Close Surgery, Ampthill

Salisbury House Surgery, Lake Street, Leighton Buzzard.

Numbers beginning with 084 cost up to four pence a minute more than using the standard area code number.

This means that people ringing their surgeries for appointments or advice will have to pay a premium rate.

Phoning from a mobile phone can be up to 40 pence more expensive a minute.

Telecommunications watchdog Ofcom has said that public sector bodies should not use chargeable 08 numbers Mrs Dorries said, "I am extremely concerned about the use of non-geographic, and higher rate, 0844 and 0845 telephone numbers by GP surgeries and out-ofhours doctor services and the implication this may have on access to care for patients.

"The Minister for Care Services recently intimated that there would be a gathering of evidence by the Government into the problem, though he stopped short of making a firm commitment on the matter of contact with GP surgeries.

"I am committed to an NHS whose services are shaped around the needs and preferences of individual patients, and which works to reduce, not exacerbate, health inequalities - the use of costly non-geographic numbers, after all, is likely to affect those on low incomes or with chronic illnesses most severely.

"I will continue to press the Government on their handling of this matter in terms of GP services."

A PCT spokesman said: "We wrote to all GP practices in Bedfordshire earlier in the year, advising that the Department of Health is currently looking at the use of 084 numbers in response to patients' concerns about higher call charges in some situations.

"A small number of practices had already adopted 084 numbers to improve telephone access for their patients.

"We would want to ensure that such systems benefit rather than disadvantage patients and have advised that any other practices considering changing to this number should not do so until there is clear guidance on this from the Department of Health which is expected soon."
>>

This, and other media articles in this area, have been drawn to the attention of the PCT, other media and a number of other local MPs, along with comments. I am led to believe that we can expect further activity in Bedfordshire.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 16th, 2008 at 2:27am
Further to the items above covering the major article in Wales on Sunday, there have also been the following:

http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2008/07/14/patients-paying-extra-for-gp-phone-calls-55578-21334485/

Daily Post (North Wales)

<<
Patients paying extra for GP phone calls

Jul 14 2008 by Deborah James

PATIENTS making calls to book an appointment at GP surgeries are being charged at least five times the normal rate through expensive phone lines.

The Welsh Assembly Government’s health chief is to launch her own probe after complaints that patients were being ripped off.

The 0844 number is used by dozens of health centres around Wales and is among the most expensive available.

Opposition AMs have also slammed the system and said surgeries should provide the cheapest service possible.

Patients using the 0844 numbers to make an emergency appointment can sometimes be left in a queue for more than 20 minutes.

Ofcom, the independent authority for the UK communications industry, has advised public bodies use a cheaper 03 system, but cannot enforce it.

Among the surgeries under fire Criccieth Health Centre in Gwynedd has the 0844 system supplied by Network Europe Group Technologies (NEG).

The company runs an enterprise called NEG Surgery Line which boasts millions of patients as users.

Sally Lloyd-Davies, Criccieth practice manager, said: “We can’t deny there is some comeback (financially) with the system.

“But you can argue it saves in other areas which attract costs.

“There have been complaints but we’ve answered every single comment successfully and there is clear information about the cost of making the calls to the surgery.”

No-one was available to comment from NEG.

An Assembly spokesman said: “We have received complaints that people using mobile phones instead of a landline to call these numbers are being charged a higher rate.

“Health Minister Edwina Hart is looking at this and considering what action can be taken to alleviate this issue.”
>>

(continued below)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 16th, 2008 at 2:29am
(continued from #608)

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/cardiff-news/2008/07/14/hart-to-look-at-gp-phone-rates-cost-91466-21334292/

<<
Hart to look at GP phone rates cost

Jul 14 2008 by Gavin O'Connor, South Wales Echo

AN investigation has been launched into South Wales surgeries using premium rate telephone lines.

Patients are continuing to pay over the odds when it comes to booking emergency appointments because of the use of the 0844 number.

The high-rate call system is used by 31 health centres across Wales and is among the top end of charges, with 18 surgeries in South Wales using the number.

The Welsh Assembly Government’s health minister Edwina Hart said she will look into the high cost of the phone calls to surgeries following a number of complaints.

Some practice managers have confirmed the revenue-generating 0844 number gives them back a direct percentage of money made.

However, other bosses are unaware of the financial burden on patients who use mobile phones to book appointments.

One young mum, who did not want to be named, got a double hit on her landline and mobile phone and described the charges as “disgusting”.

“I called Morlais surgery in Merthyr from my landline at 8.30am to book an emergency appointment, but, 20 minutes later, I was still in the queue.

“I had to hang up because I needed to take the children to school, but called the number later on, on my mobile.

“When I checked what credit I had left, it had gone down from £3 to 11p, and I wasn’t on for that long.

“Days later, my landline provider informed me about the high cost of the 0844 calls. During the month I’d made three calls and I was charged about £7. It shocked me, because I didn’t realise how much it cost.”

Another young mum who contacted the surgery said: “Last week I was number 60 in the queue, waiting to make an emergency appointment.

“You’re worried about getting to see a doctor but, at the same time, you’re thinking about how much your bill is going to be.”

Nobody at Morlais Medical Practice in Merthyr Tydfil was available for comment.

Rhymney Health Centre is also supplied the number by a communications company called Redstone.

Cheryl Meyrick, practice manager at the surgery, said: “It benefited us immediately because we suddenly had five lines coming in, instead of the one.

“It is state-of-the-art equipment and we signed a five-year contract which has three years to run.

“But I thought it was on a par with the 01 number in terms of cost.

Several attempts were made to speak to Redstone about the 0844 package, but nobody was made available for comment.

A spokesman for the Welsh Assembly Government said: “We have received complaints that people using mobile phones instead of a landline to call these numbers are charged a higher rate and the Health Minister Edwina Hart is looking at this and considering what action can be taken to alleviate this issue.”

Jenny Randerson, the Welsh Liberal Democrats Health spokeswoman, said the system was “not good enough”.

“Surgeries need to provide the cheapest service possible,” she said.

Jonathan Morgan, shadow health spokesman for the Conservatives, said: “It is not acceptable for any surgery to opt for a telephone system which costs more than the standard system.”

gavin.o’connor@mediawales.co.uk
>>

Media and a number of AMs have been briefed on developments in England and the common issue which stands for the NHS as a whole.

(The UK parliament does not directly govern the NHS in Wales however its lead is generally followed, although the Wales government has abolished prescription charges and hospital car parking charges for patients and visitors.)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by redant on Jul 16th, 2008 at 8:13am
Ironic that the Welsh Assembly government ant the National Assdembly both use 0845 contact numbers although I believe the WAG are concidering changing to an 03 contact number. See attached email from WAG.

Hello
Vivienne, one of my team in Morgenstown, asked me to contact you regarding our use of 0845 numbers for the Welsh Assembly Government switchboard.

She explained that you wanted to complain about the use of the numbers, particularly in relation to cost.

We do publicise an international number which does not use a non-geographic prefix, to make life easier for individuals to contact us from abroad, this is:

International Enquiry Number (+44) 1443 845500

The Welsh Assembly Government changed its main contact number to an 0845 number in April 2006. It is important to stress that the Welsh Assembly Government receives no income or costs from these calls. The reason the 0845 numbers were chosen was that they were non geographic, allowing callers from across Wales and the UK to ring the Welsh Assembly Government at the same rate (i.e. the further away from Cardiff – the old 02920 geographic code, the cheaper your call becomes). The number also reflects the dispersed locations of our switchboard team across Wales and makes it possible for us to base staff in different locations.

We are exploring the option of introducing 0300 numbers for the Welsh Assembly Government (and have reserved appropriate numbers already) as this would allow us to keep our dispersed locations with a non geographic prefix and callers are charged the same as if they had dialled an 01 or 02 geographic number.  This applies whether the call is being made from a landline, mobile or payphone. 0300 minutes are included in ‘packaged call deals’ available from telecoms providers e.g. a customer may have 200 ‘free’ call minutes per month with their mobile or landline contract.  Any calls to an 0300 number would come from this 200 minute total. Again there is no income or costs to the Welsh Assembly Government for these calls.

Any feedback you would like to provide would be welcome, in particular in relation to the potential for us to introduce 0300 numbers.

Please note that I am on leave on Monday and Tuesday next week, so please copy Ian Evans (cc'd into this message) my colleague into any response if you would like it to be dealt with before Weds 9th July.

Rebecca

Rebecca Davies
Head of the Assembly Government Library & Public Enquiry Service /
Pennaeth Gwasanaeth Llyfrgell ac Ymholiadau Cyhoeddus Llywodraeth y Cynulliad
Knowledge and Information Management Division / Yr Is-adran Rheoli Gwybodaeth a Hysbysrwydd
Welsh Assembly Government / Llywodraeth Cynulliad Cymru
Cathays Park
Cardiff CF10 3NQ
( 029 2082 3362  e-mail / e-bost rebecca.davies12@wales.gsi.gov.uk



Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Jul 16th, 2008 at 1:11pm

redant wrote on Jul 16th, 2008 at 8:13am:
The reason the 0845 numbers were chosen was that they were non geographic, allowing callers from across Wales and the UK to ring the Welsh Assembly Government at the same rate (i.e. the further away from Cardiff – the old 02920 geographic code, the cheaper your call becomes).



Same old BS. They changed the number in April 2006, differentials between local and national were abolished in July 2004.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 16th, 2008 at 1:27pm

derrick wrote on Jul 16th, 2008 at 1:11pm:
Same old BS.

Speaking with many people, on both sides of the argument, it is astonishing how few understand that whilst separate local and national rates still appear on price lists they do not apply to the vast majority of residential customers.

This is a widespread common misunderstanding. It is however inexcusable on the part of those who make decisions about adoption of non-geographic numbers. Given the clear understanding of 03xx numbers, it is somewhat surprising.

The message quoted above appears to contain a general invitation for feedback by email.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 17th, 2008 at 11:44am
A little research has found that the Welsh Assembly Government followed the error made by the Department of Health in permitting GPs to use 0844 numbers with Surgery Line.

A circular issued in January 2006 - http://www.wales.nhs.uk/documents/WHC_2005_089.pdf - indicates a false understanding that there is some fundamental difference between 0870 “National Rate” and 0844 “Lo-call rate” numbers. It also states that the Welsh Assembly Government was working “with the assistance of NEG Ltd”.

The equivalent announcement from the Department of Health, which covers only NHS services in England,  is a news release of 24 February 2005 - http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Pressreleases/DH_4104023.

This contains the totally false statement that 0844 numbers “offer patients a guaranteed low call rate”. There is no record of any such guarantee being offered by anyone. Rates for calling 0844 numbers are only low when compared with those for calling other revenue sharing and premium rate numbers. The call type “g6” numbers used with Surgery Line are invariably more expensive to call than geographic (or 03xx) numbers. Other 0844 (and 0845) numbers are more expensive in many cases.

One may only speculate about how the two governments came to misunderstand this issue. It is however interesting to read a statement in the public domain that NEG was involved in the process. Although involvement in the DH process at that time, and again in the recently concluded “evidence gathering”, is claimed by NEG, there is no formal record of this from the DH.

If, in the absence of any other, perhaps NEG was itself the guarantor of a “low call rate” for calling Surgery Line numbers. If this were to be established, then patients accessing “free at the point of need” NHS services would perhaps wish to claim on this guarantee by inviting NEG to re-pay the excess costs involved in funding the revenue share used to fund this NHS service.

I make this point only as a reflection on what may have happened in the past. What is needed now is an effective restoration of the principle of "free at the point of need" throughout the UK and a determination that no such errors will be made in future.

Input from citizens to the respective enquiries has not been solicited directly. The following two URLs, amongst others, do however provide contact details for the relevant ministers:

http://new.wales.gov.uk/about/cabinet/cabinetm/edwinahart?lang=en
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/ministerial_responsibilities/departments/dh.aspx

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by redant on Jul 17th, 2008 at 1:28pm
Whilst nothing to do with non-geographic numbers. but will show the confusion in Welsh politics. Prescriptions are free in Wales for all Welsh patients but if through necessity a Welsh patient has to travel to England to receive treatment and prescription is issued by an English Hospital, even though the prescription is processed in Wales the patient must pay. This is currently under review and Edwina Hart has written to advise me it will be resolved within 6 months.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jul 19th, 2008 at 8:50am
On an entirely different tack ....

VERY GOOD NEWS!!!

BBC TV "Breakfast" has shown "NEWSWATCH" this morning in which there is discussion about their move to 0370 numbers.   See the link below to watch this online.  I also believe that this item may be repesated at around 08.45 this morning and again on Breakfast tomorrow.   The item is after half way through the Newswatch item.

During the piece Michael Scott of the BBC is interviewed and interestingly he says that the BBC wanted to make the switch from 0870 without "running up a bigger phone bill for the BBC".   He implies that there has been no cost, or additional cost to the BBC in this move and this has great implications for our campaign!!!    It indicates, for example, that NHS Direct are wrong to suggest that moving from their 0845 number to an 03 number would cost them extra.   Of course they might lose their revenue share but they have always categorically denied getting any revenue share and even went to great length to get BT Global Services to provide a written statement confirming that NHSD get no revenue share (hoist by their own petard?).    

This means that all the other Quangos and government departments cannot argue that they cannot afford to move to 03 because of the cost.   This entirely counters statements by the Contact Council that moves to 03 would cost them and provides us with a solid argument and evidence when we are disputing this matter with other abusers of 084/7 numbers.  

Interestingly, GPs always claim that they are making no money from their use of 0844/5 numbers so .... they could all switch easily to 03 numbers ;) :-* 8-) :D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D      

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7510000/newsid_7514800/7514804.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm&news=1&nol_storyid=7514804&bbcws=1

[edit]More on the BBC's change from 0870 to 0370 in this thread.[/edit]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by pjaj on Jul 25th, 2008 at 8:44pm
Pretty much the same responses at a Surgery in Abingdon. When I contacted the practice manager I made the following points:

"I refer you to a recent government response to a petition concerning
the use of 0844 and 0845 (non geographic - NG) numbers by general
medical practitioners and out of hours services.

http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page15215.asp

It clearly states that ".. the message from the Department of Health
has made it very clear to NHS organisations that patients should not
be expected to pay more than the equivalent of a local call to
contact their GPs. "

The cost of an 0844/5 call can be up to 5.9p (inc VAT) per minute,
whist the cost of a 01235 call is 0p at all times on my current
BT plan. Even on the cheapest BT plan your patients would only be
paying 4.8p per minute during the day, 1.8p evenings and free at
weekends for a local call. I can see absolutely no advantage to your
patients in changing to these numbers. There does not appear to be
any services offered for 0844/5 that cannot be applied to 01235.

I therefore respectfully request that you provide alternative
geographic numbers for all your services. If it is not within your
power to do this, please forward this to the appropriate authority,
pointing out that they are not in compliance with government
directives."

His response was:

"Thank you for sending me this information and I think the relevant wording is "Local Call" it does not make reference to personal plans with telephone providers. [NEG weasel words]
Please see below the information that we were provided with and is still I believe relevant:

0844numbers are like the 0845 number for NHS direct they are lo call rate numbers and used for the NHS.  Today when a patient calls the surgery the call costs 5p per min with BT.  The 0844 rate is the same at 5p per min."

Having done a bit more research on the NEG web site, I then pointed out:

"You failed to mention the following piece of information from Network
Europe Group's web site.

"With your own 084 number, you keep about 2p from every call."

So now you are making a profit from all the patients who phone the
practice.

Under the old system I'd call and pay nothing however long it took to
process my call, now it costs me 5.9p (set up charge) plus 5.9p per
minute and you get a kick back. How is this an improvement?"

He didn't like this:

"We receive no income from phone calls at all, to do so would be in total
contravention of our contract. I understand from Dr XXX that this
type of "propaganda" is appearing in the national papers [no it's on NEG own web site!] and whilst it
is true that the scheme offers a discount this is in fact not received
by the surgery but is used to improve patient services within the
surgery and is managed by NEG.  We continue to pay the full cost of our
telephone rental and calls.

We made the change as it was necessary to move to a digital system from
the old analogue system that was offered by BT to improve our telephone
response time that had been highlighted as a problem in our patient
survey.  We have had this system in place now for some 18 months and
from our last survey it would appear that the service has improved and
therefore from this point of view the system has proven to be
beneficial.

I am sorry that this has incurred additional costs to you when you phone
the surgery but I hope the number of calls you need to make to the
surgery will be low.

Looking at it from the surgery point of view, we are required to phone
back numerous patients on mobile phones which has indeed rocketed our
telephone costs, I regret that modern technology is at a cost. [so why not go back to the older system?]

I hope I have answered your questions satisfactorily."

Well... no.

Recently in the surgery waiting room several of the patients were complaining of long waits on hold which ran up their bills.

So under the old system you rang up, got the engaged signal (no charge for this), hung up and tried again a few minutes later.
If you like you could always spend a few pence and use the automatic ringback option.

Now you phone up, get charged from the word go and are left waiting and paying for up to 15 minutes - this is better for the patients??

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 26th, 2008 at 4:41am

pjaj wrote on Jul 25th, 2008 at 8:44pm:
Pretty much the same responses at a Surgery in Abingdon. When I contacted the practice manager I made the following points: …

Well done, you put the relevant points clearly.

There are a couple of points to add.

The cost of calling call type “g6” 0844 numbers is greater than that of calling geographic numbers on all tariffs for all types of telephone service.

The surgery may have been misled by NEG into thinking that there is no call set-up fee for calls to 0844 numbers. This is only true for BT Business customers.

The terms of clause 483 of the GMS contract, which the practice holds and is bound by, is breached on receipt of money from patients “for the benefit of another”. The revenue share does not go to the practice, but to NEG, to pay for the equipment and systems that it supplies for little or no charge to the practice - it is this which is being paid for by patients. The suggestion that the practice gets to “keep” 2p is probably also misleading. The contract is nonetheless being breached.

It is true that practices incur costs in calling back to patients, especially on mobiles. If they are prepared to admit that they are seeking to recover these costs by using revenue sharing numbers for incoming calls, then at least the argument could then take place on an honest basis. However the practice wishes to provide services and balance its budget under the terms of its contract, a contractor is not permitted to charge fees for access to NHS services. The fact that NHS bodies do the same is a separate issue; it does not provide a justification.

A response to the conclusions of an “evidence gathering” exercise by the Department of Health is awaited. This must have discovered that the stated assumption that calls to 0844 numbers were at a “guaranteed low rate” remains as false today as when it was published in 2005. This absurd statement, which indicates no understanding of the truth or even the nature of telecomms regulation, is the piece of propaganda at the heart of this problem.

(added - 26/7 12:15)

We may chose to judge whether practices are deliberately lying, or are simply the victims of errors by the Department of Health and misleading propaganda from NEG. The "sort of people" who seek to defend a decision that they believed was in the best interests of their patients are not a group that I would wish to castigate for that reason alone. This is perfectly normal. It is the errors in their arguments that must be addressed, not an assumed immorality in their beliefs and behaviour.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 26th, 2008 at 8:37am

pjaj wrote on Jul 25th, 2008 at 8:44pm:
His response was:

"Thank you for sending me this information and I think the relevant wording is "Local Call" it does not make reference to personal plans with telephone providers. [NEG weasel words]
Please see below the information that we were provided with and is still I believe relevant:

0844numbers are like the 0845 number for NHS direct they are lo call rate numbers and used for the NHS.  Today when a patient calls the surgery the call costs 5p per min with BT.  The 0844 rate is the same at 5p per min."

