Hi All,

BBC Board To Decide About Possible Switch From 084 and 087 Numbers to 03 on Monday 21st April - Please Email the BBC Board & BBC Trust's Members

I have been told by a reliable source at the top management level of the BBC's Marketing, Communications and Audience section (which also controls the activities of BBC Information) that at its scheduled meeting this coming Monday, 21st April, the BBC's Executive Board (see www.bbc.co.uk/info/running/executive/index.shtml) will consider a paper that will consider the case for the BBC adopting a policy that would require all external contact numbers with the BBC (ranging from its main BBC Information call centre to regional radio station numbers and numerous individual program 087/084 audience line numbers) to change to 03 numbers.

When my source originally spoke to me some months ago they indicated there was a 90%+ likelihood their paper would recommend a switch to 03 numbers and they telephoned me to discuss this proposal to test whether the reaction of the SayNoTo0870 campaign (since I am one of the campaign's most long running, regular and staunchest critics of the BBC over its use of 084 and 087 numbers) would respond positively to such a change.  They were concerned about the fact that 03 numbers did not yet seem to then be very widely used or recognised by the public (last November) but told me that their research so far indicated that if the BBC's contract(s) with their telecoms and/or main call centre suppliers was renewed or renegotiated to enable a switch to 03 the actual cost to the BBC of using 03 numbers, instead of 084 and 087, was likely to be negligible in terms of the total cost of the contract, even though it might mean a very slight cost increase.

My reason for this post is because consideration of this paper by the BBC Board was put back after Ofcom decided to postpone the ending of revenue share on 0870 from 1st Feb 2008 in Autumn 2007 (on the amazing grounds that Ofcom was apparently so incompetent it had not previously anticipated problems with automated burglar diallers calling 0870 numbers with call price announcements) .  I was naturally concerned the BBC might, as a result, just decided to continue with 0845 and 0870 and even 0871 (Question Time tickets for future shows line) unless and until Ofcom eventually announced a date to end 0870 revenue sharing.  However in the event the paper is now going forwards to the BBC Board but what I don't know is what recommendation it is making in the light of Ofcom's delay/cancellation of 0870 call charge changes and whether that recommendation might have in any way changed.  I would be concerned for instance whether this paper might consider that the BBC could get away with switching to say 5p per minute 0844 numbers, on which any lost revenue share in the weekday daytime would be made up for by higher call charges on weekday evenings and the weekend when the majority of viewers and listeners call the BBC.

I believe that in order to put pressure on the BBC Board to take the right decision (make it compulsory for all contact numbers used by the BBC for normal contact other than quiz/prize lines or voting lines to switch to 03) it would help if as many well informed members as possible of SayNoTo0870 wrote to all BBC Board Members and all members of the BBC Trust setting out their own personal views as to why a public sector organisation like the BBC can only acceptably use 01, 02 or 03 prefixed numbers.

I don't think the email needs to be massively long as these are busy people.

The main arguments should focus on matters such as:-

1) The latest COI guidance suggests that where cost to the citizen consumer and providing equal access to all consumers is an issue that 03 numbers should now be considered.

2) The cost of calling 0845 and 0870 are vastly above the cost of normal 01/02/03 calls for those paying per minute and also many other consumers now pay nothing per minute to call 01/02/03 (due to a fixed price monthly call package covering all calls to these numbers) but calls cost up to 40p per minute on mobile phones to 084 and 087 prefixed numbers.

3) The BBC has already been badly tarnished with allegations of telephone sleaze regarding various game show lines (including Blue Peter) using 09 numbers where viewers were encouraged to continue dialling while lines had already closed and/or the prize was not given to a genuine member of the public calling the 09 line but to a pre-arranged individual chosen by the director/producer of the show.  This image of sleaze is only exacerbated by the BBC using 084/7 numbers perceived as covert premium rate and/or as involving a revenue share to the BBC.  Switching to 03 for all its normal numbers would restore public confidence in the image of the BBC and the public's enthusiasm for making contact with it and engaging with it.

4) Contrary to claims that the BBC does not earn a revenue share on its current 084/7 numbers the reality is that the revenue earned by the owner of the numbers(Cable & Wireless) appears to lower the costs of the BBC's outgoing calls and/or the supply of telephony hardware and/or phone line rental costs in a manner that would not be possible if 084/7 numbers were not being used by Cable & Wireless to cross subsidise the price charged to the BBC for these facilities.

The email addresses for the members of the BBC Board and Trust to send your email

BBC Board

www.bbc.co.uk/info/running/executive/biographies.shtml
Minutes of Recent meetings are at www.bbc.co.uk/info/running/executive/minutes.shtml

Director General - Mark Thompson -  mark.thompson@bbc.co.uk
Deputy Director General - Mark Byford - mark.byford@bbc.co.uk
Director, Audio & Music - Jenny Abramsky - jenny.abramsky@bbc.co.uk
Director, Vision - Jana Bennett - jana.bennett@bbc.co.uk
Director, Marketing, Communications & Audiences - Tim Davie - tim.davie@bbc.co.uk
Director, Future Media & Technology - Ashley Highfield - ashley.highfield@bbc.co.uk
Director, BBC People - Stephen Kelly - (no standard BBC email address - try trust.enquiries@bbc.co.uk & ask them to forward)
Group Finance Director - Zarin Patel - zarin.patel@bbc.co.uk
CEO - BBC Worldwide - John Smith - john.smith@bbc.co.uk
Chief Operating Officer - Caroline Thomson - zzCaroline.zzThomson@bbc.co.uk
Non Exec - Marcus Agius - marcus.agius@bbc.co.uk
Non Exec - Val Gooding - val.gooding@bbc.co.uk
Non Exec - Dr Mike Lynch - mike.lynch@bbc.co.uk
Non Exec - David Robbie - david.robbie@rexam.com
Non Exec - Dr Samir Shah - samir.shah@bbc.co.uk
Non Exec - Robert Webb - robert.webb@bbc.co.uk

BBC Trust

www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/about/bbc_trust_members/index.html
Minutes of Recent Meetings are at www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/about/meetings_and_minutes/bbc_trust_minutes.html

Chairman - Michael Lyons - michael.lyons@bbc.co.uk
Vice-Chairman - Chitra Bharucha - chitra.bharucha@bbc.co.uk
Trustee - Dermot Gleeson -  dermot.gleeson@bbc.co.uk
Trustee - Patricia Hodgson - patricia.hodgson@bbc.co.uk
Trustee - Janet Lewis-Jones - janet.lewis-jones@bbc.co.uk
Trustee - Jeremy Peat - jeremy.peat@bbc.co.uk
Trustee - Diane Coyle - diane.coyle@bbc.co.uk
Trustee - Alison Hastings - alison.hastings@bbc.co.uk
Trustee - Rotha Johnston - rotha.johnston@bbc.co.uk
Trustee - David Liddiment - david.liddiment@bbc.co.uk
Trustee - Mehmuda Mian Pritchard - mehmuda.mian.pritchard@bbc.co.uk
Trustee - Richard Tait - richard.tait@bbc.co.uk

Also send an email marked "URGENT - For the Attention of all BBC Trust Trustees" to - trust.enquiries@bbc.co.uk - this will provide hard copy and/or a faxed copy and/or an an additional email copy to their main private (non BBC) email address (according to their standing instructions with the BBC Trust office's staff) to any Trust members who do not regularly check their BBC email address (the minority from my previous experience where most emails are being read within a few hours and often in the evening)

A call from my main contact at the BBC Viewer & Listeners Section today indicated that we may be pushing at a door that is already fairly ready to fall open on this issue.

He wouldn't commit himself firmly on the recommendation in the paper to the board except that he then let out "perhaps will be the first major public sector organisation to switch to 03"......... I had to tell him that a Police force and an out of hours PCT number (not to mention the Ofcom Contact Centre) had already beaten the BBC to it in the public sector.

So no harm I would say in writing to the BBC saying you hear they are discussing a possible change to 03 number use on Monday and that you strongly support any recommendation to the BBC Board to switch to 03 as a method of enhancing the BBC's reputation over phone numbers and ensuring that consumers of all income groups can engage with it.

However I think it would be a mistake to slate or attack the BBC's senior management too heavily over previous BBC misdeeds on 084/7 as it appears that the decision is probably likely to go our way and so we don't want to look like a dangerous group of unreasonable radicals as this might allow those not on our side (I would strongly suspect Zarin Patel the finance director and John Smith, the former tough nut Chief Operating Officer and now head of the commercial  BBC worldwide - who both always delete my emails on this topic without reading them  - probably fall in to this camp) to try to persuade the Board to select any other less palatable alternatives in the paper such as the BBC switching to all 0845 or 5p per minute 0844 numbers.

So its probably best to congratulate the BBC senior execs on recognising the importance of this issue and encourage them to do the right thing on Monday on 03 in order to improve and restore the BBC's public perception with the average UK licence payer (i.e. their customers).

NGMsGhost wrote on Apr 18^th, 2008 at 4:14pm:

So its probably best to congratulate the BBC senior execs on recognising the importance of this issue and encourage them to do the right thing on Monday on 03 in order to improve and restore the BBC's public perception with the average UK licence payer (i.e. their customers).

And their paymasters.

Heinz wrote on Apr 18^th, 2008 at 4:26pm:

And their paymasters.

I thought a paymaster was somebody able to control your actions and/or your budget.  Whereas BBC licence payers just pay for the service and as it is also compulsory to pay (unless you wish to make do without owning a television at all) they then have no ability to even show their displeasure with the BBC by taking their custom to another broadcasting organisation.

That is of course how we got to 084/7 being introduced as the decision was taken without ever asking licence payers whether they were for it or against it.

Heinz wrote on Apr 18^th, 2008 at 4:26pm:

And their paymasters.

I thought the BBC's paymaster was the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, with whom the settlement was recently renegotiated. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable could advise whether this is enacted using prerogative powers, so the true paymaster is Her Majesty, or by a resolution of parliament.

To prevent the BBC from being subject to undue political pressure in what it does and says, it is not directly accountable for its actions, not to licence fee payers, or to any form of what we would understand as a democratic institution. It is only through lobbying members of the BBC Trust that a citizen could expect to be heard. The BBC executive is of course aware of this and makes every effort to appear accountable to listeners, viewers and website users.

I do however agree with NGMsG; if a victory is about to be announced, now is not the time to have a go. For now, we must stand ready to believe that the recently redesigned BBC model of governance is the best there could be.


If the BBC is to move to 03, then let it make as much noise about it as it wishes (even touching the boundaries of strict factual accuracy if it so desires). The BBC is in a much better position to promote knowledge and use of 03, than Ofcom or ourselves. Ofcom's paymasters would not take kindly to it paying for the amount of TV advertising of 03 that the BBC could provide.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Apr 18^th, 2008 at 7:36pm:

I do however agree with NGMsG; if a victory is about to be announced, now is not the time to have a go. For now, we must stand ready to believe that the recently redesigned BBC model of governance is the best there could be.

I believe the miraculous Road To Damascus like conversion at the BBC apparently about to take place is due to the extraordinarily bad publicity over scams on 09 prize and voting lines suffered by the BBC and other broadcasters.  The change subsequently has been quite dramatic as most of the disgusting late night 09 quiz shows where it was almost impossible to win the prize and almost no one actually got through have now been scrapped on mainstream channels (except Five where the host is a particlarly nauseous gentleman who still whips naive and lonely prople up in to a frenzy of "you can win, win, win" or similar).

A decision was clearly taken by the BBC to restore its image on the phone call front following the Blue Peter and other similar scams.  They have therefore decided to extend this to 03 numbers where they know that they had a lower level bad image and many, many complaints to BBC Information.  I suspect this is being pushed through by Mark Thompson (the Director General) and one or two other senior directors responible for corporate image over the heads of the pleadings of Capita and Cable & Wireless that they could go on getting away with 084/7 number use.


Quote:

The BBC is in a much better position to promote knowledge and use of 03, than Ofcom or ourselves. Ofcom's paymasters would not take kindly to it paying for the amount of TV advertising of 03 that the BBC could provide.

Indeed if the BBC does move to 03 then I would expect various BBC programs that could investigate the 084/7 scam properly (eg particularly Panorama) might suddenly be inclined to take a much more active interest in this subject.  It is perfectly ok to admit the BBC was hoodwinked by Cable & Wireless and Capita in to participating in a massive scam 084/7 industry if by the time the Panorama expose program occurs the BBC can say it has kicked the habit and is now beyond reproach.

If the BBC does go to 03 I believe it will have a massive domino effect on the public sector from people like the NHS Direct through the DVLA and Immigration and Passport Service to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs to Employment Benefit etc.  The BBC is sure to promote the use of their new 03 number and it only being the price of a normal call extensively in order to derive the maximum PR benefit from the change. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

What happened then?