Well done pjaj.

It's when I see the sort of nonsense which I have highlighted that I feel that these sorts of people should live by the rules they impose on others. No pun intended; they should be subject to a taste of their own medicine.

A free market in telecommunications services means that one's "local rate", that is the price of a "local call", is different from provider to provider and tariff to tariff.

This person believes that this should not apply and that the surgery should define a "local call" for all at 5 pence per minute. Local calls have never been as high as 5 pence per minute from a landline, so clearly he thinks it's only right that the cost should rise rather than fall.

With this in mind, perhaps the surgery should be forced to accept electricity from a provider at above market price in return for "free" replacement lightbulbs. The only thing being that the amount above which it would normally expect to pay is way above that of the bulbs.

This tariff would then be titled "Lo-Lectric" which is of course entirely acceptable because we know that there is nothing wrong in calling something by a name that makes it sound far better than it really is.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 28th, 2008 at 4:51pm
Source: Jenny Randerson AM

http://jennyranderson.com/news/000356/randerson_calls_for_ban_on_revenue_raising_numbers_within_the_nhs.html

Randerson calls for ban on revenue raising numbers within the NHS

4.42.07pm BST (GMT +0100) Mon 28th Jul 2008

<<
Welsh Lib Dem Spokesperson for Health Jenny Randerson AM has today called on the Health Minister Edwina Hart to move to formally ban the use of revenue raising phone numbers within the Welsh NHS. Such numbers, used by some GP surgeries and other services, often cost patients without access to a landline significant amounts of money.

Mrs Randerson has written to the Minister asking her to formally bring forward a ban.

Jenny Randerson said: "It is time that this practice stopped. While some of these numbers can raise extra cash for the NHS, it is very unfair on some of the poorest patients out there.

"All the evidence shows that poorer people are less likely to have access to a landline and rely instead on the use of a mobile phone. This system is penalising them. There are also a range of other phone line providers, all of whom charge different amounts for phoning these numbers.

"I hope that the Minister brings forward a ban. After all, she has been willing to ban things that make no difference to the poor whatsoever, like prescription charges for millionaires, so hopefully she will end this injustice.

Notes:

Recent reports have shown that a significant number of GP surgeries are using 0844 or 0845 numbers.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 29th, 2008 at 12:56am
http://www.eastbourneherald.co.uk/news/NHS-helpline-numbers-could-change.4312213.jp

NHS helpline numbers could change

<<
TELEPHONE numbers for finding an NHS dentist or accessing patient advice may be changed to cheaper rates, East Sussex Downs and Weald Primary Care Trust has said.

The numbers for the trust's dentistry helpline and its Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS) are both non-geographic 0844 numbers.

While charged at a local rate of 5p a minute on a BT landline, calls to these numbers are excluded from popular BT packages providing free evening and weekend calls.

The 0844 numbers are charged at a fixed rate of 35p a minute from Orange and Vodafone pay as you go mobile phones, where a local 01323 code would cost callers 10p to 30p a minute with Vodafone or 20p with Orange.

Yet patients from neighbouring West Sussex PCT are given a cheaper local number to call for each service.

East Sussex PCT is considering changing some of its numbers, including the dentist helpline, to start with 03, which regulator Ofcom says cost the same or less as local numbers from a mobile, landline or payphone and are included in discount packages.

In the meantime, the trust says patients can contact them by letter or email or ask the PALS team to call them back while requesting advice.
The PALS team, based at Lewes, covers the whole of East Sussex.

A trust spokesman said, "We felt it was much better to give people one telephone number for PALS, with calls charged at a normal fixed local rate, to make the service as easy to access as possible.

"In addition, a single phone number enables the PALS team to better manage the calls they handle so they can provide a better overall service.

"We appreciate that some, including those calling from mobiles or those with certain telephone call plans, will be charged more than the fixed local rate. However, we feel the benefits of the new single telephone number far outweigh any drawbacks."

The trust said it made no profit from the 0844 numbers and said patients would also be able to use NHS Direct on 0845 4647 or its helpline on 01273 403546 to search for a dentist.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 31st, 2008 at 5:10pm
The Healthcare Commission has today published the results of a survey into patient attitudes to local health services.

Detailed results are published, from which league tables by PCT can be assembled for each question.

Of particular interest and relvance is the question - “Have you had a problem getting through to your GP practice/ health centre on the phone?”.

A comparison, by PCT, between the ranked responses to this question and a ranked table of the proportion of GPs with revenue sharing 0844 telephone numbers shows no correlation whatsoever.

These tables may be accessed here.

This suggests that PCTs which permit a breach of the GMS contract by allowing GPs to use money paid by patients as a means of funding advanced surgery telephone systems do nothing to improve their position in the league table of satisfaction ratings.

I would never seek to take issue with the idea that systems like “Surgery Line” can improve patient access. It may well be that the benefits achieved are offset by the fact the patients resent having to pay for NHS services, which should be provided “free at the point of need” and not funded by use of revenue sharing telephone numbers.

The time for NEG to look at how Surgery Line can be funded properly is long overdue.

PCTs, which are increasingly being driven by statistics such as these, need to recognise that getting patients to pay for service improvements is not only wholly improper but is shown here to be ineffective.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Aug 14th, 2008 at 11:46am
Source: Telegraph & Argus

http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/3592668.Surgery_is_now_ready_to_open/

Surgery is now ready to open

6:23pm Wednesday 13th August 2008
By Claire Lomax »

<<
A purpose-built GP surgery in the heart of a multi-million pounddevelopment is almost ready to open.

The branch surgery of Saltaire Medical Practice is a key part of the £4.5 million Cottingley Cornerstone Centre in Littlelands and will open on Tuesday, August 26, replacing the surgery in Hope Hill.

The new two-storey building has been funded by the Cottingley Cornerstone Centre and developed by Bramley Homes.

Benefits for the surgery’s 2,000 patients include a larger waiting area, a separate reception and an on-site car park. Other benefits include better facilities for the storage and disposal of clinical waste.

Catherine Darlington, business manager of Saltaire Medical Practice and the branch surgery at Cottingley, said: “Our opening times and services will remain the same in the short-term. However, we look forward to developing our services in the new premises over the next months for the benefit of our patients.

“We will be delighted to welcome patients to look round our wonderful brand new premises which will provide a much better environment for everyone. During the move we have tried to ensure there has been the minimum disruption to patients.”

John Chuter, chairman of Bradford and Airedale Teaching Primary Care Trust, pictured above, said: “This new surgery is a wonderful example of partnership working resulting in a modern surgery.”

The surgery will be closed on the afternoon of Thursday, August 21, and all day Friday, August 22, to allow staff to move in. Any patient needing an appointment during this time will be redirected to the Saltaire surgery.

Patients and members of the community are invited to an open afternoon on Thursday, September 4, from noon onwards so staff can show them the new facilities. The new number for the surgery will be 0844 477 3674.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 14th, 2008 at 2:36pm

Dave wrote on Aug 14th, 2008 at 11:46am:
Surgery is now ready to open

The new number for the surgery will be 0844 477 3674.
>>

The local number for this branch surgery is presently 01274 564814.

Whilst the Department of Health is conducting a review into this matter, most PCTs are refusing to allow changes such as this to occur. The outcome of the review must be expected to be action to enforce the recently repeated Government policy that "patients should not be expected to pay more than the cost of a local call".

When this change occurs, patients of the re-located Cottingley surgery will have to start paying more than the cost of a local call.

What is to be done to prevent government policy being breached in this way?

The 0844 number in question is presently being used by the main surgery of the practice in Saltaire. That fact has no bearing on the significance of this blatant further abuse of the principles of the NHS.

Although NEG has reported that it expects the DH to allow what one government minister has described as this "rip off" to continue, it seems that there have been no other new cases since the review got underway in March. The doubt about what will happen now needs to be resolved, especially if this is perhaps the first of a number of cases of resumed "business as usual" for NEG.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Aug 26th, 2008 at 10:39pm
It seems that the worm is finally beginning to turn on doctors misuse of 0844 numbers down in West Sussex and that local Labour MP Laura Moffatt is a new recruit to the ranks of MPs known to be vigorous opponents of the doctors surgery 0844 ripoff.  Heaven only knows though when my own MP, Sir Paul Beresford, is ever going to wake up to the issue.  To be fair I am not aware of any doctors surgeries in Mole Valley using an 0844 number but surely by now there must be one somewhere.

It seems that West Sussex PCT are also taking a much more robust and pro patient view on this issue than in many other areas. [smiley=thumbup.gif]

See www.wscountytimes.co.uk/496/Crawley-doctors-told-to-axe.4427025.jp


Quote:
Crawley doctors told to axe pricey phone lines

PATIENTS at Crawley GP surgeries are set to save their pennies if premium rate phone lines are scrapped.
Despite official guidance many Crawley surgeries still use a pricey 0844 number, but Crawley MP Laura Moffatt reckons that could soon change.

She said: "This is an issue I feel very strongly about, The Department of Health issued clear guidance as far back as 2005 urging GPs not to use these expensive numbers.

"Sadly many practises ignored this and have not appreciated how expensive it can be for some of their patients.

"People who have to use a mobile phone or a pay phone can pay as much as 40p per minute to contact their GP and the many people who have 'all in' contracts (inclusive of local calls) effectively have to pay charges they would not otherwise incur."

Following a stream of correspondence West Sussex PCT sent round a letter to all Crawley practises asking them to look into changing their numbers.

Acting Trust Director Nicky Cambrook said: "Ofcom created a new '03' number which can be included in all inclusive tariffs and is charged at the same rate as other geographical numbers.

"The number was introduced in 2007 with clear encouragement for practises to use this number in preference to the non-geographical 0844 number.

"I must emphasise the need to ensure that patients are not put in the position of having to pay excessive telephone charges to contact their GP surgery."

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 1st, 2008 at 7:09pm
Some updates:


1. The involvement of Laura Moffatt MP is covered in detail on her website. It began on 19 November 2007.


2. The change of number from 01274 564814 to 0844 477 3674 for the 2,000 patients of the Cottingley surgery referred to in earlier postings has now gone ahead.


3. The recent announcement that the NHS is predicting a surplus of £1.75 billion for 2008/9 may add another dimension to the debate on GPs use of 0844 numbers.

It is claimed by NEG that Surgery Line is too expensive to be cost-justified if it were funded from the money currently available to GPs from PCTs. This is why it has to be funded by patients, as NEG's customers allegedly decline the option to adopt it based on a 03xx or geographic number.

Whilst specific grants are available for practices to deploy advanced IT systems to improve their services to NHS patients, there are no such options in respect of advanced telecomms systems. If the Department of Health, PCTs and the BMA share NEGs belief that Surgery Line provides benefits for patients (an issue on which I retain a neutral position), then these must be funded properly according to available resources. Patients' own money cannot be seen as a valid source of funding for a NHS "free at the point of need". If central funding is available, then this should be used if the benefits are worthwhile.

For a publicly-funded service, a £1.75 billion surplus is no less a failure of financial management than a £1.75 billion defecit. As services have previously been cut in order to address defecits, they must be extended to address a surplus.


4. The Department of Health maintains that its "evidence gathering" exercise, which was extended past an initial completion date of "the end of March", is still continuing.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Sep 9th, 2008 at 1:39pm
Source: E-Health Insider Primary Care

http://www.ehiprimarycare.com/news/4131/dh_backs_away_from_084_telephone_ban

DH backs away from 084 telephone ban

09 Sep 2008

The Department of Health has no immediate plans to ban use of 084 numbers in the NHS, health minister Ben Bradshaw has indicated.

In a letter to Rob Marris MP, the health minister gave no indication that the use of such numbers by GP practices and organisations such as NHS Direct would be prohibited.

Instead he told the MP, who has been campaigning against the use of 084 numbers by the health service, that the DH was currently analysing the information from a data collection exercise on the use of 084 numbers by the NHS.

He added: “In time we will publish guidance about how primary care trusts can ensure that patients are able to access their GPs or other NHS organisations via the best possible service, without placing additional costs on them.”

[…]
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 9th, 2008 at 3:09pm

Dave wrote on Sep 9th, 2008 at 1:39pm:
He added: “In time we will publish guidance about how primary care trusts can ensure that patients are able to access their GPs or other NHS organisations via the best possible service, without placing

Delay, delay and delay again while offering some vague hope of jam tomorrow.  This has been the tactics of the 084/7 abusers every since they started up their tawdry and sordid little industry.

I can't say I am in the least bit surprised given how many important New Labour friends directly pioneered this squalid little way of ripping off the poorest UK citizen consumers.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 9th, 2008 at 10:08pm

Dave wrote on Sep 9th, 2008 at 1:39pm:
Source: E-Health Insider Primary Care

http://www.ehiprimarycare.com/news/4131/dh_backs_away_from_084_telephone_ban

The article includes a valuable comment from Rob Marris:

Quote:
I think 084 numbers will go across government eventually but it is going to take quite a long time.

Whilst campaigners may rightly comment that it has already taken too long and that action is required now, we must at the same time show the necessary degree of patience in assessing what we may have achieved. We must keep plugging away, attempting to exploit every opportunity to make progress. We cannot know when we may be successful.

Those who are interested in seeing the letter from Ben Bradshaw, and perhaps reading further comments, can find them here.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Sep 9th, 2008 at 11:09pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 30th, 2008 at 8:38pm:
It is Opal Telecom, a division of Carphone Warehouse, that mostly provides the 0844 numbers used by GPs. I see no good reason why 03xx numbers (perhaps the 0344 equivalents) could not be used.


A quick search of the nhs.uk website, and then a comparison with available 0344 numbers, reveals that Opal recently (07/2008) registered many 0344 ranges that are aligned with the ranges they already have for 0844. Perhaps (although I'm not holding my breath!) NEG is having a change of heart...

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 10th, 2008 at 1:45am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 9th, 2008 at 10:08pm:
Whilst campaigners may rightly comment that it has already taken too long and that action is required now, we must at the same time show the necessary degree of patience in assessing what we may have achieved.


Why must we show the necessary degree of patience when these numbers can both be created and liquidated overnight at the touch of a few buttons.

All that is needed is legislation and/or governmental rules making the use of these numbers non permissible.  Any organisation using them must then bear the costs of changing out of their own budgets.  All of the relevant contracts will undoubtedly contain force majeure clauses allowing them to be renegotiated in the event of government legislation or other rules that makes a change in the terms of the contract essential.

It is only because we lack the revolutionary instincts of our Gallic colleagues that the government is able to foist these ripoffs on us in the first place.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 10th, 2008 at 10:10am

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 10th, 2008 at 1:45am:
Why must we show the necessary degree of patience? ... because we lack the revolutionary instincts of our Gallic colleagues


"All I can tell you is, brother, you'll have to wait"!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Nutsy on Sep 16th, 2008 at 11:06am
New to the site and really only signed up to the forums just to post this...

To add to the 0844 scam debate.
My GP moved to 0844 last year and theres many cases where i was stuck on hold for ages before getting any sort of option.

In todays case I actually need to see a dr but when i phoned up this morning I was stuck on hold for 30 minutes before i eventually gave up and came here to get the land line number.

When phoning the land line number i got straight through with no fuss whatsoever

Is me waiting 30 minutes a pure mistake or a planed scam?

This whole system is sodding gross and really made my blood boil...

My GP decides that the only time you can call to make an appointment is at 8:30 in the morning. And they make patients all call and fight for appointments. Its often the case that by 9:30 there are no appointments left.

And you can only make appointments for the day you call. You cant arrange for a next day or next week appointment.
By forcing all patients to call at that time they ensure long queues and high 0844 revenue.

Though this part is my fault. 0844 numbers are more expensive on mobile phones. And i used my mobile to make the appointment because it was by my bed and was my alarm clock to make sure i woke up in time to make the appointment.

Why has no watch dog or anything at all investigated this very immoral practice?

Thanks
Simon

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Sep 16th, 2008 at 11:37am
You were extremely lucky to get a landline alternative number and get through.

Your surgery is not alone in  not being able to make appointments in advance, the reason for this is a typical Labour government con. It is all to keep to the targets that surgeries have been given. It will not look good in the headlines if they say that appointments over 24 hours are on the increase, so to make the figure 0% they only take appointments on the day.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by NGMsGhost on Sep 16th, 2008 at 12:38pm

Nutsy wrote on Sep 16th, 2008 at 11:06am:
In todays case I actually need to see a dr but when i phoned up this morning I was stuck on hold for 30 minutes before i eventually gave up and came here to get the land line number.

When phoning the land line number i got straight through with no fuss whatsoever

Is me waiting 30 minutes a pure mistake or a planed scam?


I suspect a bit of each is true.

I would imagine the landline number is one that the surgery uses for non patient calls from business suppliers, consultants in hospitals and of course from their own family and friends.  It seems clear your surgery regards it as unacceptable to make those people use an 0844 number or wait in a queue so also have a geographic phone number specially for them.  So hence you get straight through on a priority line and unless and until they reach the stage of saying they won't talk to mere patients on this number you then jump the queue.

On the other hand the appalling queues you experience on the 0844 number are what I would call a planned scam by the telco that sold the system to your GP practice and/or the GP practice itself.

By outrageously insisting that you must call at a certain time of day (almost as though you were queuing at the door of the surgery at that time but electronically) the likelihood of queues they cannot cope with is completely maximised and this means both the telco who sold the system and your GP's practice benefit as each gets a revenue share rakeoff that increases the longer and more unacceptable the queues are.  Outrageously these GP practices always claim they got the system to reduce phone queues for patients but the new system of sharing revenue to pay back the debt they have incurred on the phone equipment gives and them the telco that sold it every incentive to maximise the queues.  They have no incentive at all to answer the phone quickly.


Quote:
This whole system is sodding gross and really made my blood boil...

My GP decides that the only time you can call to make an appointment is at 8:30 in the morning. And they make patients all call and fight for appointments. Its often the case that by 9:30 there are no appointments left.

And you can only make appointments for the day you call. You cant arrange for a next day or next week appointment.
By forcing all patients to call at that time they ensure long queues and high 0844 revenue.


This sounds utterly despicable.  My understanding was that GPs have to offer you advance appointments in a number of days time if that is what is more convenient to you.  However what they are not allowed to do is to force you to come in several days in the future when you want to be seen today.  I would file an official complaint with your local PCT, also try to get your local newspaper interested in covering the story (call up and ask to speak to a report or the edtorial team) and go to see your local MP about this.  Or you can contact your MP via email using www.writetothem.com

They are completely suiting themselves here on the basis that they are a monopoly and that if they offer outrageous service of this kind you can't take yourself elsewhere in the short term and it is still very difficult to move GP practice anyway.  They also get a large amount of money just by having you on their books and regardless of whether or not you manage to see your doctor.

What is your local PCT.  I will provide a link to their website so you can complain to them if you tell me what PCT they are in your next post.


Quote:
Though this part is my fault. 0844 numbers are more expensive on mobile phones. And i used my mobile to make the appointment because it was by my bed and was my alarm clock to make sure i woke up in time to make the appointment.

Why has no watch dog or anything at all investigated this very immoral practice?


The so called watchdog is Ofcom, the telecoms and broadcasting regulator, or OfCoN as they are known around here.