Cruz wrote on Apr 24^th, 2008 at 4:35pm:

What happened then?

The BBC haven't volunteered any information so I will have to email my contact to ask him what decision was taken.  However he may perhaps have been annoyed about my post on this website encouraging people to email the BBC Executive's Directors.  This may then in turn have caused the Executive Board members to ask some interesting questions about why they were receiving lobbying emails on this matter before the meeting.

Anyhow I will ask and see if he will tell me what happened.  Failing that the BBC will publish minutes of the decisions taken at this meeting on its website in due course.

A massive result!!

Just got an email from BBC Trust Unit. An extract -

"The BBC's management has been considering the process of changing from using 0870 numbers and decided on 22 April 2008 to move to 0370 numbers. These are charged at the same UK-wide rate as 01 and 02 geographical numbers and therefore included in the many discount packages offered by different telecom providers. "


Well done everyone, I am sure this is a major victory and I think it has been brought about, in large part,  by the small band of campaigners on this site.

I am looking forward to sticking this one to the DVLA, DSS and Sky etc.



Mike

mikeparris wrote on May 8^th, 2008 at 5:37pm:

Just got an email from BBC Trust Unit. An extract - "The BBC's management has been considering the process of changing from using 0870 numbers and decided on 22 April 2008 to move to 0370 numbers. These are charged at the same UK-wide rate as 01 and 02 geographical numbers and therefore included in the many discount packages offered by different telecom providers. "

Well done to the BBC for switching to 03. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

This shows that the BBC is not convinced that Ofcom's proposals for 0870 reform will be effective.

We should note that ITV is going in the opposite direction and changing towards 0844 revenue sharing numbers for viewers' enquiries and all its offices' direct dialling in numbers.

Fantastic! Well done everyone.  :D

I wonder what factors went into their decision?

longusername wrote on May 8^th, 2008 at 6:11pm:

Fantastic! Well done everyone.  :D I wonder what factors went into their decision?

I hope it had something to do with the ever-so-polite e-mail I sent to Tim Davie on 19 April 2008.


Quote:

I understand the BBC is shortly to make a decision on whether to abandon 087 numbers and change exclusively to 03 numbers. Like many people, I rarely call 084, 087 or 09 numbers because, although only the last is officially designated as a 'Premium Rate' number, I regard the others as premium rate too - simply because I would have to pay a premium if I called them (all my calls to normal numbers are included in my telephone package). What has urged me to write to you to express my view is that my local police force (Essex Police) took the lead last month by introducing a 0300 number for non-emergency contact.  Having served as an officer in that force for more than 30 years (8 years in the communications department), I was particularly proud they took such a brave decision. I hope the BBC can similarly 'take the lead' and recover some of the high ground it used to hold. Kind regards. P.S. I have never understood why you have some freephone numbers - perhaps scrapping them would be a good money-saver!

But if it didn't, who cares?

Dave wrote on May 8^th, 2008 at 6:11pm:

We should note that ITV is going in the opposite direction and changing towards 0844 revenue sharing numbers for viewers' enquiries and all its offices' direct dialling in numbers.

But ITV has got to rake in as much as it can to pay the £5,760,000 Ofcom fine imposed for ripping viewers off with premium rate phone-ins.

Well done everyone and well done NGM Ghost for starting the thread in the first place.

Is it worth us all emailing ITV and pointing out:

a) the difference between them and the BBC in their actions
b) how the publicity of using an 0844 may appear after todays action by OFCOM - looks like lessons haven't been learnt.

Ironically I have never received this email from the BBC Trust today and nor has my original contact at the BBC ever come back to me to tell me what happened at their Board Meeting .

However I did receive the below email from Angie Nehring, Deputy Editor of You & Yours back on April 24th, effectively confirming that the decision did go through at the BBC Board meeting on April 21st.

I feel calls by SCV for a press release (well in fact its too late to stop him as he has already issued one apparently taking most of the credit/cuedos for work that was mainly done by I and Derrick) calling for congratulation are premature as the BBC has only taken a decision in principle on the matter and must now negotiate execution and delivery date with its telecoms supplier Cable & Wireless and its call centre partner, Capita.

We can only be confident the BBC will bring in 03 numbers when it puts out a press release giving the conversion date of its biggest volume 0870 number (BBC Information) to 03 and the reasons why it has chosen to do so.  Until that takes place there is always every opportunity something may go wrong, especially given the appalling confusion caused by the nonsensical press release put out last Friday (May 2nd) by Ofcom suggesting 0870 will be the new saviour of the public when calling contact centres (with no mention of 03 numbers).  

The reality of course is quite different and is that all call centres wanting to earn revenue share like Sky have or soon will have moved to 0844 or 0871 and that the BBC does not want to stay on 0870 (a) because Ofcom's stunning volte face over compulsory call price announcements on 0870 last Friday means that any telecoms company (especially mobile phone companies and sleaze bags like TalkTalk) will be able to charge above geographic call prices unlike 03 numbers without any call price announcement warning and (b) to a lesser extent because the image of 0870 numbers is so irreparably tarnished that remaining on them will not give the impression of the BBC doing the right thing.

But as I say again the BBC Trust is only replying to correspondence here and this is not a formal press announcement of a definite introduction date by the BBC for 03 numbers.  I will therefore be asking my contact at the BBC for further details of when and how 03 numbers will be introduced and when it plans to make a formal press announcement about the replacement of its 084/7 numbers with numbers in the 03 number range.

I would certainly be grateful for any form of explanation by SilentCallsVictim as to why he believes this email from the BBC Trust is currently press releasable and also why his releases/information emails sent to the press under his name probably do not mention those from this campaign who have actually done the most work on this particular matter.