They are the worst and most corrupt regulator in Britain stacked from stem to stern with people from the telecoms companies and who then often go back to work at the telecoms companies and they do nothing at all to stop or close down these scams.  Instead they say your doctor being able to move to 0844 etc is all in the interests of a competitive telecoms market.  That is in your doctor's interest to get the highest revenue share he can but not in your interest as a consumer to get the lowest call cost you can.

Never, never, never, ever call an 0844 phone number on a mobile or BT Payphone where they are charged at 20p to 40p per minute.  Always call them on your landline where the charge is 5p per minute but even then not included in unlimited call plans to 01/02 numbers where it would be 0p per minute were an ordinary 01 or 02 prefixed number used.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 16th, 2008 at 1:11pm

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 16th, 2008 at 12:38pm:

Nutsy wrote on Sep 16th, 2008 at 11:06am:
Why has no watch dog or anything at all investigated this very immoral practice?

The so called watchdog is Ofcom, the telecoms and broadcasting regulator, or OfCoN as they are known around here.

Strictly speaking, the way in which users of revenue sharing 0844 numbers use this service is outside the scope of Ofcom's responsibilities. (If Ofcom were to re-classify 084x numbers as being used for "premium rate services" then this would bring them inside the scope of its powers.)

NHS GPs, although independent, operate under contract to the relevant PCT. The Department of Health has issued guidance to PCTs re-iterating "the Government’s position that patients should not be expected to pay more than the equivalent of a local call".

It is currently considering what action to take following an exercise "gathering evidence and views on this subject". A recent letter from the relevant minister suggests that this will amount to nothing more than advice about how patients can access their GP or other NHS organisations without placing additional costs on them. In this (unusual) case, that advice would have been to visit saynoto0870.com.

Nutsy may indeed wish to write to his PCT, local paper, MP etc. advising that this is what the advice should be, and pressing the point that perhaps all NHS organisations using 084x numbers should ensure that alternative geographic numbers are published on this website.

More seriously, it is a change of number that is required. Nobody would call the more expensive number if a cheaper and more effective alternative was available. I do not believe that it is an objective of this website to provide privileged access to NHS services for only some patients.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Sep 16th, 2008 at 9:27pm

Nutsy wrote on Sep 16th, 2008 at 11:06am:
To add to the 0844 scam debate.
My GP moved to 0844 last year and theres many cases where i was stuck on hold for ages before getting any sort of option.

In todays case I actually need to see a dr but when i phoned up this morning I was stuck on hold for 30 minutes before i eventually gave up and came here to get the land line number.

When phoning the land line number i got straight through with no fuss whatsoever

Is me waiting 30 minutes a pure mistake or a planed scam?

Perhaps you could write to your local newspaper about this. They could investigate by ringing at sample times on the 0844 and geographical numbers to see if there is a difference as you suggest.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Oct 1st, 2008 at 12:59am

Dave wrote on Sep 9th, 2008 at 1:39pm:
Source: E-Health Insider Primary Care

http://www.ehiprimarycare.com/news/4131/dh_backs_away_from_084_telephone_ban

DH backs away from 084 telephone ban

09 Sep 2008

E-Health Insider has done a follow-up piece reinforcing the points made in this article.

The new piece covers the abandonment of a 0844 number in favour of 0300 by Leicester Hospitals.

Trust ditches 0844 number

It also covers comments from local campaigners about GPs.

The point to note is that surgeries could carry on using Surgery Line if they too moved over to 0300 numbers. The only difference would be that they (or the NHS) would have to pay for the costs of the system, rather than patients.

If NEG offers a worthwhile value-for-money service, and, as an external supplier, were to be content to recognise and respect the fundamental principles of the relationship between NHS patients and their GPs, rather than seeking to undermine it and encourage surgeries to mislead their patients, then NEG would have no problem with this.

The same applies to Opal Telecom (part of Carphone Warehouse) which provides the telephone service. It could provide the same services on 03xx numbers as on 0844 by a simple variation of the financial arrangements in the existing contracts, as is done by other telephone service providers.

So far, neither party has publicly indicated its willingness to support the Department of Health in restoring the principle of "free at the point of need", should it wish to do so whilst retaining the benefits of Surgery Line.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 5th, 2009 at 3:06am
http://www.brooksidegrouppractice.co.uk/newsletters/summer08.pdf

Telephone System

A few patients have asked why we have a 0844 telephone number and we
wanted to explain the reason we don’t have a geographical telephone
number. In 2004 we needed to upgrade our telephone system as the current
technology was getting old and the number of calls we were receiving was
increasing. The best system we could find was one that used an 0844
number which was endorsed by the Government with charges the same as
BT Option 1 – 4.2p per minute. We are not funded by the Primary Care Trust to install a
phone system and the cost to us is high – about 10 times greater than our previous system.

In brief, we changed to a 0844 number for the following reasons:

 it provides the best technology possible to answer high numbers of calls, ensures
immediate access to an emergency line, records calls for patient protection and
directs patients to the right department across 3 sites;
 it had been agreed by the government as a suitable service with the 0844 lo-call
Number;
 the original decision was made on the basis that the charges were the same as BT
Option 1 for a local call;
 we have signed up for a 7 year contract - and we do believe the system is the best we
could possibly offer our patients.

The biggest telephone running expense to the surgery is the cost of
telephone consultations, where the GP rings the patient, often at length
and often to patients’ mobile phones. The cost of this is high especially to
some networks and to the G3 numbers many patients use (25p per min).
We believe this service, though costly to us, is of immense health benefit
and convenience for patients.

We have also made available a phone number for patients who need to contact the
surgery whilst abroad. Although we have no obligation to provide this service patients can
contact us from outside the UK if they need to on 0044 870 112 7587.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 5th, 2009 at 3:12am
http://www.hamiltonpractice.nhs.uk/

The Hamilton Practice:

Tel:  0844 477 3558 * Keats House Health Centre,
Bush Fair,
Harlow,
Essex. CM18 6LY  
Fax:  0844 477 3559  
Please Note: If you need to speak to one of our secretaries please call between 10am - 2pm Monday - Friday.

* Calling an 0844 number costs the same (currently 4.2p per minute) as calling a BT low call rate number for the  majority of patients. Some phone companies do charge an additional cost to their customers and if they have a discounted calling arrangement they can contact their network provider to advise them that the surgery is a health facility and request that the number is included in their discounted calls.


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Feb 5th, 2009 at 9:13am

idb wrote on Feb 5th, 2009 at 3:06am:
The cost of this is high especially to
some networks and to the G3 numbers many patients use (25p per min).


That's rubbish - what numbers (aside from 09 numbers) cost 25p from a landline?!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by bbb_uk on Feb 5th, 2009 at 7:00pm

idb wrote on Feb 5th, 2009 at 3:12am:
...they can contact their network provider to advise them that the surgery is a health facility and request that the number is included in their discounted calls[/highlight]
We have more chance of winning lottery than getting our OCP to discount calls on 084 which are used by surgeries, etc!  ;D

Do these people actually think this is possible or is this just NEG trying to play down the cost of 0844 calls?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 5th, 2009 at 7:49pm

jgxenite wrote on Feb 5th, 2009 at 9:13am:

idb wrote on Feb 5th, 2009 at 3:06am:
The cost of this is high especially to
some networks and to the G3 numbers many patients use (25p per min).


That's rubbish - what numbers (aside from 09 numbers) cost 25p from a landline?!


Whether or not this particular figure is accurate, there is no doubt that any NHS practice incurs many expenses. The only relevant question is over whether these should be covered by patients as they access NHS treatment. For a NHS "free at the point of need" the only answer is a clear NO.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Feb 5th, 2009 at 8:55pm

bbb_uk wrote on Feb 5th, 2009 at 7:00pm:

idb wrote on Feb 5th, 2009 at 3:12am:
...they can contact their network provider to advise them that the surgery is a health facility and request that the number is included in their discounted calls[/highlight]
We have more chance of winning lottery than getting our OCP to discount calls on 084 which are used by surgeries, etc!  ;D

Do these people actually think this is possible or is this just NEG trying to play down the cost of 0844 calls?

The title of this thread is apt, assuming that this rubbish came from the said provider.

The call rate from a BT landline for 0844 477 numbers is 4.894ppm inc VAT or 4.255ppm exc VAT. This rate is set by the terminating provider, in this case Opal Telecom, part of Carphone Warehouse.

This is so that Opal can know how much it will get in termination charges from BT. The figure is about 4.5 ppm exc VAT during the daytime. The terminating payment for a 01/02/03 number is about 0.3 ppm exc VAT during the daytime.

The surgery is the customer of Opal Telecom, maybe indirectly. They expect others to fund the extra 4.2ppm to make them inclusive!


That's a bit like Sony saying that Currys and Comet should reduce its large screen plasmas to the same price as they sell the small ones for!


Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Feb 5th, 2009 at 10:11pm
Re Hamilton and Brookside is there anything we can do about these? As someone whose wife is a Doctor and who wouldn't dream of spouting these lies this just makes me so angry.

a) You can't ask your provide to include them in their call package. None will.

b) The rates quoted are pre Vat and practically nobody calling their Doctor can claim back the Vat (even if Vat registered as it is usually not a business expense)

c) Use of the word Lo-call

d) Providing an 0870 for calling from abroad is unobtainable from some places and where not is usually treated as premium rate

Contact: Local press? Local PCT?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 6th, 2009 at 4:36am

Keith wrote on Feb 5th, 2009 at 10:11pm:
Re Hamilton and Brookside is there anything we can do about these? ... Contact: Local press? Local PCT?


The PCTs are likely to refer to the fact that the DH is currently consulting on a proposed ban on use of 084 numbers in the NHS, and will state, perhaps rightly, that they are awaiting the outcome.

Local press have been found to be keen to pick up on these stories if there is a patient, or patient group, ready to comment.

It is important to make the point that there is an alternative if patients and practices genuinely benefit from the features offered by Surgery Line. The remaining term of the contract with Opal (Carphone Warehouse) could be completed using a 03xx number - the equivalent 0344 number is reserved for the purpose of migration. As this would demand conformity with the principles of the NHS of course the funding arrangements would have to change.

There is a website (see "WWW" link in the footer of this message) that includes a detailed outline proposal for how the funding arrangements could be changed. It also includes examples of media coverage of the issue, extensive lists of examples in all localities and other relevant information. (Please present any feedback about the website directly, not through this forum.)

N.B. NHS services are not available to businesses, so VAT incurred as a NHS patient cannot be recovered.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Feb 6th, 2009 at 8:20am
SCV - My anger wasn't at the use of the 0844 number (although i'm pretty angry about that as well) but the blatent lies and misleading statements that they shouldn't get away with and puts them in the catagory of a dodgy trader rather than a respected member of the community, a position GPs used to hold.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 6th, 2009 at 9:08am
Keith

As we know, they are repeating information taken in good faith from those who claim to be experts in this field.

The point is that the lies are necessary to cover up the breach of the principles of the NHS which would otherwise be exposed for what it is. After the DH stopped them using 0870 numbers it only agreed that 0844 was OK, because (as is generally understood) it was misled by the same lies from the same source.

Respected members of the community or otherwise, GPs should not have to advise patients of the charge they impose for accessing NHS treatment. If they were in private practice then this would be an issue for Trading Standards.

If anyone wishes to argue that patients should pay towards the costs of NHS services as they use them then that is a valid position that could be taken. The NHS Constitution however prohibits this at present.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Feb 6th, 2009 at 9:39am
SCV,

Oh come on! Do you really think that every GP in both these surgeries is nieve enough not to realise these are lies or misleading, especially with all the publicity over 0844 numbers currently?

Do you really think that nobody has pointed it out to them.?When our local GPs went 0844 there was one hell of a stink. They would have to be blind deaf and dumb or stupid not to have checked out the evidence either originally or when the issue was raised with them. They are supposed to be analytical people. They know, but they refuse to do anything about it.

My wife is a Doctor - She is fully aware of all of these facts.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 6th, 2009 at 2:07pm
Keith

It is hard to know how many practices saw through this originally and knew they would need to lie in order to go ahead with Surgery Line in the first place.

If the truth only dawned on them after they had signed-up to a lengthy contract, they would perhaps be most likely to rely on DH and PCT endorsement of their decision and stand by their position, rather than admitting their mistake. This would be especially true if the system was generally found to be an improvement over the previous situation.

Doubtless there will be many partners and staff within practices who are unhappy with this, as with many other, practice decisions. I would not expect them to all speak out in public.

I hope that the vast majority of GPs remain worthy of the status formerly accorded them, even if they may be prone to error and in the hands of practice managers over relatively minor issues such as this. I believe that there is politics in this as they seek to place responsibility for this cock-up on the DH.

We will shortly learn what position the BMA GPC is to take in response to the DH consultation. I hope that this will include a readiness to find a solution. If, as you suggest, a significant number of members of the profession are deliberate and persistent liars with no respect for the principles of the NHS, then we will have an unholy battle on our hands.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Keith on Feb 6th, 2009 at 4:41pm
SCV,

I see you caught caught out with 'thingy-up' as I have done in the past. It makes what you post look odd doesn't it  ;D

To be honest I'm happy to accept that many if not most probably did believe what they were being told when they signed the contracts, if those contracts were signed several years ago. It doesn't excuse those that signed contracts recently. It also shows a complete lack of morals to put this stuff on their web site now (or at least not remove it) knowing it to be untrue or misleading.

I would have a lot more respect for a surgery which said 'we c*cked up'. One that tells the truth, but doesn't think they have done anything wrong a little less respect for, but absoutely no respect for a surgery that publishes this rubbish. They either know and are quite happy to mislead their patients or are incredibly incompetent, in which case do you want to be their patient?

Once Doctors had universal respect. A combination of the 0844 scandal and the co*ked up Doctors contracts has lost that respect for many people whcih is very sad, particularly as I'm married to one  :-[

Happily I am aware of Doctors who are very anti the 0844 scandal so I wouldn't want to go as far as the comments in your last paragraph. Yet anyway!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jrawle on Feb 6th, 2009 at 8:08pm

jgxenite wrote on Feb 5th, 2009 at 9:13am:

idb wrote on Feb 5th, 2009 at 3:06am:
The cost of this is high especially to
some networks and to the G3 numbers many patients use (25p per min).


That's rubbish - what numbers (aside from 09 numbers) cost 25p from a landline?!


They mean it costs them a lot to call patients on their mobiles. Presumably they meant 3G.

Note that they provide an 0870 number for callers from overseas. This should be in the database as it'll be free for some BT customers, and cheaper for everyone in the evening and at weekends.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on Feb 7th, 2009 at 1:40pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 6th, 2009 at 2:07pm:
Keith

It is hard to know how many practices saw through this originally and knew they would need to lie in order to go ahead with Surgery Line in the first place.

If the truth only dawned on them after they had signed-up to a lengthy contract, they would perhaps be most likely to rely on DH and PCT endorsement of their decision and stand by their position, rather than admitting their mistake.




Keith wrote on Feb 6th, 2009 at 4:41pm:
To be honest I'm happy to accept that many if not most probably did believe what they were being told when they signed the contracts, if those contracts were signed several years ago. It doesn't excuse those that signed contracts recently. It also shows a complete lack of morals to put this stuff on their web site now (or at least not remove it) knowing it to be untrue or misleading.



There is still a way out of these contracts,( if they really want to), under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 (partIII), Misleading Price Indications.




Law and penalties

Under the Consumer Protection Act 1987, it is an offence to give misleading price
indications to consumers, and the maximum penalty is an unlimited fine.  Liability
can extend to the business which provided the number, if they gave incorrect pricing
information to the advertiser.

In addition, where Special Services have been marketed to businesses in a
misleading way, the business customer may be entitled to cancel the contract and to
claim compensation (which could include the cost of re-printing business stationery).

The above is from a Norfolk Trading Standards leaflet,( I can't provide a link as I do not have it, but NGMsGhost might still have it).

But similar advice is here from Hereford TS; - http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/business/trading_standards/detail.aspx?id=180805&classification=Eng;Busi;Adv;FT





Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by pw4 on Feb 9th, 2009 at 2:41pm

derrick wrote on Feb 7th, 2009 at 1:40pm:
There is still a way out of these contracts,( if they really want to), under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 (partIII), Misleading Price Indications.

Unfortunately, the Consumer Protection Act wouldn't apply in this case as GP practices are businesses, not consumers.
The second paragraph could apply, but the practice would have to prove it had been misled, which could be difficult as anything in writing has probably been carefully worded.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 9th, 2009 at 4:43pm

pw4 wrote on Feb 9th, 2009 at 2:41pm:
the practice would have to prove it had been misled, which could be difficult as anything in writing has probably been carefully worded.

Practices were clearly misled in writing - by the Secretary of State for Health on 24 February 2005 -

Hutton rings the changes on NHS telephone numbers


Quote:
The only special service numbers the NHS will be able to use in future are freephone numbers or those that offer patients a guaranteed low rate call, such as '0845' or '0844' numbers.

I have long been wondering if Mr Hutton retained a copy of the guarantee to which he refers, and who was the guarantor. His successor, Alan Johnson, would have a quite sizeable claim to make against that guarantee, or would be able to advise patients on how to claim on their own account. There is plenty of circumstantial evidence as to the source of the idea that this fictional guarantee existed.

Let us hope that a ban will be able to go ahead without troubling the lawyers, but with all parties accepting their responsibilities and contributing to an effective solution that allows the best possible NHS services to be provided "free at the point of need".

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by sherbert on Feb 9th, 2009 at 6:49pm
'Free at the point of need' will never happen even if the telephone numbers do get changed, going off topic a bit, there are still the ridiculous hospital car parking charges that have to be paid and these come to be quite a large sum of money if you have to make regular hospital appointments. I know this is a different subject and probably should be on another forum, but just making a point.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 9th, 2009 at 8:51pm
A fair point. There are other issues, including some (not all) aspects of car park charges and prices in hospital shops that are firmly on the campaign agenda, as there are circumstances in which they can breach the principle of "free at the point of need".

To hold this to the topic, what is distinct about the charges levied through use of revenue sharing telephone numbers by NHS providers is that they are incurred when there is no other service being provided other than access to NHS treatment. Unlike with the other cases, there are no circumstances in which they can be excused as being not charges for NHS services when the numbers are called by NHS patients.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 11th, 2009 at 3:25am
We have another example here in Kelvedon: Council says 'have your say on 084', where a practice manager ...


Quote:
said she shall be writing on behalf on the surgery to explain that the number ensures a better service at an “absolute minimal” extra cost.

Even if the extra cost of calling the 0844 number used by this surgery were "minimal", in either absolute or relative terms - which it is not ...

this comment would still pose the question - "how much extra should NHS patients pay for more advanced surgical procedures, cleaner wards and greater personal respect as they use NHS services?".

For those who believe in a NHS "free at the point of need" the answer is "not one penny piece".  The NHS is funded by us all through taxation, not paid for by patients as they use it.


An edited version of the same piece is found in papers all around Colchester, as Campaign to say ‘no to 084’. Do we need to ask what inspired that headline?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 28th, 2009 at 2:27am
http://www.devonshirelodge.co.uk/telephone_system.htm

<<
New Telephone System

NEG Surgery Line


This is a revolutionary telephone service, designed specifically for general practice. It has been in development for two years and ensures 96% of callers get through to their surgery first time. NEG Surgery Line™ has an ever growing presence in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Feedback from our patients has consistently expressed frustration with the difficulties experienced when trying to get through to the surgery to make an appointment, particularly at busy times such as Monday mornings.
After careful consideration, we have chosen 'Surgery Line' - a telephone system that patients find easy to use and has received a great deal of praise around the country.