Quote:

-------- Original Message -------- Subject:      FW: You and Yours 070 number - complaint - good timing Date:      Thu, 24 Apr 2008 17:22:23 +0100 From:      Angie Nehring <angie.nehring@bbc.co.uk> Dear _________, Thank you for your email, I'm sorry it's taken me so long to reply. May I reassure you that the reason your email was not read out on air was simply because of the mass of calls and emails we received on the subject of customer service. It's obviously something people feel strongly about. With reference to your particular point on the use of 0870 numbers by the BBC, I have good news to pass on. As of yesterday, the BBC has decided to phase out its use of 0870 in favour of the new 0370 numbers recently made available by Ofcom. This change will enable the audience to call the BBC at the lowest cost to the caller. 0370 calls cost no more than calls to 01/02 geographic numbers and are included in discount packages for both fixed line and mobile contracts. Yours sincerely Angie Nehring Dept Editor You and Yours Sent: 15 April 2008 13:31 To: Peter White-DSHS; Liz Barclay Cc: Katy Johnstone; Mark Damazer; zzMark zzThompson-DG; Mark Byford & PA; Tim Davie; Dear Mr White and Ms Barclay, I tried both to phone your so called "phone-in" program about 12.35pm today (Wednesday 15th April) and sent the below email to you as well but my comments about customer's being abused with excessive 084/7 call charges numbers by many UK call centres have not been let on air. Are you now under strict instructions from senior BBC management to not discuss the 084/7 issue at all on your program? I note that you have not mentioned this issue again for a very long time indeed, despite Ofcom going back on their previous commitments about making 0870 numbers priced on the same basis as 01/02 calls on 1st February 2008. I suspect that producers and presenters on your program have now been told never to mention this issue again on your show by the BBC's senior management (due to its own extensive and widespread cynical use and abuse of these numbers)? Of course you also still even absurdly use an abusive 0870 covert premium rate (see the dictionary definition of the word premium) phone number for calls to the phone in line on your supposedly pro consumer show. Clearly this appears to be yet another example of the modern trend for rotten customer service by a large and faceless organisation that does not appear to listen to or at least take action in response to the views expressed by its customers! I look forward to your comments. Regards,

The primary credit for campaigning effort here must go to NGMsG who suggested that many of us contact the BBC, which led to us receiving a personal email today. It is surprising to learn and ironic that he did not.

The only credit to be given in a news story is to the BBC management for "saying no to 0870" and also showing that Ofcom's efforts on 0870 are unlikely to have any meaningful effect, necessitating it acting for itself.

The BBC will itself give this story a big push when it has sorted out the detail. I believe that a bit of early publicity will put on the pressure for this to done swiftly. The fact that the ITV / Ofcom story is running today and tomorrow may provide a platform on which to cover this matter also.

I would not normally condone discussion of specific tactics in the forum, but I believe that NGMsG is the one to draft a media release, taking such personal credit as he wishes.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2008/may/11/celebrity

ITV's number is up

<<
A footnote to the ITV phone-in affair. Last year, the broadcaster changed all its phone lines over to 0844 numbers which cost 5p per minute to ring and allow them to share in call profits. Now sources tell me it's swapping back to normal London numbers. 'Having moved the whole company over, we're now all being moved back,' I'm informed. 'They turned out to be expensive to ring from a mobile number and impossible to get through to from abroad.' A timely decision.
>>

This is really good news, although again we can't be sure until we see the colour of their money.

Is it just me, or does anyone else get the feeling the tide is turning at long last?

longusername wrote on May 11^th, 2008 at 4:11pm:

does anyone else get the feeling the tide is turning at long last?

Yes, that feeling comes over very strongly. As this will always be a relatively small item on the relevant agendas, it is bound to be a slow process.

Decision makers in public and private bodies are now recognising that public opinion is set strongly against the rip-off of hidden revenue sharing, and some will hold this view for themselves. This is what is important, as this is how change for the better is made.

We must beware of false dawns and note that there is still a very long way to go. I believe that newcomers like myself should however celebrate the successes achieved by those who have been involved in this campaign for many years, as we join them in efforts to achieve further success.

I have just received a reply from the trust after asking them when the BBC are going to implement the change; -


13 May 2008

Dear Mr

Thank you for your email regarding BBC management’s decision to change from 0870 to 0370 numbers.
I should first like to explain that the BBC Trust, for whom I work, is independent and distinct from the BBC’s management. It was the BBC’s management that decided to make the switch and they are managing the process.  I am advised, however, that they hope to make the switch during the summer.

I am unable to give you fuller details at present since they are still being worked out by the BBC’s management, but I hope this is helpful.

Yours sincerely

Victoria Finney

Correspondence Manager

BBC Trust Unit

I just found (via a Google automated news story search email notification) what appears to be this letter from Ian Fannon of Tv Licensing on The Scotsman website.  This is in response to some earlier article of theirs it would appear about the Which article on 084/7 numbers.

See http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/Value-for-money.4171426.jp


Quote:

Value for money TV Licensing's change from 0870 numbers to 0844 numbers (your report, 29 May) was based on providing the best value for money for callers and licence fee payers. An average three-minute call costs less than a second-class stamp. We believe it is fairer for those who want to contact us by telephone to pay for it, rather than being subsidised by all licence fee payers. If people would prefer not to call, they can contact us online or by post. TV Licensing is run by the BBC and is not a government agency, as described in the Which? report. IAN FANNON, TV Licensing, 77 Kingsway, London The full article contains 111 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper. Page 1 of 1    * Last Updated: 10 June 2008 7:10 PM    * Source: The Scotsman    * Location: Edinburgh

So it seems Mr Michael Stock has previously misled me and not all BBC run phone numbers are after all changing to 03.  Since payment of the BBC Licence Fee is actually a huge revenue earning activity for the BBC it seems particularly disgraceful they would charge for the privilege of asking questions about how to pay it.  They even have the gall to admit they are doing this. :o >:(

Also note the point about "less than the cost of a second class stamp" previously used by Eddie Mair on the PM program.  So it is now quite clear these comments were not Mr Mair's own thoughts at all but actually a pre prepared stock propaganda line from the BBC PR department.

It seems that Ian Fannon is Communications Manager of Tv Licensing based on his previous letter to the Guardian newspaper a few weeks ago:-

See www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/may/05/2


Quote:

A licence to scare? In response to Lucy Barrett's article, the information on our database is confidential and is used for the sole purpose of TV Licensing (Somebody, somewhere, is selling you fear, April 28). We comply with the Data Protection Act and none of the data we hold is released to third parties. We take the security of the information we are entrusted with very seriously. A minority of people (about 5%) try to avoid paying the licence fee and our new campaign contains messages designed to deter a potential evader. We continue to work to ensure everyone is aware of the licensing requirements and the effectiveness of our enforcement operation. Research has shown that, in fact, the majority of licence payers (nine out of 10) believe it is appropriate for TV Licensing to highlight anti-evasion messages. Ian Fannon, communications manager, TV Licensing

I think we should all consider write to BBC Board Members condemning the fact that the contact number for BBC Tv Licensing is apparently not going to change to 03.