Cost of calling an 0844 Number
Example 1

For most patients there is little or no difference in the price between calling the 0844 number and our old local number. Prices do vary, but according to the most common BT tariff, calls to the surgery from a BT Landline during opening hours would now cost 4.p per minute + VAT plus a 6p call set up fee.  

Calls to 0844 numbers now cost a flat rate of 4.26p per minute + VAT plus a 3p call set up fee.  

Calls from mobiles and other service providers may vary.

Example 2

The cost of a 10 minute call to your 0844 from a BT landline is 5p per minute + a 3p call set up fee this = 53p

The cost of calling a local number from a BT landline is 4.7p per minute + a 6p call set up fee = 53p

In the interests of fairness I would like to point out that after 10 minutes BT do become marginally cheaper.

Also the above costs include VAT and often the press and BT will not include this on their official releases so always ask the question.

On telephoning 0844 576 9965 you will be offered a number of options so that your call can be directed to the appropriate member of staff.

This means that many patients will actually pay less in total because their call is answered and processed more quickly. We suggest you add our number 0844 576 9965 to your  Friends & Family list of numbers. [***]

NEG WELCOMES GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION ON ENHANCED TELEPHONY SERVICES TO GP SURGERIES - December 2008 Please  click to view the statement by NEG
>>


*** According to BT Price List [Serviceview], Section 55:Personal (Residential) Customer Options
Part 12:Friends & Family / Friends & Family Overseas / Friends & Family Auto Update

http://www.serviceview.bt.com/list/public/current/Cust_Opts_Res_boo/3227_d0e5.htm#3227-d0e5

Excluded Calls

Calls to numbers shown in Section 2 Part 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 or 16 of the BT Price List with a Categorisation for Customer Options of 2, 4, 5 or 7.

0844 576 9965 is charge rate g6, categorization 5, and is neither "Eligible for Friends & Family (Exluding F&F Auto Update)" nor "Eligible for Friends & Family Auto Update"

http://www.serviceview.bt.com/list/public/current/Call_Charges_boo/1632_d0e5.htm#1632-d0e5

Yet more lies from the despicable, deceitful and downright nasty NEG.

Now, where is Kath Simmons/Simons?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 28th, 2009 at 2:59am

idb wrote on Feb 28th, 2009 at 2:27am:
http://www.devonshirelodge.co.uk/telephone_system.htm

Members may wish to note that the page now on display is an update from that shown previously. This was used as an example of how NEG customers misrepresent calling costs as is seen here. The practice was notified of this.

The information on this page will shortly be updated to reflect the revised and still erroneous and misleading version; copies of both versions will be retained, awaiting the further necessary revisions.

The point about Friends and Family is totally meaningless, as this will be abolished from 1 April.


Some quick additional points:

The source of the information is given away by the word "your" on the first line under "Example 2". This should have been changed to "our", as it was under Example 1.

The author was clearly confused or working too quickly as revealed by the error "after 10 minutes BT do become marginally cheaper". It is the call to a "local" number that is shown to be cheaper than a call to a 0844 number by these (inaccurate) figures. There is no comparison between telcos.

The correct and up-to-date figures for the 10 minute call are 0844 (g6) - 57p; geo - 48p, or zero if subscribing to the "Anytime" option.

The advice to question whether or not VAT is included in published figures has clearly not been followed. A rate for calls to geo numbers, which included VAT at 17.5%, is taken as if it were VAT exclusive. There is no reference to the use of setup fees that are three price changes out of date or to the selective use of setup fees from two different tariffs.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Feb 28th, 2009 at 3:11am
http://www.totalfrance.com/france/forum/viewtopic.php?t=58262

how to call an English 0844 number help please....

<<
My husband needs to ring his doctors surgery in England to get the results of a blood test that he has had, but the only number that the surgery has is an 0844 number, which we cannot dial from our french landline.
Is there any way that we can get around this and call them? (we don't have an english mobile otherwise we would have used that!)



We did try dropping the first 0, but we recieved a recorded french message telling us that the number that we were dialling was not in the french directory. I'm assuming, as the french use 0844 and 0845 numbers, that this is the reason you cannot access the english numbers when you try.



We did try to call the 'normal number', only for it to divert to the 0844 number, with the same french message, telling us that this number is not in the french directory!
We tried both avenues, and neither worked, hence my post on here to see if there is a way of 'bypassing' the 0844 number.
>>

There is a reference to  

another web site <don't pay to call>

Is this affiliated to saynoto0870.com by any chance? I suspect not.

Title: Blood test result
Post by sergeant121 on Feb 28th, 2009 at 7:24am
In a previous life, I would have dealt with a call such as, "I live xxx miles away and have been trying, unsuccessfully, to telephone my elderly Aunt for x days now.  The phone rings, but I cannot get a reply and I'm conerned for her safety" by establising the address and visiting myself.  If unable to get a reply at the door, I would make enquiries of neighbours and, if they proved fruitless, would, as a last resort, break in to confirm (or occasionally otherwise) the well-being of the person.

I see very little difference here.  The blood test may seem trivial but, as we all know, could confirm an illness which requires urgent attention. As such, I would have made contact with the surgery myelf to advise them one of their patients was attempting, but failing, to get in touch from abroad and to establish a viable communications route for the UK citizen abroad.

Whether the attitude of the police now would be similar to what mine was, is another matter (in view of the surveillance society under which we all now live in the UK, I suspect not), but it has to be worth  try.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Feb 28th, 2009 at 5:15pm

idb wrote on Feb 28th, 2009 at 2:27am:
http://www.devonshirelodge.co.uk/telephone_system.htm

<<
New Telephone System

[…]

On telephoning 0844 576 9965 you will be offered a number of options so that your call can be directed to the appropriate member of staff.

This means that many patients will actually pay less in total because their call is answered and processed more quickly. We suggest you add our number 0844 576 9965 to your  Friends & Family list of numbers. [***]

NEG WELCOMES GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION ON ENHANCED TELEPHONY SERVICES TO GP SURGERIES - December 2008 Please  click to view the statement by NEG
>>


*** According to BT Price List [Serviceview], Section 55:Personal (Residential) Customer Options
Part 12:Friends & Family / Friends & Family Overseas / Friends & Family Auto Update

http://www.serviceview.bt.com/list/public/current/Cust_Opts_Res_boo/3227_d0e5.htm#3227-d0e5

Excluded Calls

Calls to numbers shown in Section 2 Part 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 or 16 of the BT Price List with a Categorisation for Customer Options of 2, 4, 5 or 7.

0844 576 9965 is charge rate g6, categorization 5, and is neither "Eligible for Friends & Family (Exluding F&F Auto Update)" nor "Eligible for Friends & Family Auto Update"

http://www.serviceview.bt.com/list/public/current/Call_Charges_boo/1632_d0e5.htm#1632-d0e5

Yet more lies from the despicable, deceitful and downright nasty NEG.

Now, where is Kath Simmons/Simons?

Indeed.

With all 084x numbers BT keeps a regulated amount and passes the rest to the telephone provider operating the respective telephone number on behalf of the receiver. This means that the receiving telco gets most of the call charges.

The call charge from BT lines for numbers in the 0844 range are set by the receiver's telco. They thereby know and can control how much payment they get from BT and other call-retailing telcos. They can also decide whether to opt out of any BT discount schemes such as Friends and Family. Discounting the retail price means that the amount that the receiver's telco get will be reduced.

So Opal Telecom, part of Carphone Warehouse of which this surgery is a customer, has decided to charge the highest price it can for this 0844 number and opt it out of any discounts.

So these are blatent lies by the surgery to cover up what it is doing.


SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 28th, 2009 at 2:59am:
The point about Friends and Family is totally meaningless, as this will be abolished from 1 April.

The point about Friends and Family is meaningless because it is not available to 0844 576 numbers for the reasons explained. This was determined by Opal Telecom.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Mar 1st, 2009 at 4:51pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 28th, 2009 at 2:59am:

idb wrote on Feb 28th, 2009 at 2:27am:
http://www.devonshirelodge.co.uk/telephone_system.htm
... The information on this page will shortly be updated to reflect the revised and still erroneous and misleading version ...

"This page" has now been updated. The practice has been notified.

Members may also be interested to view the updated list of NHS bodies using revenue sharing numbers, which now has 160 entries. A catalogue of media coverage is also available for reference and information. Please advise of any omissions or sugestions for additional material on the site as a resource for campaigners on this issue.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 1st, 2009 at 11:18pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Mar 1st, 2009 at 4:51pm:
[...] A catalogue of media coverage is also available for reference and information. Please advise of any omissions or sugestions for additional material on the site as a resource for campaigners on this issue.
A very useful collection of information.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by lompos on Mar 2nd, 2009 at 8:29am


Quote:
A catalogue of media coverage is also available for reference and information. Please advise of any omissions or sugestions for additional material on the site as a resource for campaigners on this issue.


An ommission from the media coverage catalogue is here:

http://www.thecnj.co.uk/islington/2009/022709/iletters022709_03.html

This is from the 27 February edition of the Islington Tribune.

Not sure how to advise them to add it to their catalogue.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Mar 2nd, 2009 at 11:37pm

lompos wrote on Mar 2nd, 2009 at 8:29am:
An ommission from the media coverage catalogue is here:

The omission has now been corrected. This is a good letter.


lompos wrote on Mar 2nd, 2009 at 8:29am:
Not sure how to advise them to add it to their catalogue.

There is an email address on the home page; it is also available at the foot of this posting.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 7th, 2009 at 1:04am
http://www.gloslmc.com/newsletters/previousyears/final%20Newsletter%20March%2008.pdf

GLOUCESTERSHIRE LOCAL MEDICAL COMMITTEE
MARCH 2008 Edition

0844 NUMBERS

The issue of phone charges for use of 0844
numbers has not gone away; the
government is looking into it. The current
guidance from the GPC is that it is OK to
use these numbers provided your practice
leaflet mentions the price ‘relevant to most
consumers’ i.e. the likely phone charges
that patients will bear when they phone the
practice. This warning does not have to be
heard on the system itself. However, there
are now ‘03’ series numbers which the
government would much prefer us to use.
These would cost the caller less than the
0844 numbers. NEG, which supplies the
phone systems that use 0844 numbers,
could convert the systems to 03 numbers if
necessary but says that, for instance, there
are some mobile networks which cannot
connect to 03 numbers yet.
For the
moment, it would be better for patients to
be able to talk to the practice, even if more
expensively than by using a landline, than
not at all. Pending the outcome of the
government’s deliberations and the
resolution of such technical challenges, we
would advise practices that have not yet
made the change to delay yet longer until
the way becomes clearer.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 7th, 2009 at 1:06am
http://www.marstonmedicalcentre.co.uk/patient_survey.htm

Telephone

Your comments


• A normal 01865 number, to ring 0844 costs too much from a mobile
• The new phone number is completely unmemorable, if only the old easy to remember number could be retained or incorporated in the new, it would be a godsend
• Have a normal telephone number
• An easier to remember phone number with no choices. Same as it used to be

Our response

We know the change in telephone number has been unpopular and we did not change it without consideration.

Our old switchboard was on it last legs and we needed to find a replacement. Nearly every system we looked at now provides the facility of offering options for where you wish your call to be directed. The service we chose offered the best range of options for our surgery set up and whilst we would have preferred to keep the old number we had to change to move onto a new network with our new supplier.

The 0844 is a local call number it is not a premium rate line.

The new system does provide both the patients and practice staff with benefits. Patients no longer get the engaged tone and know they are being held in a queue rather than having to constantly re-dial during busy periods. They can also cancel appointments when we are closed.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 7th, 2009 at 1:51am
http://www.nimbuspartners.com/files/2008-TechTrack100_page_3.pdf

NEG Telecom has a call-management
platform that streamlines incoming
phone calls by using intuitive and
dynamic routing. Half of its 3,000 clients
are part of the NHS—doctors’ surgeries
and dental practices, for example—
while other customers include schools
and businesses. Its school line can cut
truanting by sending parents amessage
if their children have not turned up at
school, while surgeries can prioritise
calls by assessing levels of risk.
Led by managing director Dean Rayment,
the Essex company has had sales growth
of 175% a year, with revenues rising from
£354,000 in 2004 to £7.4m in 2007
.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 7th, 2009 at 2:09am
http://www.leicestercitypct.nhs.uk/paper_f_gp_practice_numbers-doc.cmsdoc

LEICESTER CITY PRIMARY CARE TRUST

BOARD MEETING
28 August 2008

GP Practice 084 Phone Numbers

Background

1.      In response to feedback from patients at the October 2007 Board meeting, the PCT committed to undertake a review of GP practices with non-geographic phone numbers to develop a better understanding of the local issues and to identify if there are any actions that the PCT can take to address these.

2.      In March 2008, the Board received an interim report on the issues emerging from the Review.  This paper builds on the material presented in the interim report.  It does not seek to duplicate the information already provided but sets out a final analysis of the scale of the issue together with an appraisal of the options available to the PCT.  


What is the issue?

3.      Depending on the type of line and phone package that patients call on, the cost of calling a GP practice on non-geographic number can vary significantly.  There are significant variations in the cost of calling 084 numbers from mobiles lines as well as some fixed lines call packages with the patient very much in the hands of his or her service provider.  

4.      To illustrate the difference, for a patient with a BT residential landline on a standard contract the cost of a daytime call to a 084 number is 5 pence per minute (inc. VAT).  In comparison, the cost of a call to a 084 number from a Vodafone pay as you go mobile is 35 pence per minute.  This means a ten minute call to a 084 number from a BT landline would cost 50p whereas the same ten minute call from the mobile provider described would be £3.50.  

5.      In addition, significant numbers of patients will be on low cost call packages, either with BT or other providers, which may include free daytime calls but will exclude 084 numbers.


How many people may be affected?

6.      Quantifying the number of patients across the City who may be paying more than the cost of a local call to phone their GP practice is not straight forward, not least because the telecoms market is both extremely competitive and in certain sectors dynamic.  However, it is possible to estimate the broad range by using a series of assumptions.

7.      First, we know how many GP practices in the City have 084 telephone numbers - 25 out of a total of 63.  These practices are contracted to three service providers – NEG Telecom Ltd (Surgery Line), NTL and Ecocall.

8.      Second, we know how many patients are registered with these 25 GP practices - 178,010 as at 1 July 2008.  Set against the PCTs total registered population on the same date of 350,726, this equates to 51% of the city’s registered patient population.

9.      Using these data we can then apply a series of assumptions to form a view of the broad order of patients who may be affected:
•      We know from recent local analysis of actual GP practice call logging that around 6% of incoming calls to GP practices are made from mobile phones.  This would equate to around 11,000 of the 178,010 patients registered with the 25 GP practices that have 084 phone numbers
•      Alternatively, we know from a recent Eurobarometer survey undertaken for the European Commission  that around 15% of UK households are ‘mobile-only’.  That is, they have mobile but no fixed telephone access.  This would equate to around 27,000 of the 178,010 patients registered with the 25 GP practices that have 084 phone numbers
•      However, we also know that this is not just an issue for mobile phone callers – certain low cost telephone packages exclude calls to non-geographic numbers.  The Eurobarometer survey found that 30% of UK households buy two or more communication services as part of a bundle from the same provider at a single price.  These packages can include television, fixed telephony, mobile telephony and/or internet access, with a combination of fixed telephony and internet access being the most popular package.  This would equate to around 53,000 of the 178,010 patients registered with the 25 GP practices that have 084 phone numbers.

10.      Although fairly crude, the above analysis suggests that somewhere in the range of 6-30% (11-53,000) of the 178,010 patients registered with GP practices with 084 phone numbers may potentially pay more than the cost of a local rate call to phone their GP practice because of the telephone package that they are on.

...

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 7th, 2009 at 2:12am
...

Options appraisal

11.      Acting on the mandate given by the Board at it’s March 2008 meeting, the PCT has engaged over the intervening period with GP practices with 084 phone numbers, the Local Medical Committee and the largest single provider of 084 services to city practices (NEG) in order to explore the range of potential options.  The PCT has also retained the services of an independent telecoms consultant in order to access specialist technical advice and has sought independent legal opinion to review the contractual arrangements between GP practices and 084 number providers.

12.      The PCT met with NEG, the provider of the Surgery Line Service, on 16 May 2008 in order to explain the dilemma facing the PCT and to see if any workable solutions could be found for all parties.  The outcome of this meeting was that NEG is willing in principle to work with the PCT to look at how its existing Surgery Line System is managed at a practice level.  However, it is equally clear from this meeting and subsequent correspondence that NEG has little commercial interest in renegotiating existing contracts, for example to enable their service to be fronted with a 03 phone number rather than the current 084 number.  Whilst this position is disappointing, from a commercial perspective it is not surprising given the number of contracts already held across the city, the period left to run on each of these of between 5-7 years and hence the value of the existing guaranteed return.

13.      Given the commercial stance adopted by the main provider of 084 phone services to city GP practices, there are effectively three options that remain open to the PCT.

[...]

16.      The PCT could buy out all the existing 084 contracts held by GP practices across the City and then work with them to implement a new standardised solution.  This would be a complex, multi stranded solution that would require significant financial and technical support but it would be technically feasible.

17.      Strand one would require the PCT to buy out all of the existing 084 contracts held by GP practices across the city.  The existing 084 systems have been paid for via a leasing arrangement over a seven year period.  Legal opinion provided to the PCT and confirmed by the main 084 provider indicates that the leases would need to be settled in full in order to terminate the agreement.  Based on the average monthly payment to the lease company, annualised over the remaining lease period for each of the practices affected would suggest a total write off cost of around £500,000.  

[...]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Apr 7th, 2009 at 2:15am
http://www.steeplemorden.com/uploads/MINFEB08-11February2008.doc

STEEPLE MORDEN PARISH COUNCIL

(Approved 10/3/08)
Minutes of the Parish Council Meeting held in the Cricket Pavilion on
Monday 11th  February   2008 at 7.30pm
Present:      Councillors:  T Turner (Chairman), A Alexander,   S Norton,  J Brocklehurst, S Traverse-Healy, J Jarman, B Spall,  J Hobbs
District Cllr Mrs Murfitt
In attendance:      Mrs S Walmesley (Clerk) and 3 members of the public

[...]

3.3 Change of Contact Details for Ashwell Surgery

A response to the last letter had been received from Dr Russell. It stated that she had personally checked the charges made when calling the surgery. The company made no connection charge and the charge was 4.96 per minute including VAT. Any different charges made to patients were because of the way in which their telephone provider charged for connection. BT charge for a local call was 6p for a connection charge and then 3.25p per minute. Therefore a 3 minute call through BT would be 15.75p and a call to the new surgery line would be 14.88p. The Practice Manager, Mrs Stapleton had been in contact with NEG and they had agreed to formulate a comprehensive reply, and if necessary someone from the company would talk to the Parish Council about the charges. Councillors were still concerned about the connection charge of 6p for calls to the surgery, not only for BT calls but for calls on most of the tariffs. The Clerk was asked to reply to the Surgery advising of this and invite a surgery and NEG representative to speak to the Councillors.