On second thoughts perhaps it is best to wait till the BBC changes their other numbers to 03 and then launch the broadside against tv licensing still using 0844 at that time in the form of comments to the media about the BBC change to 03 for other contact numbers.

The BBC's "Recent Questions" has this one:


Quote:

Will the BBC stop using 0870 numbers? Yes. The BBC has decided to change from 0870 to a new 0370 number range which was created last year by Ofcom, the telecoms regulator. With the changing telecoms market and greater variety of charging frameworks, it has become clear that 0870 charges are not clear and no longer work well for audiences. 0370 calls cost no more than 01and 02 geographic landline numbers and are included in discount packages for both fixed-line and mobile phones. This enables viewers and listeners to call the BBC at the lowest cost to callers. The BBC has taken time to plan for the switchover of up to 80 different numbers to be as smooth as possible and also at the lowest cost to the licence fee payer. All the BBC’s 0870 numbers will be phased out during the summer of 2008 and replaced with an equivalent 0370 range of numbers. 0870 numbers replaced a previous system where there was no central number to call the BBC on and therefore the cost of calling BBC centres depended on where you live. They were introduced in 1998 so that everyone could call the BBC for the same cost (equivalent roughly to a postage stamp). Local radio 0845 numbers, which have a cheaper ‘local-rate’ charge, and freephone numbers (eg 0800 and 0500) will not be affected by this change..

People might find it rather interesting to look back at what Michael Stock at the BBC was saying to try to justify their use of their 0870 numbers back on 22nd July 2005 compared to their later volte face on this matter.

See http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_4700000/newsid_4706600/4706631.stm

You will see that he was then also perpetrating the "its less than cost of a stamp" argument by claiming (contentiously) that the average call length time to their 0870 numbers was only 3 minutes.

So it is clear that Mr Stock has always been the key front man for the BBC on this issue and hence clearly why he was the person to approach this campaign about a plan by the BBC to change to using 03 numbers when they first started to investigate this proposal during the latter part of 2007.  Hence also why Mr Stock was then the man to write the paper containing the proposal to move to 03 numbers that allegedly went in front of the BBC Executive Board at its meeting in April this year.

However I have just checked and the Minutes of the BBC Executive Board Meeting of 7th April 2008 have now been published but there is no mention of the proposal to switch to using 03 phone numbers or of Michael Stock attending the meeting to present his paper. Unless this was part of Network Supply Review at Item No. 3 in the Minutes?  But it doesn't sound like it was part of Network Supply Review from what is minuted.

Odder and odder.  Have we perhaps been led up the garden path or was this a secret and unminuted decision?  Mr Stock certainly led me to believe the matter would be decided by a paper he had written that was being presented to this meeting.

See www.bbc.co.uk/info/running/executive/pdfs/ebmins_apr08.pdf

I have just realised that the meeting I was told about was due to take place on Monday 21st April, but there are no minutes as yet of such a meeting on the BBC website that publishes the minutes of the Executive Board.

See www.bbc.co.uk/info/running/executive/minutes.shtml

So was there a second meeting of the Executive Board during April and if so are we still awaiting the publication of the minutes of that meeting?

Below is a copy of my email sent today to Ian Fannon at BBC Tv Licensing:-


Quote:

-------- Original Message -------- Subject:      BBC Planning To Retain Its Expensive 0844 Revenue Share Number For Tv Licensing Calls Date:      Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:38:11 +0100 To:      mediaenquiries@tvlicensing.info Dear Mr Fannon, BBC Planning To Retain Its Expensive 0844 Revenue Share Number For Tv Licensing Calls As one of the most active and longstanding members of the www.saynoto0870.com website campaign I was interested to read the comments recently attributed to you in your letter to The Scotsman newspaper (see http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/Value-for-money.4171426.jp) attempting to justify the BBC's apparent planned retention of its new 0844 revenue sharing number for calling Tv Licensing about paying the tv license fee.  This is even though paying the tv license fee is in effect something about which people now have almost no choice and already amounts to a hugely regressive stealth tax on the very poorest members of society, and especially on the poorest members of society on low incomes who are not over 75 and are not on benefits. I thought you might be interested in therefore entering the fray to further defend TV Licensing's position in the discussion that is taking place on this matter on the www.saynoto0870.com website. See www.saynoto0870.com/cgi-bin/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1211964387/ See also the previous discussion a few weeks ago at the stage when members of this campaign had been led to believe by a well informed senior source at the BBC that the BBC Executive Board was planning a switch to 03 prefixed numbers for all of its contact phone numbers.  As you may know unlike 084 and 087 prefixed phone numbers 03 prefixed numbers (only recently introduced by Ofcom in Autumn 2007) do not cost any more to call than a number starting 01 or 02 from a landline or a mobile phone and are also included in all landline inclusive call packages and mobile phone bundled minutes.  By contrast 0844 numbers are not and are charged at up to 40p per minute by some Pay As You Go mobile operators.  Research shows that some of the poorest members of society often do not have a landline and only use a pay as you go mobile phone. See www.saynoto0870.com/cgi-bin/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1208458341/1#1 for the previous discussion about the expected BBC changes to using 03 for all of its phone numbers. I am sure it would further illuminate matters on the www.saynoto0870.com web discussion forum if you were now prepared to join the debate to try to defend TV Licensing's continued use of an 0844 revenue sharing phone number instead of switching to an 0370 normal priced phone number as this campaign had previously been led to believe would be the case by the BBC (given that we were previously told by one of its senior Executives in its communications and audiences division that the BBC was planning to switch to 03 for all its contact phone numbers in all parts of the BBC). I look forward to hearing from you regarding the above matter and/or to possibly seeing a post from you on this subject in the www.saynoto0870.com discussion forum. Regards,

and my later update:-


Quote:

-------- Original Message -------- Subject:      Thread Discussing BBC Licensing 0870 on Saynoto0870.com Website Date:      Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:52:24 +0100 To:      mediaenquiries@tvlicensing.info Dear Mr Fannon, Further to my earlier email I see that all of the thread discussing the question of the BBC's contact phone numbers, including BBC Licensing's phone number, has now been consolidated together at:- www.saynoto0870.com/cgi-bin/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1208458341/0 I hope this is of assistance. Regards,

It seems that the real reason 0844 is being used to contact Tv Licensing is because greedy Capita once again appear to have their fat snouts firmly dug in to the NGN revenue sharing trough.

From www.tvlicensing.co.uk/aboutus/index.jsp


Quote:

"TV Licensing" is a trading name used by companies contracted by the BBC to administer the collection of television licence fees and enforcement of the television licensing system. The majority of administration is contracted to Capita Business Services Ltd, with cash related payment schemes contracted to Revenues Management Services Ltd. Over-the-counter services are contracted to PayPoint Collections Ltd. Marketing and public relations activities are contracted to the AMV Consortium. This consortium is made up of the following four companies: Abbott Mead Vickers BBDO Ltd, Fishburn Hedges Boys Williams Ltd, PHD Media Ltd and Proximity London Ltd. The BBC is a public authority in respect of its television licensing functions and retains overall responsibility.

The plot thickens.  I now find that Mr Michael Stock is also a Board Member of the Contact Centre Association (even though he is not a BBC Executive Board Member).

See www.cca.org.uk/about/Board%20Members.asp

This is a board which also has as a member Rob Pike - the Director of Retail Service Operations at the Royal Bank of Scotland Group (the parent company of NatWest). One of the largest users of 084/7 NGNs in the country!

Then at www.cca.org.uk/about/FP%20Group.asp we find out about the Foundation Partner Group that set up the CCA:-


Quote:

Foundation Partner Group Formed in 1999, the Foundation Partner group is an established forum of both corporate and public sector influences.  Its success to date can be demonstrated by the successful launch of the CCA Standard Framework. Organisations investing in Foundation Partnership have the opportunity to participate in the benefits of corporate membership and are also invited to participate in a wider range of activities which assist CCA in promoting best practice and professionalism and offer the group the opportunity to be involved in driving the collective voice for the industry. Our Foundation Partner Group includes: British Gas BT Capita Department for Work & Pensions HM Revenue & Customs NHS Direct Royal Bank of Scotland Group Royal Mail Sky Subscriber Services Tesco Vodafone Ltd If you would like to become involved in the FP Group please contact Pauline.Cochrane@cca.org.uk or Tel:  +44 (0) 141 564 9384.

Well wouldnt you know it some of the UK's leading and most hardened abusers of 084/7 numbers for all their contact centres are on this group that founded the Contact Centre Association.  BT, Capita (who operate the BBC call centres), Department for Work and Pensions, HMRC, NHS Direct, Royal Bank of Scotland Group, Royal Mail, Sky, Tesco and Vodafone.  In other words all those organisations which are most notorious for abusing customers with 084/7 numbers and for coming up with the same old standard lies and obfuscation to defend their use.  Most disturbing is that four public sector organisations (DWP, HMRC, NHSD and Royal Mail) are part of this aggressive setup to ripoff the call centre customer).  No wonder HMRC and DWP are doing nothing about trying to move away from 0845 to using 03 numbers.

They even use a geographic phone number for members of their own 084/7 abusing fraternity to get in touch with them and better discuss how to ripoff the UK citizen consumer.  Talk about two faced. :o >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

The website is full of lots of flannel about professionalism, standards, excellence and so on but I feel perfectly sure that the CCA is in fact a cartel of some of the country's leading abusers of the consumer by forcing them to call stealth premium rate 084/7 numbers to get in touch.  I think there are a fair few backbench MPs who would be very interested to be more fully informed of the work of the CCA and just who its leading members are.

Unfortunately Michael Stock at the BBC has now sent me the below response to my earlier email.

I am very disappointed indeed by its contents.

I feel that the BBC have totally betrayed and misled me regarding their intended changes now apparently being to switch to using 03 numbers only for those numbers which are currently 0870 (and what is to stop them changing loads of those to 0844 before the 0870 to 0370 conversion date so they also stay as 0844). :o >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif]


Quote:

-------- Original Message -------- Subject:      RE: Thread Discussing BBC Licensing 0870 on Saynoto0870.com Website Date:      Wed, 11 Jun 2008 17:25:18 +0100 From:      Michael Stock A small but important correction to your email - we have been clear that the switch to 0370 was for 0870 nos. A variety of other numbers including 0800, 0845, 0844 etc etc are unaffected. rgds Michael Stock Head of Business & Partnerships BBC Marketing, Communications & Audiences

And this was my reply to Mr Stock:-


Quote:

-------- Original Message -------- Subject:      BBC 0870 to 03 Nmbr Change - Illogical Retention of Premium 084 & 0871 Numbers Including Question Time? Date:      Wed, 11 Jun 2008 22:09:02 +0100 To:      michael.stock@bbc.co.uk CC:      tim.davie@bbc.co.uk, mark.byford@bbc.co.uk, mark.thompson@bbc.co.uk, jana.bennett@bbc.co.uk Dear Mr Stock, Incoherent and Illogical Proposals to Retain BBC 0844, 0845 & 0871 Phone Numbers (including BBC Question Time Audience Line), Whilst Moving 0870 Numbers to 0370, Will Fail To Be Understood by The Public or To Allow The BBC To Regain The Moral High Ground Over Its Phone Numbers Thank you for your reply to my email.  However this latest news that you have provided that only the BBC's 0870 prefixed phone numbers are to be changed to use the 0370 number range in which they will then cost no more than calls to normal priced 01 and 02 prefixed numbers (even on landline and mobile phone inclusive packages) and that many other BBC numbers currently beginning 0844, 0845 or 0871 are to be left exactly as they are and continue to attract premium rate charges for calling them is very unwelcome indeed and also seems entirely illogical and quite irrational on the BBC's part.  The reasons for such an apparently inexplicable, inconsistent and utterly incoherent approach on the BBC's part to its phone number policy are very hard to fathom indeed and I cannot understand why you personally would have agreed to put forward such an illogical proposal to the BBC Board, especially given your own undoubted considerable expertise in the workings of these numbers as demonstrated by your own longstanding position as a Board Member of the Contact Centre Association (see www.cca.org.uk/about/Board%20Members.asp) and the BBC's position as part of the Foundation Partner Group of the CCA along with its major call centre partner Capita. As best I can now see it the BBC is being forced to do something about its 0870 numbers by later on this year (2008) as by that stage measures introduced by Ofcom will eventually mean that it will no longer be possible for the BBC and/or its two business partners involved in receiving phone calls from the public (Capita and Cable & Wireless) to continue earning revenue share on receiving calls from the public but as a result of unfortunate regulatory failings by Ofcom many members of the public will still not enjoy or be guaranteed the same low prices when calling 0870 phone numbers as they can be certain of when calling numbers starting with 01, 02 or 03. As a result of this the BBC has rightly decided to move away from 0870 and to adopt 0370 numbers where the public are guaranteed to pay only normal national rates for phone calls and to have the calls included in their bundled minutes call plans. But if the BBC wishes to restore public confidence that calling the BBC will only cost the price of a normal phone call to a licence payer's friend or relative then why has it chosen to blow this confidence completely out of the water by leaving in place phone numbers where this will continue not to be the case and that will continue to be charged at wholly extortionate rates as high as 40p per minute by unscrupulous telecoms providers (especially mobile phone operators) who seek to take advantage of the fact that technicalities in Ofcom's regulations allow them to charge more than for calling a number starting 01 or 02 by charging an utterly ridiculous rate to call these numbers, whilst also knowing at the same time that many members of the public still wrongly believe these numbers only cost the same to call as a number starting 01 or 02. I am very disturbed indeed to hear that you were in effect economical with the truth when using me as a sounding board for the www.saynoto0870.com campaign last Autumn when testing your proposal that the BBC might switch to using 03 numbers. Your obvious economy with the truth was in failing to proactively mention to me that the BBC would not be ensuring that any of its many numbers starting 0844, 0845 or 0871 were also moved to the 03 number range. Unfortunately your apparent attempt to hide this fact from members of the Saynoto0870.com campaign, albeit by a process of omitting to mention that your proposals did not cover those number ranges rather than by supplying actively misleading information, will go down very badly indeed with our campaign.  I cannot believe that the BBC is still planning to assault the intelligence of the acutely politically aware viewers of Question Time by having David Dimbleby use siren like smugness to suggest that they call a number range (0871) just about to be transferred to the premium rate regulator (Phonepayplus - formerly ICSTIS) in order to participate in future shows. I also cannot see any logic or reason why BBC radio stations and some other programs and services (such as tv licensing) should continue to charge stealth premium rates of up to 40p per minute to call them from mobile phones on numbers that are also excluded from landline and mobile phone bundled minutes and/or inclusive call packages.