[...]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Apr 7th, 2009 at 1:02pm
http://www.somersetlmc.co.uk/documents/newsletters/2007/Issue%20%20130%20February%202007.pdf

“SURGERY LINE” TELEPHONE SYSTEMS

Worth a look if you are thinking about changing or upgrading your phone system

Replacing your telephone system with up to date technology can be very costly, and a company called NEG Surgery Line has come up with an ingenious way in which you can offset the cost. They have negotiated a bulk agreement with some non-BT telecoms providers to purchase call capacity at less than the BT local call rate. Callers to the surgery continue to pay the present BT charge, and the difference potentially provides for both the practice’s costs and the company’s profits without the caller having to pay extra.

NEG now provide phone systems for many hundreds of practices, and as patients are not paying a premium charge, the Department of Health is happy with the system. NEG install new branded phone hardware (which can include things like cordless headsets) and set up the system to match your needs. Incoming calls are picked up by the Surgery Line software and stacked or forwarded according to your requirements. Crucially, the system is flexible enough to accommodate the Monday morning peak as well as a direct transfer to the OOH service or other numbers. It also has useful extras like a 6 hour power back up supply, integrated panic button and on demand call recording. For a fairly modest subscription this can be extended to full recording of all calls. NEG also reckon to be able to offer very competitive charges for outgoing calls as well, but you will still need an ADSL/ISDN line and, of course, a BT connection.

The biggest hurdle is the need to change your phone number to an 0844 “lo-call” one, though NEG say they will leave a redirect message on your old number “for ever” if you wish. Also, the best deal comes with a 7 year contract, and the calculation that many practices can have a “nil-cost” system is based on this assumption. Patients who have call packages like BT Option 3 or Talk-talk will pay more because 0844 calls are excluded from flat rate packages. And despite the benefit to callers of virtual call stacking when the lines are busy, the LMC is well aware of how irksome it is having to wait for up to a minute at the start of a call whilst some disembodied voice goes through a series if irrelevant options before you actually join the queue – and knowing that you are paying for the privilege of doing so. So, if you are planning a surgery move or a major phone upgrade, this is worth a look: practices using Surgery Line confirm that NEG is an efficient and responsive company. But if you are reasonably happy with what you have, we do not think that the benefits will outweigh the costs, at least for now.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Apr 8th, 2009 at 3:01am
A news piece dated 6 Aprill covering the No 10 petition is found in Healthcare Republic:

Petition urges ban of 08 numbers in NHS

The comments that have been added make this worthy of inclusion in this thread.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 24th, 2009 at 4:54am
http://www.charnwoodmedicalgroup.nhs.uk/js/tinymce/plugins/filemanager/files/Newsletter1.pdf

CHARNWOOD MEDICAL GROUP NEWSLETTER
May and June 2009 | Volume 1, Issue 1

<<
UPDATE ON OUR NEW TELEPHONE SYSTEM

Why did we switch our phone system?

The company supplying our phone system is called Surgery Line, a specialist GP telephone company. You probably experienced difficulties in calling this surgery – particularly at peak times in the past. By switching to an 0844 number, we are able to increase the number of phone lines into the practice and route your call through to the right person. This means that your call will be answered more quickly than before and you will be less likely to hear the engaged tone when you call in.

The cost to you

There is a common misconception that 0844 numbers cost the same to call as 0870 numbers or premium rate numbers. This is not true. Premium rate calls cost between 10p to £1.50 a minute, whilst national call rate numbers (usually known as 0870) cost about 8p a minute to call. 0844 numbers cost 4.2p per minute to call, which is equivalent to the BT standard daytime rate for the first minute of a call. Whilst tariffs do vary widely, for most patients there is little or no difference in the cost of calling other places on a low call rate 0844 number. In fact, some patients may find it cheaper because unlike a BT call there is no 3p connection charge. Those patients who pay more because of their telecom provider’s rate package will only find themselves paying a few pennies extra for the call. We don’t not make a ‘profit’ out of the 0844 calls - this is written into our contact. The money generated partially funds new equipment in order to provide a better service for patients. The alternative is that ALL of the money goes to the telecoms companies such as BT.

Increased efficiency

Not only is the cost of the call comparable to one made to a local number, but because the telephone system is more efficient, you should be on the phone for less time. Many Doctors surgeries with the Surgery Line system have found that average call durations have decreased by up to half, meaning that it should take you less time to book an appointment. We have changed over to 0844 numbers in order to improve the service we offer our patients and to help staff operate more effectively.

How the system works

We have recorded a new greeting and a new options menu, so you can choose which department or service you wish to be transferred through to. Once you choose the service you require, you should be put straight through. This makes it easier to reach the person you want, and easier to make an appointment.

Call queuing

Your call may be put in a queue, depending upon how busy the surgery is when you call. This often depends on the time of day as the first two hours of surgery opening is usually the busiest. Obviously, there are a limited number of staff available to answer the phones, so even with extra lines you may have to wait for your call to be answered. The engaged tone is all but eliminated in practices with a Surgery Line system.

Mobile phones

Calls from mobile phones to 0844 numbers are subject to the providers’ charges. Calls can be included with minute allowances from the mobile provider, but this is at the discretion of the provider.

All 08 NGN (non geographic numbers) tend to be excluded from calling plans unless you specifically state these numbers as part of your ‘bundled minutes’, although this depends on your provider. 0844 numbers are charged at 4.2p per minute + VAT at all times

Whilst some mobile providers don’t allow 08 to be included within their ‘free bundled minutes’, however, it’s worth noting that the UK mobile industry average cost for a ‘free minute’ is actually 5 pence. You just pay for these ‘free minutes’ upfront at the beginning of the month as part of your ‘bundled costs’ and lose these ‘free minutes’ if you don’t use them within two months.

Over 1,200 GP and dental surgeries have now switched to 0844 numbers for the reason that their patients receive a better service. There are many benefits, but the main one is that it is now easier for patients to get through to make appointments. This is also supported by evidence from independent practice patient surveys which repeatedly highlight the improved service. Whilst we appreciate that change can be inconvenient, we are confident that you will see an improvement in the telephone service we are able to offer you.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on May 24th, 2009 at 10:36am
As usual, smoke and mirrors to disguise the true cost.


Quote:
"... national call rate numbers (usually known as 0870) cost about 8p a minute to call.
BT charges 6p/minute peak to call them but it's irrelevant anyway.


Quote:
0844 numbers cost 4.2p per minute to call, which is equivalent to the BT standard daytime rate for the first minute of a call.
4.2p/minute conveniently forgets the VAT (which takes it to 5p/minute - and which means it is not "equivalent to the BT standard daytime rate" but is, in fact, ½p/minute more expensive).


Quote:
Whilst some mobile providers don’t allow 08 to be included within their ‘free bundled minutes’, however, it’s worth noting that the UK mobile industry average cost for a ‘free minute’ is actually 5 pence. You just pay for these ‘free minutes’ upfront at the beginning of the month as part of your ‘bundled costs’ and lose these ‘free minutes’ if you don’t use them within two months.
They've brought a couple of extra mirrors into the frame with that nonsense!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by derrick on May 24th, 2009 at 12:36pm
ALSO;-


idb wrote on May 24th, 2009 at 4:54am:
This means that your call will be answered more quickly than before and you will be less likely to hear the engaged tone when you call in.  By switching to an 0844 number


No, just held in a queue whilst your phone bill increases!
01/02/03 numbers will do the same!



idb wrote on May 24th, 2009 at 4:54am:
We have recorded a new greeting and a new options menu, so you can choose which department or service you wish to be transferred through to.


And we can generate more money whilst you listen to this menu, then we will put you in a queue for even more money!



idb wrote on May 24th, 2009 at 4:54am:
Not only is the cost of the call comparable to one made to a local number, but because the telephone system is more efficient, you should be on the phone for less time. Many Doctors surgeries with the Surgery Line system have found that average call durations have decreased by up to half, meaning that it should take you less time to book an appointment. We have changed over to 0844 numbers in order to improve the service we offer our patients and to help staff operate more effectively


Then they should have used a local number!
On the phone for less time? how does that work when you are in a queue? The engaged tone costs nothing, and it is unlikely that you will be answered any quicker by a human!
"changed over to 0844 numbers", so we can make more money!


idb wrote on May 24th, 2009 at 4:54am:
a low call rate 0844 number. In fact, some patients may find it cheaper because unlike a BT call there is no 3p connection charge. Those patients who pay more because of their telecom provider’s rate package will only find themselves paying a few pennies extra for the call. We don’t not make a ‘profit’ out of the 0844 calls - this is written into our contact. The money generated partially funds new equipment in order to provide a better service for patients.



There they go again,"low call rate", breaking the Criminal Consumer Protection Act 1987 LAW!
With BT there is an 8p connection charge, so at least they are right with, “a BT call there is no 3p connection charge”

Don't make a "profit", "written into our contract", "money generated", all against their contract as they are making a financial gain, as they say,” The money generated” which their contract expressively forbids.



idb wrote on May 24th, 2009 at 4:54am:
Calls from mobile phones to 0844 numbers are subject to the providers’ charges. Calls can be included with minute allowances from the mobile provider, but this is at the discretion of the provider.

All 08 NGN (non geographic numbers) tend to be excluded from calling plans unless you specifically state these numbers as part of your ‘bundled minutes’, although this depends on your provider. 0844 numbers are charged at 4.2p per minute + VAT at all times


Calls to 0844 can NOT be included in minute allowances.

You cannot, “specifically state these numbers as part of your ‘bundled minutes’”, they will tell you to get lost!

“0844 numbers are charged at 4.2p per minute + VAT at all times”, NOT from mobiles! They can cost up to 40ppm.



idb wrote on May 24th, 2009 at 4:54am:
Over 1,200 GP and dental surgeries have now switched to 0844 numbers for the reason that their patients receive a better service. There are many benefits, but the main one is that it is now easier for patients to get through to make appointments. This is also supported by evidence from independent practice patient surveys, which repeatedly highlight the improved service.


“better service?, No, just for the surgery to make more money!

Only benefit is to the surgery.

What “independent practice patient surveys”, I was never asked!


These people are either the most accomplished liars, or so gullible that they believe everything their telco informs them is gospel!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 6th, 2009 at 5:27pm
In the last few days, the following item has appeared on the internet:

084 numbers in Primary Care

This is the NEG response to the Department of Health consultation on a proposal to ban use of 084 telephone numbers in the NHS.

I offer some preliminary comments from a quick scan.
  • It contains an acceptance that 03 numbers may be used in place of 084 numbers, which could be seen as something of a breakthrough.

  • It however fails to make any reference to the significance of “free at the point of need” as an issue of NHS policy, leaning on the nonsense of “choice”.

  • All call costings are given as if the rates for 0845 numbers applied to all 084 numbers. Even then they are confused, as unlike items are used to give differences.

I will be preparing a formal response and will post further.

For now, I can say that both NEG and the BMA argue that patients should have the choice of paying for enhanced NHS services as they use them, rather than through taxation. This is a legitimate point of view, however it must be argued openly and honestly. The question of what services are available for those who choose not to pay in this way is only one of the points I raise in opposing this view.

Other members may wish to offer their view.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 6th, 2009 at 8:47pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jul 6th, 2009 at 5:27pm:
In the last few days, the following item has appeared on the internet:

084 numbers in Primary Care

This is the NEG response to the Department of Health consultation on a proposal to ban use of 084 telephone numbers in the NHS.

Well, what can I say? The title of this thread couldn't be more apt!

Let's look at NEG's so-called "Fact Two":

They say a 3 minute call to a:-
  • 01, 02, or 03 number on "Standard BT Tariff" costs 4.50 pence per minute plus 8 pence call set-up which comes to 21.50 pence.
  • 01, 02, or 03 number on "BT Unlimited Evening & Weekend Plan" costs 3.91 pence per minute plus 8 pence call set-up which to 19.73 pence.
  • 084 number on "Standard BT Tariff" costs 4.89 pence per minute plus 2.93 call set-up which comes to 17.61 pence.


A daytime call to a 01, 02 or 03 number on either what they refer to as "Standard BT Tariff" ("Unlimited Evening Plan") is the same as on the Unlimited Evening & Weekend Plan. The 3.91 pence per minute is a figure they have plucked out of thin air.

Of more concern is the 2.93 call set-up fee for a 084 call. The call set-up fee is 2.94 pence for "standard rate" or "non-discounted" rate customers. This is set out in BT Price List General Notes.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 6th, 2009 at 9:18pm
There is the continued reference to "enhanced" solutions. So what is a non-enhanced solution?  :-?

What does the level of "enhancement" of the "solution" have to do with the 084 number? Answer, nothing because the system itself is based in the surgery and can be accessed through the geographical number. The tailored message depending on time of day, menus, and voicemail are all based on hardware at the surgery.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jul 7th, 2009 at 3:59am
Let's look at so-called FACT#9:

[/start NEG propaganda]

When the Department of Health first began to express concerns about the use of 084 numbers by GP surgeries, it was within the context of an ongoing OFCOM study into this area. On 11 April 2005, Gary Belfield, Head of Primary Care at the Department, wrote to PCT Chief Executives, telling them that OFCOM was looking into this area and that, as a result, it was possible that OFCOM could withdraw support for revenue sharing through 084 numbers.

In fact, when OFCOM published the findings of its study later in 2005, it concluded:

"Ofcom does not consider that it currently has sufficient grounds to justify preventing public bodies using revenue sharing NTS numbers."

"An approach that singled out public sector services would be potentially discriminatory."

"Ofcom does not consider there is currently sufficient evidence of consumer detriment in relation to the use of 08 numbers by public services to justify such an extreme position."

"The responses from two other regulatory bodies, LACORS and ICSTIS, argued that a ban on revenue sharing would be disproportionate and that priority should be given to improving price transparency."

We contacted OFCOM in the process of drawing up this response to the Department's consultation on 084 numbers and they confirmed to us that this remains their policy position.

[/end NEG propaganda]

and contrast with this Ofcom guidance:

Guidance for public bodies: Ofcom does not consider that it currently has sufficient grounds to justify preventing public bodies using revenue sharing NTS numbers. However, Ofcom has already stated its view that public bodies should consider carefully whether it is appropriate to use 084 and 087 numbers in place of Freephone or ordinary geographic numbers. In particular, Ofcom believes it is inappropriate for public bodies to use NTS numbers exclusively (i.e. without at a minimum, giving equal prominence to a geographic alternative) when dealing with people on low incomes or other vulnerable groups. Ofcom has been active in providing advice to the Government's Central Office of Information ('COI') and Government Departments and will continue to provide this support. Ofcom would like to see a greater level of compliance with the COI's published guidelines on the use of number ranges, given the level of public disquiet over this issue, and would be keen to support the Government in achieving this objective.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 7th, 2009 at 11:52am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jul 6th, 2009 at 5:27pm:
  • All call costings are given as if the rates for 0845 numbers applied to all 084 numbers. Even then they are confused, as unlike items are used to give differences.

In my haste and confusion, I misunderstood where they had gone wrong, please ignore the line quoted above - I now have it.

BT Standard is used as the base to get the lower setup fee of 2.94p (even though almost nobody is on that tariff.)

This setup fee however applies to 01/02/03 as well as 0844 calls. The cost for a 3 minute 01/02/03 call is therefore 16.44, not 21.5.

The 3.91 given for Unlimited 01/02/03 is the rate that applied from Dec 08 to March 09.

The correct cost for this 3 minute call @ 4.5 ppm is 21.5.

This must however be compared with the equivalent 0844 call: 4.89 ppm, setup 8p, giving 22.67. (Comparison with the BT Standard equivalent is meaningless)

Whichever way you do it the 3 minute 0844 call is 1.17p more expensive. The rates for each call type are the same for both tariffs. The setup fee for each tariff is the same for both call types.

(N.B. I follow the rounding approach shown by NEG. In fact rates are shown to three places of a penny. Call costs are calculated ex-VAT and rounded up to the nearest penny. VAT is applied to the total on the bill.)


NEG has long laboured under (or deliberately falsely promoted) the false assumption that differences in setup charges give advantages to 0844. At times it has claimed that there are none.

The difference between the BT rates for 0844 and 01/02/03 has been diminishing for some time because the former is fixed and the latter is being raised to get customers onto inclusive packages.
We are only dealing here with non-inclusive calls from BT landlines during the daytime. This may be a sizeable proportion of GP patients, but all other callers to 0844 (g6) numbers suffer a much greater differential in cost.


On further review of the material I see a strong argument for use of revenue sharing numbers to provide money to GPs for investment in the facilities of their surgery, as an alternative to funding out of taxation. Despite the false claims about cost, this argument is advanced on the basis that patients may pay more.

Some would find the argument that the cost of upgrading a GP telephone system should be carried by the patients of the surgery in question as they use it, rather than all taxpayers, to be persuasive. This, coupled with the fact that the individual costs are modest, in the context of a highly valued otherwise free service, is what has kept Surgery Line going without serious protests from many patients.

The definitive false statements about the actual costs are to deflect those who look at the issues of principle, forcing them to pursue highly detailed arguments that require an understanding of the BT Price List to follow.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 8th, 2009 at 11:09pm
A posting partly relevant to the NEG response to the consultation and my reply to it have been made in another thread.

This posting is to establish a link, as they are probably relevant to both threads.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 22nd, 2009 at 10:13am
NEG consultation response - a commentary on the NEG submission to the DH

is a new item on the NHS.Patient web site

Copies have been distributed to key relevant personnel. Warning - this is not light holiday reading!!

(This website is being re-designed due to a technology update, i.e. down-grade, but not much is changed yet.)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 4th, 2009 at 8:18pm
Although there is no reference to it as such, there is much to be found here that is well withing the terms of this topic:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/0844_telephone_numbers

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Aug 30th, 2009 at 10:03am
GPs using Talk Talk (Opal Telecom) 0844 numbers can change to 0344.

A guide to changing numbers is published.

Briefing issued.

One wonders why NEG has apparently made no public reference to this obvious solution. The launch of the consultation was not considered to be the proper time, according to a NEG representative who chose to appear on TV to discuss the issue. Five months after the end of the consultation and with an announcement of the outcome imminent, it is not too late for those who wish only for open and honest discussion of the issues.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Nov 14th, 2009 at 12:23am
Some propaganda from elitetele.com, "the UK's leading business telecoms provider"

http://www.elitetele.com/Phone-Numbers/08-Numbers/0844-Phone-Numbers/

0844 Numbers Versus 0845 Local Rate Numbers (Non Geographic)

0844 Numbers

0844 Numbers are the new and realistic 0845 replacement, bearing in mind that 0845 numbers are due to be reviewed by Ofcom within the next 18months.

The range has also proven popular for 0870 number migration as there is a low rate call cost to callers – only 5ppm – and the range also allows for a revenue stream. The 0844 range is less costly to the business than using a freephone number and as the calls are charged at a fixed price, it is much less likely that Ofcom will impose any future regulatory changes to this range.

0844 numbers provide access to all the Network Level Services.

0844 is a prefix that companies use on their phone number so callers pay local rate, wherever they are calling from in the UK. 0844 is not as well known as the prefix 0845, but 0844 does the same job. Companies may choose 0844 as an alternative because the number they want has already been used by 0845. Also, they can make callers aware that 0844 is local rate by saying ‘all 0844 calls at local rate’ so the caller knows for sure that the call to 0844 will be cheap.

Many companies offer their customers local rate 0844 calls because it improves business, and gives them a national presence. A customer calling 0844 will have no idea where the company is based, and may presume that because they have a 0844 that they are a successful and national company. The 0844 prefix will attract their business because they want to be sure that the company will treat them in a professional manner, and the 0844 number does give them extra credibility.

Companies often get bad press if they are known to have bad customer service, and they do not have an 0844. If callers have to spend extra money just to make a complaint because there is no 0844, they may not give their return business. An 0844 number puts the relationship on a better footing in the first place, as the customer does not feel cheated by telephone charges because of the 0844.

Whether a company has 0844 or 0845, the result is the same. The company could be in Aberdeen but with 0844 the caller could be in Cornwall and still pay local rate when calling 0844. Callers are also more likely to call an 0844, so businesses can use that 0844 opportunity to build a better customer relationship

People are once again kicking up a fuss over phone numbers. There’s now talk of banning the 0844 and 0845 numbers that apparently a fifth of 8000 GP Practices are using. And lest we forget, the 0845 NHS Direct number too!

Well, let’s take a look at 0844 and 0845 shall we? 0844 and 0845 numbers are not, contrary to popular belief, premium rate numbers. Let me repeat that – 0844 and 0845 numbers are not premium rate! It does not cost the national debt to ring them and I seriously doubt that people would actually appreciate a local number for NHS Direct.

With 0844 and 0845 numbers, GP Practices can gain Network Level Services. This means that call recording, call statistics, call reporting and call re-routing to contact centres are all features available to GPs because they have an 0844 or 0845 number. So imagine the line’s busy when you ring your doctor – we can divert you to a contact centre or to another GP Practice. Calls can be recorded for legal reasons and training purposes. Listen to me when I say, 0844 and 0845 numbers are not the enemy! Instead, they enable your GP to offer you a better service – and let’s face it, we’d only complain if they didn’t.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by jgxenite on Nov 14th, 2009 at 12:28am
What a load of rubbish!  :-/

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Nov 14th, 2009 at 1:49am

idb wrote on Nov 14th, 2009 at 12:23am:
Some propaganda from elitetele.com, "the UK's leading business telecoms provider"

http://www.elitetele.com/Phone-Numbers/08-Numbers/0844-Phone-Numbers/

0844 Numbers Versus 0845 Local Rate Numbers (Non Geographic)

The text quoted above latterly includes that from a news posting on this website - Doctors Expensive 0845 And 0844 Phone Numbers To Be Banned?.

Following the link to this posting shows some comments, including a sizable item that I was surprised to see published. (WARNING: Some members may find the comments distasteful as it does not condemn all use of 0844 numbers.)

The headline editorial piece for the 0844 section of the website is such rubbish as to be unworthy of comment.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jan 16th, 2010 at 1:09pm
From http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/


Quote:
Government and BMA gives the
green light on 084 numbers

read more

The NEG press release of 11 January 2010 contains some familiar nonsense alongside some significant acknowledgements of fact!


Quote:
• the Government accepted that 084 numbers are not always significantly more expensive for patients to call

This is true - in some cases there is no additional expense, in some it is modest and in others it is significant. This depends on the tariff applicable to the patient.


Quote:
• the Government recognised that some telecoms providers (eg NEG) “have chosen to charge no more for an 084 call than a call to a geographic number when dialling from a fixed line”

Patients who receive telephone service from NEG and other alleged providers who have made a similar decision regarding all 084 calls (none of whom are known to me) will be relieved to hear this. It would be interesting to hear from NEG what proportion of NHS patients this represents and why the government has allegedly required NHS bodies to disregard the interests of all other patients, including all those who use mobiles.


Quote:
• the Government wishes to see a marketplace evolve in the NHS in which 084 numbers compete alongside 01, 02 and 03 numbers

This is complete nonsense. The government has not yet indicated a serious intention to encourage competition between NHS GPs based on the quality of service offset by the cost of calling them.

This may be a dream of consumerists and those, like NEG, who have no regard for the principles of our NHS. The BMA has also indicated support for the idea of charging NHS patients based on the quality of service. The hands of the present government are far from clean in this respect, but it has not yet gone this far on this issue.


Quote:
"... As long as ... the practice obtains a written guarantee from their phone supplier (usually NEG) that they are charging rates in line with local geographic calls, then they will be deemed to have fulfilled their medical services contract."

NEG is happy to confirm that its Surgery Line solution meets this requirement.

The BMA alleges that the terms of the forthcoming revised GMS contract will be met on the assumption that all patients receive telephone service from NEG, or other providers with a similar commitment about their charges for calling 084 numbers. NEG is not a registered provider of telephone service and I am unaware of any such provider who has made such a commitment.

It is vital for the government to confirm that the Directions to NHS bodies and the terms of the revised GMS contract refer to what patients actually pay.
Simple and straightforward guidance to this effect is all that is necessary to sort out this mess.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by loddon on Jan 16th, 2010 at 6:19pm
NEG appear to have misunderstood what the Government is really saying.    The day after NEG published this piece the Minister for Health Mike O'Brien said in Parliament :---

".... patients should not be expected to pay more than the cost of a local call to contact the NHS, including doctors’ surgeries. GPs will have this year to end the practice completely and get out of any contracts that cause that to happen.

Mr. O’Brien: I agree that we need to ensure that this practice of some GPs charging more than a local rate for contact ends as quickly as possible. We have made it absolutely clear to GPs that they must get out of these contracts .......  They have all got to be out by 21 December, but we want them to be out now, or as soon as they possibly can be."


NEG should notice that he said ".... we want them to be out now, ...."

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 16th, 2010 at 9:22pm
What am I missing with this latest NEG statement? It can clearly be demonstrated that many callers will pay more than the 'local geographic call' rate; that is indisputable and easily proven. Whilst NEG may be an odious organization, it seems odd for it to issue such a press release which is easily challenged, Perry Mason or not. Is there something that I just cannot see? Do we need to analyze the NEG statement word-by-word and letter-by-letter to understand its true meaning?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jan 16th, 2010 at 11:41pm

idb wrote on Jan 16th, 2010 at 9:22pm:
What am I missing with this latest NEG statement? It can clearly be demonstrated that many callers will pay more than the 'local geographic call' rate; that is indisputable and easily proven.

The latter point is acknowledged in the NEG statement!

The BMA is promoting the widely-believed myth that calls to 084 numbers "should" be charged at "the local rate". Based on this, NEG confirms that the numbers it uses are subject to this requirement.

This is a distortion of the conditions that historically (in the case of 0845) and currently (in the case of 0844) are imposed on BT. It also, as acknowledged by NEG, ignores call charges from mobiles.

When these existed as distinct items, "local rate" applied to calls to 0845 numbers and "national rate" to 0870. This was demanded of BT and generally followed by its competitors at the time. Many people genuinely do not recognise that things have changed - not least the use of the mobile as the only phone, rather than as an additional "luxury".

The conditions that still apply to calls to 0844 numbers from BT enable the called party to select the rate to be charged (up to 5p per minute). NEG select the highest of these (call type "g6") to maximise the revenue share. It may of interest to note that latest recruit to Surgery Line demonstrates a change to use of call type g11 for which the rate from BT is set at 4p per minute - this could be significant if the decision to switch to g11 was perhaps taken before the rate for weekday daytime non-inclusive geographic calls from BT went from 4.5 to 5.25 pence per minute on 1 October 2009.

The NEG assurance relates to the fact that the rate selected for Surgery Line is less than the weekday daytime rate for geographic calls from BT for those outside the terms of an inclusive package. Those who are prepared to accept the "other rates may differ" nonsense as sufficient must recognise that this approach dismisses those with BT packages in effect, all Virgin Media customers and all users of Mobiles and Public Payphones as being unworthy of consideration.

What is most dangerous, and is being fed by the BMA and NEG, is the assumption that these callers are being ripped off by their telephone service provider. The fact that some of the premiums appear excessive and disproportionate may support this argument. We must however continue to point out that insofar as this is true, it is totally separate issue. It is fundamentally fair and reasonable for the cost of the revenue share to be recovered from callers, given that it exists. Some of us may wish for revenue sharing to be prohibited or for the cost to be met out of other charges (e.g. packages fees, as with BT and 0845). Until that day arrives however, and there must be doubts that it ever will, we should keep those arguments out of this debate, if we would be content for use of 084 numbers to be banned in the NHS before more radical changes are made.

My personal view is that regulations to limit the level of revenue sharing mark-ups should be introduced, if only because the existence of such regulations would make them more transparent. I see this and other changes as being likely to emerge, eventually, from the work that Ofcom will be doing this year. We are however so close to victory on the NHS issue, with the fundamental point being acknowledged and issued in Directions, that we must press on to secure this relatively modest objective, rather than waiting perhaps at least another 5 years before we may achieve more.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 17th, 2010 at 12:50am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 16th, 2010 at 11:41pm:
My personal view is that regulations to limit the level of revenue sharing mark-ups should be introduced, if only because the existence of such regulations would make them more transparent. I see this and other changes as being likely to emerge, eventually, from the work that Ofcom will be doing this year. We are however so close to victory on the NHS issue, with the fundamental point being acknowledged and issued in Directions, that we must press on to secure this relatively modest objective, rather than waiting perhaps at least another 5 years before we may achieve more.

I fully agree.

My interpretation of the NEG press release 11th January 2010 - NEG WELCOMES CONFIRMATION FROM DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND BMA OF GREEN LIGHT FOR SURGERY LINE is that no such confirmation from "the department" giving the "green light" for Surgery Line has been given unless certain criteria are met. Any such "confirmation" from the BMA is irrelevant as the BMA is neither the arbiter nor authority on this matter.

The Dec 22 directions are very clear:


Quote:
[directions] do not prohibit an organisation from using specific number ranges for the purpose of contacting NHS services. Organisations remain free to use non-geographical number ranges such as 084, providing that patients are not charged more than the equivalent cost of calling a geographical number to do so.”
The Directions from the Secretary of State make clear that any NHS organisation is free to choose to adopt or continue with any number based solution, including 084 numbers. All that is required is for the NHS organisation to satisfy itself, before signing or extending a contract, that the cost of calls to the NHS body is no higher than equivalent calls to geographical number.


NEG does not address this direction in a clear manner; rather it simply endorses the BMA guidance from Jan 8:


Quote:
This does not mean that the use of 084 numbers in itself has been banned. As long as the tariff is equivalent to local rates, and the practice obtains a written guarantee from their phone supplier (usually NEG) that they are charging rates in line with local geographic calls, then they will be deemed to have fulfilled their medical services contract.


Note the equivocal choice of words. Nevertheless, it is not possible for any practice, as far as I am aware, to obtain such a guarantee.


Quote:
NEG is happy to confirm that its Surgery Line solution meets this requirement.


It cannot possibly meet this requirement.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jan 17th, 2010 at 1:49am
This is all a game of bluff.


idb wrote on Jan 17th, 2010 at 12:50am:
NEG does not address this direction in a clear manner; rather it simply endorses the BMA guidance from Jan 8

The BMA guidance simply refers to what has been said by NEG:

Quote:
The DH has been assured by the main phone service supplier, NEG (Network Europe Group, a national provider of telephony services such as Surgery Line), that this is the case.

It is well known that the lead negotiator for the BMA GPC is a client of NEG and a defender of the principle that it is acceptable for patients to pay for "improved" access to NHS services. This view was expressed in this radio interview, although it was not repeated after it had been challenged.

Clearly the BMA GPC and NEG are working together to protect what is seen to be a common interest. (This raises the question of what the majority of BMA members in NHS General Practice would think about a small proportion of their number having their costs subsidised by payments from patients.)



idb wrote on Jan 17th, 2010 at 12:50am:

Quote:
NEG is happy to confirm that its Surgery Line solution meets this requirement.

It cannot possibly meet this requirement.

Yes it can. NEG does not charge any patient more than the cost of geographic call to ring Surgery Line numbers.

NEG is not a registered provider of telephone service, it is an agent of Talk Talk as it provides equipment and services to Surgeries. I can guarantee that I do not charge anyone more than 1p per minute to call anywhere in the world, but then I too am not a provider of telephone service. Talk Talk, like all other providers (barring some exceptional situations with BT), charges its residential customers more than the cost of a call to a geographic number to call Surgery Line numbers. Talk Talk could not give such a guarantee, whereas NEG can.

The government is itself bluffing in that it has not publicly called the bluff of the BMA / NEG. I suspect that both parties have walked away from the negotiations on the revised GMS contract believing that they have achieved what they want. I am not prepared to wait until the revised contract comes into force in April to have this tested, possibly even in the courts.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Jan 17th, 2010 at 2:38am

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 17th, 2010 at 1:49am:

idb wrote on Jan 17th, 2010 at 12:50am:

Quote:
NEG is happy to confirm that its Surgery Line solution meets this requirement.

It cannot possibly meet this requirement.

Yes it can. NEG does not charge any patient more than the cost of geographic call to ring Surgery Line numbers.

NEG is not a registered provider of telephone service, it is an agent of Talk Talk as it provides equipment and services to Surgeries. I can guarantee that I do not charge anyone more than 1p per minute to call anywhere in the world, but then I too am not a provider of telephone service. Talk Talk, like all other providers (barring some exceptional situations with BT), charges its residential customers more than the cost of a call to a geographic number to call Surgery Line numbers. Talk Talk could not give such a guarantee, whereas NEG can.
There is little point in seeking assurance from an entity that has no capability to provide such an assurance. NEG does not set any telephone tariff. Neither does it determine the rate of value added tax nor decide the cost of a flight from London to New York.

This is all semantics and, as you assert, bluff. It is staggering that the DH cannot put this one easily to rest. It is also remarkable that an alleged left-of-center administration allows an organization such as NEG, which embodies traits so reviled by the same (shadow) administration in previous (Thatcher) times, to 'get away' with this nonsense.

It may well end up in the courts. This is where we (as a campaign group) could use a pro bono attorney!

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on Mar 3rd, 2010 at 3:54am
[This may not, strictly speaking, be a NEG propaganda issue]

http://www.londonderrysentinel.co.uk/news/Local-number-for-GP-out.6103581.jp

<<
Local number for GP out of hours

Published Date: 25 February 2010

SICK people seeking a doctor outside normal office hours in Londonderry now ring a local telephone number following changes introduced by the service deliverer.
Western Urgent Care is responsible for the provision of the GP Out of Hours Service in Londonderry, Tyrone and Fermanagh and handles roughly 100,000 calls per year from its base on the Northland Road.

Up until last week people who needed to contact a doctor outside normal office hours, at weekends or on bank holidays rang a generic 0870 telephone number. But that all changed last Monday when a local 02871 number was introduced.

The change followed the implementation of new rules by the communications watchdog Ofcom last August governing 0870 telephone numbers and aimed at giving consumers a much clearer idea of how much it costs to call these numbers.

Ofcom noted that 0870 numbers were previously used by many businesses and organisations to provide a wide range of information and advice including many customer service lines.

But consumers were often charged more for calling these numbers than they would if they called a "geographic rate."

General Manager of Western Urgent Care Mr Eugene Dunne said the switch to a local telephone number was a simple matter of economics and reducing costs.

"Basically it was down to the cost," said Mr Dunne. "With the 0870 numbers Western Urgent Care was being billed for the entire cost of the call.

"With the local number patients will be charged no more than if they were contacting their doctor as normal," he said.

The Western Urgent Care service has been in operation since 2005 and handles approximately 100,000 telephone calls annually.

Its existing telephone number changed from 08706062288 to 02871865195 on Monday, February 15.

Users are reminded that if they ring the old telephone number they will get a voice message telling them the new number to ring.
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on May 19th, 2010 at 7:38pm
NEG is still at it.

Late last year a group of Dental practices in Devon - The Den Dental Group - took on Surgery Line using call type g6 0844 numbers. There is a recorded message announcing that the call is charged at "low call rate".

Extensive research is said to have shown that patients pay no more than the cost of a local call to ring these numbers, even if outside the local dialling area. I was able to point out that the term "low call", as it was spelt out to me, has no particular meaning (indeed it could simply mean lower than £1 per minute), whereas it could evoke the impression of the now generally obsolete "local rate".

03 numbers were said to have been investigated as an option, but they were rejected on the grounds of being too expensive. The "Surgery Line" system is already seen as being quite an expensive solution, despite the benefit of subsidy from callers. It may be valuable to note that NEG did not attempt to pretend that 03 numbers were unsuitable; indeed I suspect that it probably would claim that it presented these as an option, but the client preferred the "low call" 0844!


The Department of Health announcement on 14 September 2009 said that the ban on the use of "expensive" telephone numbers applied to the NHS. There was no specific indication of how this would be applied to those contracted to provide Dentistry, Pharmacy and Ophthalmology services under the NHS. I understand that these groups were covered by the ban on 087 and PRS numbers introduced in 2005. Other members may wish to join me in seeking clarification on this point.

NEG may be seeking to exploit a loophole in the implementation of the ban by transferring its attentions away from GPs towards other NHS providers. It is however fighting the terms of the ban on GPs by providing an assurance that the 0844 numbers it uses are not more expensive to call than geographic numbers. It is free to offer such an assurance in respect of all NHS patients to whom it provides telephone service - unfortunately this assurance is meaningless, because NEG is not a registered provider of telephone service.

NEG has succeeded in perpetrating the myth that call charges are set by the recipient and those who vary from these rates are somehow breaking an agreement. This is complete bullsh1t. It goes back even further in time than the general abandonment of a distinct local rate, to the point where BT was the monopoly provider of telephone services. (We await the cessation of the legacy regulations from that time.)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 19th, 2010 at 10:50pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 19th, 2010 at 7:38pm:
NEG is still at it.[...]
One always has to keep in mind the open, honest and thoroughly decent manner in which this upstanding company operates.

http://www.negtec.co.uk/openbook.htm

<<
Much of the confusion in today's telephony markets is due to the deliberate efforts of companies to obscure their revenue streams. Bills are hard (if not impossible) to understand as a direct result of too much or too little information. We operate a different system. If you want we will tell you exactly how your costs will be generated and how we make our money, and we'll do it in English!!! We are not ashamed of making money or how we do it, so we won't act as if we are. We're a salespersons worst nightmare! Our job is to negotiate on your behalf, if your looking at changing your telecoms supplier can you afford not to have us on your side? (sic)
>>

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by idb on May 20th, 2010 at 2:39am
http://www.hamiltonpractice.nhs.uk/

The Hamilton Practice:

Tel: 0844 477 3558 *

* Calling an 0844 number costs the same (currently 4.2p per minute) as calling a BT low call rate number for the  majority of patients. Some phone companies do charge an additional cost to their customers and if they have a discounted calling arrangement they can contact their network provider to advise them that the surgery is a health facility and request that the number is included in their discounted calls. [presumably advice provided by NEG]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Heinz on May 23rd, 2010 at 9:15am
Of course, that 4.2p figure is the pre-VAT cost - which begs the question of how many patients can avoid paying VAT?

Attempting to shift the 'blame' onto the telephone provider is a bit rich too - but what can we expect in a culture awash with spin?

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Sep 7th, 2010 at 1:55pm
http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/about-us-press.html


Quote:
5 September 2010 - "Millions Fail To Get Through To Local GPs"

Every month in the UK, 20 million patient calls to local GP surgeries using normal landlines result in an engaged tone. This startling research was submitted to the Department of Health today by Network Europe Group, the country's leading provider of enhanced telephony to Primary Care. This is the first time the true extent of how difficult it is to get through to local GPs in the UK has been revealed.