                                                                                                                                                                   Continued on Page 3 of Thread/..........

Quote:

Where is the logic or possible rationale for this strategy when, as I understand it, all of the BBC's incoming and outgoing calls pass through Cable & Wireless and all of its large call centres are run for it by Capita.  So why on earth should some calls to the BBC continue to command a ripoff premium rates and be either impossible or problematic to make from outside the UK (especially 0844 and 0871) while other numbers are now finally returned to only costing the same as the price of making a normal national rate call to a licence payer's friend or relative on an 01/02 number, just as used to be the case when calling the old BBC Duty Office in London before the monstrous and generally uncaring and unresponsive Capita run BBC Information call centre edifice was set up some 10 or more years ago. Does the argument from Capita and Cable & Wireless go something like "well we can only afford to give up some of our revenue share income on some of the 084/7 phone calls we get if you can let us hang on to another part of it" or at least something along those lines?.  Whatever the thought process behind this crazed hybrid solution it certainly will not wash, it is not logical or morally coherent and the failure to move all your numbers to 03 will be resoundingly condemned by members of the www.saynoto0870.com campaign as a result. What a shame that the BBC has chosen to ruin what could have been a great PR triumph for it in which it retook the moral high ground over phone calls to the BBC by botching its changes with a half baked approach in which either incompetence, greed or irrationality has caused it to try and continue to retain its unpopular 0844, 0845 and 0871 phone numbers for a substantial proportion of all calls to the Corporation. Yours in great disappointment. Regards,

This is certainly inconsistent with the BBC's reporting of the Which report, where they clearly stated that they were reforming. Specifically I'm thinking of Business Lunch. I can' think of the exact wording used, but as the report referrred to all 08xx numbers, each one in detail on the BBC report, then for the BBC to only change 0870 and claim the BBC is reforming, when they specifically highlighted the problems with 0845 and 0844 and 0871 in their report is very misleading indeed.

Keith wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 7:50am:

This is certainly inconsistent with the BBC's reporting of the Which report, where they clearly stated that they were reforming. Specifically I'm thinking of Business Lunch. I can' think of the exact wording used, but as the report referrred to all 08xx numbers, each one in detail on the BBC report, then for the BBC to only change 0870 and claim the BBC is reforming, when they specifically highlighted the problems with 0845 and 0844 and 0871 in their report is very misleading indeed.

Keith,

I was actually telephoned by the person at the BBC coming up with the paper for the BBC Board about these 03 proposal and he also managed to mislead me in to believing that the BBC was planning to change all its numbers to start 03.   He even asked for me to give him some particularly bad examples of NGN use by the BBC like Question Time and seemed as though he wanted to tackle them all.

Now we find they are only changing 0870 to 0370 and what is to stop them changing a load of 0870s to 0844 before the conversion date so they are not even covered by the conversion program to 0370? :o >:(

Is there any benefit in raising this with Which or Working Lunch. I can't currently as I don't have time. I have emailed Working Lunch before on issues and they have never been raised. I assume because I'm one of thousands so it has to be more proactive.

I do think that the Working Lunch report is now very misleading. As I said I can't think of the exact words used. It might even have been that the BBC is moving from 0870 numbers, but even if it was the context of the report very much implied a different story in that:

a) specific examples of 0845 and 0844 costs and bad practise were given in the BBC report

b) the interviewer used the words 'people in glass houses....' in referecne to the BBC and the response to that was the BBC was moving to 03xx.

Now even if the reference was to 0870 (and I don't know that it was) having covered the items in a) and then saying you are changing from these bad practices implies all the other numbers as well.

A burglar who now robs one house a night and not two is not a reformed character.

I am not trying to defend the Beebs actions but they have said on their site  for a  a while that only 0870 is being changed.

See:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/contactus/questions.shtml


"Will the BBC stop using 0870 numbers?Yes. The BBC has decided to change from 0870 to a new 0370 number range which was created last year by Ofcom, the telecoms regulator. With the changing telecoms market and greater variety of charging frameworks, it has become clear that 0870 charges are not clear and no longer work well for audiences.
0370 calls cost no more than 01and 02 geographic landline numbers and are included in discount packages for both fixed-line and mobile phones. This enables viewers and listeners to call the BBC at the lowest cost to callers. The BBC has taken time to plan for the switchover of up to 80 different numbers to be as smooth as possible and also at the lowest cost to the licence fee payer.