Full press release in PDF: http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/pdf/Millions-fail-to-get-through-to-local-GPs.pdf

From notes to editors in the PDF:

Quote:
5 September 2010 - "Millions Fail To Get Through To Local GPs"

Click to download press release PDF (includes notes to editors)

Every month in the UK, 20 million patient calls to local GP surgeries using normal landlines result in an engaged tone. This startling research was submitted to the Department of Health today by Network Europe Group, the country's leading provider of enhanced telephony to Primary Care. This is the first time the true extent of how difficult it is to get through to local GPs in the UK has been revealed.


Under notes to editors (2) it explains how they came to this conclusion:


Quote:
Data provided to NEG from its customer base, using BT's Network Call Performance Report, reveals that a staggering 93% of calls to a typical GP surgery get an engaged tone if they use a normal landline without a queuing facility. Over 5 million calls are made by patients to NEG GP sites each month. That means that it is safe to estimate that 23 million calls are made each month to normal landlines. The pattern analysis provided to GP surgeries by BT suggests that, for patients whose surgery uses normal landlines, whilst 1.6 million calls get through successfully to the local GP first time, over 20 million patient calls encounter an engaged tone.

The first note says that NEG Surgery Line is in 1,500 surgeries, which is 18% of the total number.

On the basis that 5 million calls are made to NEG's customers (18% of surgeries) it has been calculated that roughly 23 million calls are made to the other 82%. These, according to NEG, only have "normal landlines", a term which it mentions throughout but fails to define.

Do four out of five GPs in the country really only allow one call at a time, with no call waiting or call queuing??? I think not.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 8th, 2010 at 1:00am

Dave wrote on Sep 7th, 2010 at 1:55pm:

Quote:
Every month in the UK, 20 million patient calls to local GP surgeries using normal landlines result in an engaged tone. This startling research was submitted to the Department of Health today by Network Europe Group, the country's leading provider of enhanced telephony to Primary Care. This is the first time the true extent of how difficult it is to get through to local GPs in the UK has been revealed.

I have asked the Department of Health for a copy of this research; it demands close examination.

Others may wish to do the same, perhaps through formal FOI requests.



Quote:
Data provided to NEG from its customer base, using BT's Network Call Performance Report, reveals that a staggering 93% of calls to a typical GP surgery get an engaged tone if they use a normal landline without a queuing facility. Over 5 million calls are made by patients to NEG GP sites each month. That means that it is safe to estimate that 23 million calls are made each month to normal landlines. The pattern analysis provided to GP surgeries by BT suggests that, for patients whose surgery uses normal landlines, whilst 1.6 million calls get through successfully to the local GP first time, over 20 million patient calls encounter an engaged tone.

The BT Network Call performance report is available to individual BT customers. The absence of a plural in the reference to this item suggests that the key source element in this research could well have been a single GP practice. The practice in question may have been "typical" in some respects, however it will be interesting to see the evidence used to support the claim that the 93% call failure figure is typical.

(A "typical" NHS Patient may have a BT landline with the Unlimited Weekends Call Plan. Another "typical" NHS Patient may have BT Unlimited Anytime, cable TV, a contract mobile, a PAYG mobile, or no home telephone. Characteristics of typical cases may be useful as illustrations, but they cannot simply be used directly as the basis of a projection to a wider population, unless that characteristic can itself be established as being "typical". This cannot be done simply by association.)

It will also be interesting to see which statistical theory is used to provide the "safety" found to support the overall projection, in particular the apparent assumption that 0% of surgeries with geographic numbers have a queuing facility.

(I comment here for the benefit of forum members who may be looking to challenge NEG, but I do not think it worth the trouble of engaging with incomplete nonsense in full public debate.)


For the sake of pursuing the key issue, I am prepared to accept NEG's claim that Surgery Line is exceptional in that it requires the unlimited queuing facility available on the network through use of a non-geographic number, with the consequent additional cost. This could of course be provided through use of a 03 number, which NHS GPs in England who are tied into contracts for Surgery Line are required to adopt before 1 April 2011. Their contract for telephone service from Talk Talk permits a change from a 0844 to the equivalent 0344 number at any time. It is unfortunate for NEG that they have to incur the expense of a non-geographic number, as many would argue that for a typical GP surgery this is going much further than is necessary to provide a perfectly good service to patients.

As we have seen with NHS Direct, it is over-costly solutions that are threatened by the need to make the NHS more cost-efficient in these straitened times. Improper use of revenue sharing numbers can indicate that an over-costly solution has been used, so because the cost of the solution cannot be justified to the user, external funding has to be engaged - this is available from the caller's telephone company by using a revenue sharing number. If that company is not BT, then the cost will certainly be passed on as a premium charge to the caller. The "over-costly" point is not true in every case where a revenue sharing number is used, however it is probably true for Surgery Line which takes the improper funding even further to provide many other unnecessary "goodies".


If NEG is pressing the Department of Health to ensure that every GP provides an adequate and cost-effective telephone system then it has my full support. I doubt however that many will find the full cost of Surgery Line to meet these requirements - it does very much rely on what NEG calls its "revolutionary co-funding" arrangement.

If NEG is trying once again to persuade the Department of Health that its ignorant and false assertion about the cost of telephone calls to 0844 numbers is true, then I can only agree with its assertion that "facts" are what must be considered.
  • It is a fact that callers on BT Call Plans, all other landline tariffs, mobile contracts, mobile PAYG tariffs and from public payphones pay more to call NEG 0844 numbers than an equivalent call to a geographic number.

  • The fact that NEG is apparently unaware of this may be true, but it is irrelevant.

  • It is also a fact that the BMA GPC believes that NEG's incompetent assurances about call costs are significant, but this too is irrelevant.


[Conclusions follow ...]

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Sep 8th, 2010 at 1:01am
[... Further to my epic - [url=http://www.saynoto0870.com/cgi-bin/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1160182005/703#703]#703[/url]

It is vital that the PCTs which enforce the terms of the revised NHS GP contract are aware of the three facts stated above.

The opinions of NEG and the BMA GPC are irrelevant to the duty of every practice to make a proper objective determination about the relative cost of calling its telephone number in order to comply with the revised contractual terms.

The NHS is a universal service, therefore the contractual requirement to consider the arrangement "as a whole" means that no group of patients may be disregarded. Even if a majority of patients have telephone service from BT and are sufficiently ill-advised not to have a Call Plan in place when they make calls (and therefore incur penalty charges on calls to geographic numbers), their situation cannot be allowed to cause the interests of other patients to be disregarded.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Apr 11th, 2011 at 1:39am
This thread would not be worth its name if it did not include at least one quotation from the quite extraordinary submission to the Ofcom consultation published here - http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/simplifying-non-geo-numbers/responses/NEG.pdf.

The essence of the submission is an impassioned plea for Ofcom not to allow the benefits delivered to the NHS by NEG to be compromised by having to be transparent about call charges.
This is summarised in the following comment:

Quote:
Ofcom could be tempted only to concentrate on the aspect of the DH conclusions that concern price transparency and seek to argue that clarity over costs is all that is required to deliver a satisfactory policy outcome for the NHS.
We believe this would be a serious mis-reading of the situation.

The bare-faced honesty of this remark is quite astonishing. (All that Ofcom can address is the fundamentals that are common for all. Other issues of NHS policy are nothing to do with Ofcom.)

Another piece of honesty is revealing. NEG indicates that Surgery Line is too expensive to be funded directly by a GP in the normal way - it relies totally on additional subsidy from revenue sharing:


Quote:
Although NEG’s business was built initially on an 084 based solution, we have since late 2008 also offered our customers the choice of using an 03 number. None to date has chosen to do so.

Actually Surgery Line started on 0870 numbers. The switch to the most expensive possible 0844 numbers occurred as the government was somehow persuaded that 084 numbers offered a "guaranteed low rate".

Back on more familiar territory, NEG has the nerve to attack OFCOM, because it contends that the basis for its proposals is fundamentally flawed:


Quote:
The problem is that the sum total of these draft proposals would render it impossible for any revenue-sharing number, such as NEG’s Surgery Line, which is charged at the geographic rate or below, to be accurately distinguished from other 084 or revenue-sharing numbers where the consumer pays more than the geographic rate to contact the organisation.

The Department of Health has fallen for this (or at least it has failed to dispute allegations that it has fallen for it), the BMA GPC has been happy to go along with this (whether it truly believes it or not), many Surgery Line users are happy to repeat this and a large number of PCTs have been taken in.

Now that this assertion has been placed so clearly before Ofcom, let us hope that some effort can be made to distinguish fact from fiction in the public domain.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Apr 26th, 2011 at 12:54am
Fans of this thread will be delighted to know that all has returned to normal after what has appeared to be a public pause.

This announcement of undeclared, but unmistakable, authorship accompanies a statement in this newsletter, both linked to from this website.

Another NHS GP will newly adopt Surgery Line with a type 'g11' 0844 number from 11 May.

Some classic quotes for this thread (read the document for context):

Quote:
The use of 084 numbers in the NHS is supported by the Department of Health


Quote:
decisions on whether to adopt an 084 number will continue to be freely taken by an individual GP surgery


Quote:
For virtually all patients' calls, the local GPs’ 084 number is not more expensive to call than using an ordinary number


Quote:
Patients pay local call rates with the 0844 number charges from landlines.


Quote:
If you use a mobile phone, depending on your provider and contract, such calls can cost more.


Quote:
we encourage you to use a landline.


Quote:
If we use a mobile in the main are there other options we can consider? - you should consider the use of email or use our web site to send messages for matters that can be dealt with.

I am most impressed with the idea that a practice invests in a new telephone system whilst encouraging those who use the increasingly more popular type of telephone not to use it.

When the BT rates for non-inclusive daytime calls go up on Thursday, whilst the Anytime Call Plan subscription is reduced, I expect to hear NEG celebrate with an encouragement for patients not to subscribe to the Anytime Plan.

(This announcement has been brought to the attention of all relevant bodies.)

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jun 28th, 2011 at 1:44am
I make no allegation, but invite followers of this thread to see if they can detect anything familiar in the style of a comment added to a blog here - http://nhspatient.blogspot.com/2011/05/resistance-to-ban-on-use-of-084-numbers.html?showComment=1309196532785#c6958083377688029737.

I have seen the word "bullying" applied to what are referred to as "anti-084 campaigners" previously.

Just for the record, it is only the mis-use of 084 numbers against which I campaign. Unlike other forum members, I can accept use of 084 numbers if it is possible for the level of the "service charge", and the telco's access charge to be declared openly. There are serious issues about whether this could be achieved, indeed I suspect that relatively few would wish to continue using these numbers if required to publicise the "service charge" which they impose.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 2nd, 2011 at 12:46pm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jun 28th, 2011 at 1:44am:
I make no allegation, but invite followers of this thread to see if they can detect anything familiar in the style of a comment added to a blog here - http://nhspatient.blogspot.com/2011/05/resistance-to-ban-on-use-of-084-numbers.html?showComment=1309196532785#c6958083377688029737.

I have seen the word "bullying" applied to what are referred to as "anti-084 campaigners" previously.

There are more and more comments being added to the above blog. I was particularly interested in that from Anonymous "Contributor to the debate" who asked if the blog author can explain "where in the principles of the NHS it is set out that the service should be organised as to provide a hidden subsidy to large scale telecommunications providers with the patient seeing no added benefit?"

GPs have opted for a solution that uses a non-geographic number to deliver calls to their local 01/02 numbers at surgeries. So rather than calls going directly from the patient's telco to that of the surgery's landline, and the former paying the latter, they choose to have calls go from the patient's telco to the 084 provider on then on to the landline number.

These 084 numbers are therefore part of surgeries' phone systems and passing the calls to the local numbers costs the provider. With 03 numbers this cost is paid for by the party that uses the number and with 084 it is paid for by callers.


Suggesting that these charges (if they are levied to the receiver by way of a 03 number) are a "subsidy to large scale telecommunications providers" is pure fantasy!

By implication, these "large scale telecommunications providers" are those operating the non-geographic numbers and it was the surgeries' choices to opt for such solutions.



SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jun 28th, 2011 at 1:44am:
Just for the record, it is only the mis-use of 084 numbers against which I campaign. Unlike other forum members, I can accept use of 084 numbers if it is possible for the level of the "service charge", and the telco's access charge to be declared openly. There are serious issues about whether this could be achieved, indeed I suspect that relatively few would wish to continue using these numbers if required to publicise the "service charge" which they impose.

I fully agree and go by your principles set out here. Other networks members may vary.

It is important to appreciate that the abuse of 084 numbers has tarnished their standing in the minds of many as they perceive it as the numbers which are wrong and should be abolished completely. This is the sort of outcome seen in other areas and not just telecommunications.

The sheer number of users of these numbers is a testiment to the lack of declaration of any service charge and frequent quoting of one provider's atypical call rates. The former is necessary in a multi-provider system as lines must be drawn between what is the caller's (provider's) responsibility and what is the receiver's (provider's) responsibility.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by Dave on Jul 17th, 2011 at 11:22am
I've just come across this Word document on the website of the Ashley Medical Centre in Bangor, Northern Ireland:

http://www.ashleymedicalcentre.co.uk/website/Z00256/files/NEG_RESPONSE_TO_DAILY_MAIL_ARTICLE_AND_OTHER_ANTI_084_CAMPAIGNERS.doc

Its title is "NEG RESPONSE TO DAILY MAIL ARTICLE AND OTHER ANTI 084 CAMPAIGNERS"

It's linked to from the Practice Policies page (click on the Telephone System tab). It says at the end that it was last updated on 11th May 2011.

Is it referring to this Daily Mail article of 2 May 2011?:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/bills/article-1721790/Millions-still-pay-premium-rates-to-call-GP.html

The first paragraph of the NEG statement is:

Quote:
Anti-0844 campaigners have been circulating material to surgeries claiming they will be in breach of their contract if they continue to use 084 numbers.  They simply have got their facts wrong

What is the situation in Northern Ireland with respect to use of 084 numbers? The document talks about the Department of Health which only applies to England.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 17th, 2011 at 1:06pm

Dave wrote on Jul 17th, 2011 at 11:22am:
I've just come across this Word document on the website of the Ashley Medical Centre in Bangor, Northern Ireland:
...
What is the situation in Northern Ireland with respect to use of 084 numbers? The document talks about the Department of Health which only applies to England.

This is familiar NEG material, full of factual inaccuracies. As they do not bother to identify mine, I will leave those in this document unstated.

The one exception worth mentioning is that the "relevant legislation" referred to applies neither to NEG nor to the Ashley Medical Centre! This gives a clue as to the extent to which the remainder of the document is off the point.

Last time I did a check there were very few 084 numbers used by NHS GPs in Northern Ireland. If anyone finds differently, I will be very happy to add them to my database.

A quick scan of the dhsspsni website suggests that there has been no recent revisions to the GMS contract similar to those applied in England and Wales.

Title: Re: NEG propaganda
Post by speedy on Jul 18th, 2011 at 4:33am
Why has no PCT pointed out that a letter from NEG or other similar Companys which are NOT the Telephony Providors - they are only the System ( Hardware ) Suppliers - is NOT appropriate - The Telephone Providers in NEG case is Talk Talk - THEY are the people that set the Charges not NEG or similar - it is because the PCTs have been mis-informed from higher up  >:(

Has this been put directly to NEG and the like and IF they answered what was it and why are they lying to GPs about being the Telephont Providor

When PCTs ask for the Call Charge confirmation from GPs they should point out that a letter from NEG is NOT what is required to the PCTs request

I will answer my original Question regarding one PCT that I have been liasing with and when I informed her of all of the points that I have collected from various Threads and posts that I have found on this site regarding the mis-infomation that NEG has conned MOH and higher and she was horrified because the PCT had unwittingly passed this mis-infomation to the GPs that was passed to them

I then helped her onto this Site and relavant Sections - which she said would make very enlightened reading  

I then myself later found the Thead Titled NEG Propaganda which I will tell her of but tell her to start from about page 37 because earlier pages links dont work now and prices are out of date

Title: Daisy Surgery Line propaganda
Post by Dave on Nov 9th, 2011 at 8:50pm
Wye Surgery in Kent has quite recently gone over to a 0844 Business Rate number.

There is no date of change, but there is a page about the new phone system which contains links to three documents (all in PDF):


Title: Re: Daisy Surgery Line propaganda
Post by SilentCallsVictim on Nov 11th, 2011 at 4:17am

Dave wrote on Nov 9th, 2011 at 8:50pm:
Wye Surgery in Kent has quite recently gone over to a 0844 Business Rate number.

There has been extensive commentary on this story on the "Wyeweb" community web site.
See the items -
[list bull-bluesq]
  • Will you be phoning the doctor? [list bull-bluesq]
  • 084 Telephone Number – Statement from Wye Surgery [list bull-bluesq]
  • More on the 0844 issue

    On the more general issue of factual information concerning what we must now know as DAISY Surgery Line,
    after seeing the document - Enhanced Telephony - THE FACTS:
    [list bull-blacksq]
  • I have published a blogging - Daisy Surgery Line and "Enhanced Telephony",
    which aims to cover the issues comprehensively. [list bull-blacksq]
  • I have also issued a media release and MP briefing - Daisy Group endorses "co-funding" for access to NHS services,
    which primarily addresses the issue of principle at the heart of my concern over this matter. Members or readers are welcome to use any of the information and references in my published material, with or without attribution, although please take care not to do so irresponsibly. My circulation lists are extensive, but no harm need be done by possible duplication.

  • Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by idb on Dec 8th, 2011 at 12:38am
    NEG has agreed to amend / withdraw inaccurate and misleading statements from marketing material on its website. See http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications.aspx#2

    NEG Ltd t/a Network Europe Group      7 December 2011      1      Internet (on own site)      Computers and telecommunications

    I note that some of its lies are still evident within one of the case studies on its website, but other case studies containing the false statements have been removed.

    http://www.networkeuropegroup.com/pdf/gps/practice-managers.pdf

    Patients benefit by having their calls
    answered more quickly. The engaged
    tone becomes rare – even at peak times -
    because you are able to handle incoming
    calls more efficiently, whilst patient calls
    are spread out during the day. Calls to
    084 or ‘lo-call’ numbers cost patients 4p
    per minute, the same as the first minute
    of BT’s standard call rate between 6am
    and 6pm. This means that many
    patients will actually pay less in total
    because their call is answered and
    processed more quickly. Significantly, the
    cost of calls from mobiles remains
    unchanged - these account for around
    30% of all calls to surgeries.

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jun 6th, 2012 at 6:45pm
    Perhaps it is time to resurrect this thread as the most appropriate place for a posting that may be of interest to viewers of "The Apprentice" and those following the threat of industrial action by doctors.

    Now is perhaps the time for a businessman, who has publicly declared himself to be sickened by overblown claims and committed to the belief that command of the detail is vital, to address a simple question.

    It may also be a good time for the BMA to be clear about whether it is encouraging greed by some of its members, or if they are the innocent victims of a foolish business decision.

    These obtuse comments may be made clear by reading the following press release - Who is undermining the NHS - GPs or a private sector businessman? - and the open message referred to within it.

    (N.B. Neither the news release nor the open message are issued in the name of the Fair Telecoms Campaign. This is of course, an issue which is currently high on the fairtelecoms agenda.)

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by idb on Jul 10th, 2012 at 11:49pm
    The Surgery Line / NEG Ltd response to the Ofcom Simplifying Non-geographic Numbers consultation is available at http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/non-geo-numbers/responses/Surgery_Line.pdf

    Including

    Most importantly our product ensures that patients can access their primary care provider first time, every time, unlike the millions of patients who face the engaged tone every month when trying to get through to their doctor. Surgery Line is hugely popular amongst our GP clients and a force for good in the NHS.
    [...]
    We consider Surgery Line, and enhanced telephony on the whole, as a force for good in the NHS as the gateway to primary care.
    [...]
    Since its inception, Surgery Line has been committed to improving patient access to the NHS. Our personal experience of failing to get through our GPs drove us to provide a system which meant patients can get through every time.
    [...]
    Under the terms of the contract the revenue share is not a profit for GPs and is reserved purely to finance the cost of the system and any additional improvements. This is allowed under the NHS Regulations provided that “having regard to the arrangement as a whole” calls do not cost more than an equivalent local rate call. This context is vital to understanding our need to protect socially valuable services, and ensuring that these proposals do not have implications for patient access and experience in the NHS.
    [...]
    Essentially, Surgery Line do not want to see consumers being penalised for ringing NGN numbers or changes which result in the current G6/G11 points being priced, on the whole, at more than a geographic call.
    [...]
    We have significant concerns that the fear of fines and banning of services (as detailed in the existing regulatory arrangements) will deter GPs from using an ETS based on a 0844 number to improve services, despite their strong support and demand for the Surgery Line product. Furthermore, potential regulatory measures including prohibiting access and an immediate service ban are not suitable for NHS services, where patients must have continued, and uninterrupted access to primary care. Additional regulatory pressures (including potential increased data regulation responsibilities) would be inevitably passed onto GPs, and would act as a further deterrent to the take up ETS.”
    [...]
    We believe that an industry code alone would be the most appropriate way to regulate the market, not inclusion in the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) rules, as this may not be appropriate in its entirety.
    [...]
    Communicating with our customer base of over 1,000 surgeries would require an extensive educational campaign and require significant staff time to article this information. Again, this is difficult to quantify without proposals being clear.

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by catj on Jul 11th, 2012 at 1:39am
    It's good to see NEG repeatedly put into print the assertion that "calls [to 0844 numbers] do not cost more than an equivalent local rate call". It makes it easier to show that it's untrue.

    NHS regulations require that callers pay no more to call a GP than calling a geographic 01 or 02 number using the same method (i.e. calling both from a landine or calling both from a mobile).

    Mobile phone contract deals usually come with a number of inclusive minutes to 01/02/03/07 numbers.

    Not taking into account the value of any text message allowances and internet access that is also bundled with many of the current deals, and assuming all of the minutes are used, contracts cost in the region of:
        *10 pounds for 50 minutes (20 pence per minute) to 100 minutes (10 pence per minute);
        *15 pounds for 100 minutes (15 pence per minute) to 200 minutes (7.5 pence per minute) to 300 minutes (5 pence per minute);
        *25 pounds for 300 minutes (8.33 pence per minute) to 400 minutes (6.25 pence per minute);
        *30 pounds for 600 minutes (5 pence per minute);
        *35 pounds for 600 minutes (5.83 pence per minute) to 900 minutes (3.89 pence per minute);
        *45 pounds for 1200 minutes (3.75 pence per minute).

    These are approximate figures as each network varies their deals a little.

    The inclusive minutes can be used to call 01/02/03/07 numbers. They cannot be used to call 0844 and most other types of non-geographic numbers.

    If some or all of the included text message allowance and/or internet allowance is also used, the effective pence per minute rate for calling 01/02/03 numbers is even lower than the above estimates.

    If only half of the inclusive minutes are used, the effective pence per minute rate for calling 01/02/03 numbers is, in the vast majority of cases, still very much less than the additional price of calling an 0844 number.

    Calls to 0844 numbers cost 20.4, 25, 35, 40 or 41 pence per minute depending on the provider and the deal, and the majority charge 35 pence per minute or more.

    Mobile phone 'Pay as you Go' deals are simply charged at a fixed pence per minute rate, with calls to 0844 numbers usually costing more than to 01/02/03 numbers. In some cases it is possible to purchase a larger amount of minutes for calling 01/02/03 numbers for a fixed fee. 0844 numbers are not included. Some of these plans are detailed below.

    It is easy to compare the prices for 0844 numbers and for 01/02/03 numbers from the major providers either for out of bundle minutes on contract deals or for pay as you go tariffs. These can be seen below.

    Three mobile contract

        *01, 02 or 03 number: free in inclusive minutes; 25, 30 or 35 pence per minute out of bundle (and only 6 to 8.5 pence per minute on business plans).
        *Add-on bundles for 01/02/03 numbers: 5 pounds for 1000 minutes, 10.21 pounds for 2000 minutes.
        *0844 number: 20.4 or 35 pence per minute depending on the plan and never inclusive.


    Vodafone mobile contract

        *01, 02 or 03 number: free in inclusive minutes; 35 pence per minute out of bundle.
        *0844 number: 35 pence per minute and never inclusive.


    Three mobile pay as you go

        *01, 02 or 03 number: 26 pence per minute (even cheaper with a bundle, e.g. 100 minutes for 10 pounds, 300 minutes for 15 pounds or 500 minutes for 25 pounds).
        *0844 number: 35 pence per minute.


    Vodafone mobile pay as you go

        *01, 02 or 03 number: 25 pence per minute (even cheaper with a bundle, e.g. 100 minutes for 10 pounds, 200 minutes for 15 pounds, 300 minutes for 20 pounds, 500 minutes for 30 pounds).
        *0844 number: 25 pence per minute.


    Orange mobile pay as you go Racoon

        *01, 02 or 03 number: 12 pence per minute.
        *0844 number: 40 pence per minute.


    Orange mobile pay as you go Dolphin

        *01, 02 or 03 number: 25 pence per minute.
        *0844 number: 40 pence per minute.


    Orange mobile pay as you go Monkey

        *01, 02 or 03 number: 25 pence per minute.
        *0844 number: 35 pence per minute.


    O2 mobile pay as you go

        *01, 02 or 03 number: 25p a minute for the first 3 minutes a day then 5p a minute for the rest of the day.
        *0844 number: 25 pence per minute.


    O2 mobile contract

        *01, 02 or 03 number: free in inclusive minutes; 35 pence per minute out of bundle.
        *0844 number: 20.4 or 35 pence per minute and never inclusive.


    Virgin mobile contract

        *01, 02 or 03 number: free in inclusive minutes; 40 pence per minute out of bundle.
        *0844 number: 41 pence per minute and never inclusive.


    Virgin mobile pay as you go

        *01, 02 or 03 number: 26 pence per minute (16 pence per minute on Daily Bonus tariff).
        *0844 number: 41 pence per minute.


    Virgin mobile Original pay as you go

        *01, 02 or 03 number: 21p a minute for the first 5 minutes each day then 6p a minute for the rest of the day.
        *0844 number: 41 pence per minute.


    Someone else may care to look at the charges from T-mobile, ASDA, Tesco, TalkMobile, etc, but they are unlikely to be much different to those listed above.

    The most recent DHS guidelines at:
    http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_132809 specifically state the requirements apply equally for callers using landlines and mobile phones.


    Calls to 0844 numbers usually cost more than calling 01/02/03 numbers.

    0844 numbers are effectively banned for all GPs and have been since April 2010.

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by sherbert on Jul 11th, 2012 at 10:30am
    0844 numbers are effectively banned for all GPs and have been since April 2010.


    However they are still using them, certainly mine is >:(

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by bbb_uk on Jul 11th, 2012 at 5:15pm

    sherbert wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 10:30am:
    0844 numbers are effectively banned for all GPs and have been since April 2012.


    However they are still using them, certainly mine is >:(
    Have you contacted them since the revised/clarification use of 0844 numbers and reminded them that they are breaking DoH guidelines because it costs you more from a Virgin mobile to ring them on their 0844 than a geographical number?


    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 11th, 2012 at 7:00pm

    catj wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 1:39am:
    Mobile phone contract deals usually come with a number of inclusive minutes to 01/02/03/07 numbers.

    Not taking into account the value of any text message allowances and internet access that is also bundled with many of the current deals, and assuming all of the minutes are used, contracts cost in the region of: …

    Are these the "SIM only rates"?

    If not, then they will also include a standardised contribution towards the cost of the handset and any inclusive service arrangement.

    They will always include "line rental" to cover incoming calls, as this is not a separate item for mobile services.




    sherbert wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 10:30am:
    0844 numbers are effectively banned for all GPs and have been since April 2012.

    In fact it was April 2010, with a twelve month period of grace for those currently using them to change their arrangements.

    The ban did however rely on PCTs reading and understanding the terms approved by parliament.
    Unfortunately they were misled by NEG/Daisy/Surgery Line and the BMA/LMCs.

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by catj on Jul 11th, 2012 at 9:54pm
    I amended the original post: "April 2012" corrected to "April 2010".

    It was a simple typo in the second-to-last character of the post.

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by SilentCallsVictim on Jul 12th, 2012 at 12:54am

    catj wrote on Jul 11th, 2012 at 9:54pm:
    I amended the original post: "April 2012" corrected to "April 2010".

    It was a simple typo in the second-to-last character of the post.

    As I had to myself correct a typo in the second word of the last line of my most recent post, I understand.

    My posting was more to offer an explanation for the lack of compliance, than a correction.

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by SilentCallsVictim on Oct 14th, 2012 at 8:23am
    NEG followers may be interested to note a couple of developments.



    After 7½ years with NEG, preceded by 6 years with the leasing company used by NEG, Andrew Wollard has left his position as 'MD'
    (or should that be 'Commercial Director'?) of Daisy Surgery Line, as he puts it on linkedin:

    Quote:
    … to spend some more time with my family and seek out new challenges and ventures

    Let us hope (for the sake of future employers) that either his cv is clear about the actual role which he held, or the talent for misrepresentation,
    which has been reported here as a key feature of NEG, is recognised and exploited.



    Links to the former Surgery Line website now all lead to this page - http://www.surgeryline.com/index.html.

    Quote:
    New website coming soon…

    An archive copy of previous content is held - please contact me (david@fairtelecoms.org.uk?subject=NEG_Archive) if items are needed for any purpose.


    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by bigjohn on Nov 29th, 2012 at 2:53am
    I see losses are  increaseing at Daisy .

    See: http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/Dealer_News/23370/Daisy_Group_cautious_on_months_ahead_after_losses_increase.aspx

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by speedy on Nov 29th, 2012 at 3:36am
    Hurrah !!!

    Look out Mobile based Businesses Daisy are out to screw you just as they have GPs and their Callers - with Daisy if they cant find figures to fit their Sales Pitch then they will invent it.  ::)

    Their GP Surgery Line will eventually run out of Customers because they know none will be renewing at end of Contracts that is the reason they have gone after another Customer Base to Con - Wake-up GPs and smell the roses or should it be Stink Lilly.  >:(

    Beware Mobile based businesses Daisy is coming to get you  ::)

    Which animal is it that leaves a sinking ship ? I am afraid my memory fails me  ;D

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by SilentCallsVictim on Nov 29th, 2012 at 5:54am
    Let us keep things in order.

    Daisy grows by acquisition. It acquired NEG, NEG continued to operate as it always has. Hopes that Daisy would take the good and strong elements of the Surgery Line product, but adjust it to fit the NHS have not yet been realised.

    The financial performance of Surgery Line has been dented by an increasing (although not total) resistance to its proposition to customers. In my view, Daisy has not yet decided what to do with it. The fact that the website has been taken down (with a promise of something to come) may be significant.

    Daisy has (so far) taken NEG as it is and defended it. That is not to say that NEG is fully and properly representative of Daisy and its approach to business in general. It seems that Daisy is content, at least to some degree, to leave its subsidiary businesses to operate as they will. This makes it very difficult to form a valid impression of the group as a whole.

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by idb on Nov 30th, 2012 at 4:16am
    I for one am celebrating Daisy Group's increasing losses. Its subsidiary's lies and deceit has cost the public far more than the GBP 13.8m FY recorded loss. Long may these losses continue until this odious organization has disappeared for good. What it has done is unforgivable, and it needs to be held to account for crimes against telephony.

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by SilentCallsVictim on Feb 28th, 2013 at 2:59am
    At last the new Surgery Line website is up and running.

    Visitors may notice a difference of approach, as it is no longer exclusively a "co-funded" product. The body of the information makes cautious reference to NHS regulations, in a tone which almost suggests that clarification of the ban on use of 0844 number is imminent.

    Links to a special document "NHS Regulations – Supporting GPs with Compliance - Effective January 2013" are presented, almost as a footnote. This document offers a wholly impenetrable and largely incomprehensible opinion on the question of whether callers pay more to call 0844 numbers. A lot of spurious nonsense found in earlier versions has been removed. This document does however fail in its third paragraph by suggesting that GPs need not consider each and every patient of the practice.

    Whatever the merits of the complex arguments that follow, this suggestion strikes at the core principle of the NHS being a "universal" service. NHS-contracted GPs have a statutory duty to have regard to the NHS constitution which states this well-understood principle clearly.

    The contractual requirement is not based on determining whether 0844 or geographic numbers are cheaper, in some general sense. It prohibits use of numbers which, having regard to the arrangement as a whole, are more expensive. If this were even true for a small, but significant, minority of callers, then use of such a number would be prohibited. One cannot be sure of the mix of tariffs which apply to callers to any particular practice, however it is inevitable that a significant number of callers (in most cases a majority) will pay more to call a 0844, than a geographic, number.

    We must remember that the NHS is all about minorities - everyone in need of healthcare. At any time, it is funded by the taxes paid by the healthy majority so that services may be provided to the minority that need them. Over time, an individual citizen may move between the two groups, at rates which vary between them, but at any time it is the needy minority which is the sole focus of the NHS. (There are other ways of funding healthcare, but we are concerned here only with the NHS.)

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by idb on Mar 24th, 2013 at 3:22am
    http://www.yellowad.co.uk/news.cfm?id=9526&headline=Fury%20over%20GP%E2%80%99s%20premium%20rate%20phone%20line

    Fury over GP’s premium rate phone line

    <<
    A DOCTOR’S surgery has been criticised for making patients use a premium rate telephone line.

    Patients making appointments at the Clayhill Medical Practice in the Vange Health Centre must call an 0844 number.

    A county council candidate has questioned the ethics of employing the expensive phone line.

    Melissa McGeorge, Labour candidate for Pitsea, said she had received complaints from residents about the extra charges.

    She said: “I had one lady who got an £8 phone bill for calling her doctor’s surgery. It’s obscene.

    “I can’t find another doctor’s surgery in the borough that is still charging people premium rates.”

    Government rules brought into force in April 2011 state that doctor’s surgeries cannot use 0844 numbers which cost more to dial than local numbers.

    The rules state that ‘persons will not pay more to make relevant calls to the practice than they would to make equivalent calls to geographical locations’.

    NHS South Essex said the surgery was looking into changing the number.

    Spokeswoman Susan Morris-Newnham said: “The practice met with their telephone supplier in February in the hope of re-negotiating their contract and these discussions are still ongoing.

    “The practice is continuing to investigate all other options, including the introduction of a new local telephone number that can run alongside in the 0844 number.”
    >>

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by speedy on Mar 24th, 2013 at 2:37pm
    Why are these PCTs pretending to the Public that they know nothing about 03 Migration, they have had all the information particularly with reference to the 03 Migration within the terms of the Provider Contract without penalty.

    The now free offer from a Provider of a Geo. Line to run alongside is not Compliance. This 2-Tier System is not the answer and should be labelled 2nd Class Line, while the wealthy use the 0844 and get an Appointment and better service. Some Practices that have installed this 2-Tier Service have also put Hazard Warning In Emergency phone 0844   That says it all.

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by bigjohn on Mar 27th, 2013 at 7:12pm

    I see Daisy have some fresh finance.

    http://www.mobiletoday.co.uk/Dealer_News/24792/Daisy_Group_on_takeover_hunt_after_snaring_fresh_finance.aspx

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by idb on May 5th, 2013 at 11:55pm
    http://www.surgeryline.com/surgery-line/faqs/

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Why have you stopped marketing the 0844 number to GPs surgeries?

    We have always listened to the needs of our customers, undertaking extensive work to help support them with compliance and developing solutions which help meet the very significant demands placed upon frontline NHS staff and improved access for patients.

    However, we will not stand in the way of public opinion. We will continue to work in the interests of our GP customers and develop solutions which support them to improve their service to patients, however, we have taken the decision to no longer proactively market the 0844 product to NHS-related organisations.

    We will continue to work with our GP customers to develop alternative solutions, supporting them by providing them with the products of their choice.

    There is a news release on the fair telecoms web site: http://www.fairtelecoms.org.uk/1/post/2013/05/daisy-surgery-line-ends-0844-numbers-for-nhs-gps.html

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by loddon on May 6th, 2013 at 8:09am

    idb wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 11:55pm:
    http://www.surgeryline.com/surgery-line/faqs/


    This piece from the Surgery Line site states :---

    "Frequently Asked Questions

    Why would a practice change to 03 or even a local intelligent number?


    The only way that a busy practice will EVER eliminate the engaged tone is to use an intelligent 03 or intelligent geographic number ..........."


    So now we have it, at last, from the arch-villains who have made all sorts of untrue claims in the past about geo versus non-geo numbers.   They have finally admitted and confirmed what we have said for many years -- that everything that is claimed as capability on non-geographic numbers is equally available with geographic numbers -- except revenue sharing or micro-payments as Ofcom like to call them.  This proves that there is absolutely no need for non-geographic numbers at all and as we have said they have always been a RIP-OFF.  We campaigners are quite happy to make an exception, however, for 03 numbers which must charged at the same rate as geographic numbers.

    One strange statement by Surgery Line "intelligent 03 number"; what do they mean by this?   When is an 03 not intelligent?  (Rhetorical of course.)  ;) :)


    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by SilentCallsVictim on May 6th, 2013 at 11:47am

    idb wrote on May 5th, 2013 at 11:55pm:

    Quote:
    Frequently Asked Questions

    Why have you stopped marketing the 0844 number to GPs surgeries?

    Many thanks to idb for drawing attention to the Daisy website updates to reflect the comment made to Wales on Sunday.

    The fair telecoms campaign blogging now includes a briefing on the full Daisy statement
    This Statement was published after publication of the Wales on Sunday article and our news release.


    If anyone is interested in before / after comparisons, we have retained copies of the now-amended pages, as cached by Google prior to the events of early Sunday morning..

    Title: Re: NEG propaganda
    Post by loddon on May 6th, 2013 at 1:03pm
    Further to my earlier post in this thread which quotes Surgery Line as stating ;---

    "The only way that a busy practice will EVER eliminate the engaged tone is to use an intelligent 03 or intelligent geographic number ....."

    We should realise that Surgery Line have not entirely reformed their tendency to mislead, be economical with the truth and over-exaggerate things till they become untrue.   As ever they say that "The only way that a busy practice will EVER ...."  which is obviously untrue because there are other ways to achieve that objective.   They hint at the option to increase the number of lines, or the practice could make use of ISDN lines.   The cost/benefit analysis of alternative approaches would need to be evaluated of course.    A practice can also change its policies to avoid peak call times by NOT refusing to allow patients to book appointments more than a day ahead thereby causing a mad panic, and peak calls, first thing in the morning; and there could be other policy moves and actions which could be taken.

    Let us hope that Surgery Line will in time become more honest and truthful.

    SAYNOTO0870.COM » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
    YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.