All the BBC’s 0870 numbers will be phased out during the summer of 2008 and replaced with an equivalent 0370 range of numbers. 0870 numbers replaced a previous system where there was no central number to call the BBC on and therefore the cost of calling BBC centres depended on where you live. They were introduced in 1998 so that everyone could call the BBC for the same cost (equivalent roughly to a postage stamp). Local radio 0845 numbers, which have a cheaper ‘local-rate’ charge, and freephone numbers (eg 0800 and 0500) will not be affected by this change.. "

I did post a thread about this recently, with an observation that they still refer to 0845 as local rate,but some kind soul seems to have chosen to remove it. >:(

Members may wish to suggest a question at the following link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/your_say/default.stm

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 10:32am:

Members may wish to suggest a question at the following link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/your_say/default.stm

I really don't think they are going to accept a question about either Question Time's own 0871 number or the BBC proposals regarding 03 numbers (and whether or not Question Time is going to move from 0871 to 0370).  So the only question one might get on air would be about say 0844 number use by doctors surgeries.

Given that the production company is one of the BBC's worst offenders by using 0871 I would imagine they would try to squash any question about 084/7 numbers.  Also don't forget the questions are for the panellists and not for the BBC or David Dimbleby to answer.

oldharryrocks wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 9:38am:

Local radio 0845 numbers, which have a cheaper ‘local-rate’ charge, and freephone numbers (eg 0800 and 0500) will not be affected by this change..

And where do they indicate what will happen to their 0844 and 0871 numbers? :-? :-/

NGMsGhost wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 10:55am:

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jun 12th, 2008 at 10:32am: Members may wish to suggest a question at the following link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/your_say/default.stm I really don't think they are going to accept a question about either Question Time's own 0871 number ...

It appears that someone has got a suggested question accepted by the website.

Whilst not directly compelling a response and admission of personal responsibility and profiteering on the part of the MD of the production company, it seeks to raise the specific issue in a manner that is suitable for general discussion. An editor would however probably spot the significance before allowing the question to be used on air.

Fans and followers of the programme may however see the website.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 11:29am:

It appears that someone has got a suggested question accepted by the website.

It appears that person may be someone who is rather well known to you SCV. ;) ::)

I also note that the question that person has asked is a generic one about government and public service bodies setting an example by not using 084/7 numbers rather than being about the BBC's use and abuse of them.

Therefore the only way Question Time's own use of 0871 or the BBC's general use of 084/7 might be probed or discussed on the program would be if we could prime one of the Panel members for the show in question to do so by briefing them on the goings on with the BBC's 084/7 numbers and the high cost of the Question Time 0871 number in particular.

It might get you somewhere but in my view it is all shadow boxing.  The people on whom we should really be waging war are Ofcom who allowing the whole scam to continue to flourish and prosper and who fail to even interpret their own General Conditions in a way that prevents misleading price descriptions being given to 084/7 numbers on the phone bills of most of the major telecoms companies (apart from BT).

Even if the BBC did only promise to get rid of 0870 that is not what they implied in programmes like Working Lunch and other p[rogrammes that reported on these numbers following the Which Report. There news reports clearly identified the evils of all the 08xx number (not just 0870) usually with specific examples for 0845, 0844 and 0871. They then made it clear they were putting their own house in order shortly.

That is misleading.

Keith wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 1:40pm:

Even if the BBC did only promise to get rid of 0870 that is not what they implied in programmes like Working Lunch and other p[rogrammes that reported on these numbers following the Which Report. There news reports clearly identified the evils of all the 08xx number (not just 0870) usually with specific examples for 0845, 0844 and 0871. They then made it clear they were putting their own house in order shortly. That is misleading.

The 0370 prefix is only available for those who have corresponding 0870 numbers. If the statement was that the BBC is switching to 0370 then that thereby implies that only 0870s will be moving over and must therefore lead us to question what about other 084/0871 numbers?

Keith wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 1:40pm:

Even if the BBC did only promise to get rid of 0870 that is not what they implied in programmes like Working Lunch and other p[rogrammes that reported on these numbers following the Which Report. There news reports clearly identified the evils of all the 08xx number (not just 0870) usually with specific examples for 0845, 0844 and 0871. They then made it clear they were putting their own house in order shortly. That is misleading.

Also 0845 numbers were surely originally selected for certain lines by the BBC because they were cheaper than 0870 numbers and/or because the call was in a more local area (eg BBC radio station) where it was expected to be cheaper to make a call than via 0870.

So how can the BBC possibly defend a call to their national BBC Information call centre now being cheaper to make on 03 than a call to your local BBC radio station that will still be on 0845. ;) :-? :-/

Dave wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 1:50pm:

The 0370 prefix is only available for those who have corresponding 0870 numbers. If the statement was that the BBC is switching to 0370 then that thereby implies that only 0870s will be moving over and must therefore lead us to question what about other 084/0871 numbers?

I know how my original phone conversation with Michael Stock at the BBC went last Autumn and he clearly led to me believe that all contact numbers with the BBC were going to be switched over to 03.  And that was supposed to include Question Time, that he at that time implied he was particularly shocked and appalled to find now used an 0871 number.

Regardless of what the BBC originally decided or the technicalities that going to 0370 can only apply to 0870 numbers the BBC clearly ran a number of reports specifically identify the problems with 0845 and 0844 numbers with costs and also clearly stated they were putting their own house in order.

These statement appears to be a lie.

Keith wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 4:09pm:

Regardless of what the BBC originally decided or the technicalities that going to 0370 can only apply to 0870 numbers the BBC clearly ran a number of reports specifically identify the problems with 0845 and 0844 numbers with costs and also clearly stated they were putting their own house in order. These statement appears to be a lie.

I will be interested to see what impact my email has as I circulated it very widely across senior members of staff at the BBC including Trustees and Members of the Executive Board and also the Controllers of all the main national BBC tv and radio stations as well as heads of departments and other special high level employees.

I would have thought that BBC Local Radio stations will be up in arms about this when it becomes clear that the rest of the BBC is moving to normally priced 03 numbers while they are to be stuck with up to 40p per minute from mobile phone covert premium rate 0845 numbers.  And on what possible basis can such a decision possibly have been taken.  Were they even consulted about this proposal by Mr Stock or the BBC Executive Board?

As to technicalities the 0345 number range awaits the BBC if they simply wish to exactly mirror their current range of 0845 numbers.  Or they could simply have gone for 0300 numbers throughout to replace all of their current 084 and 087 prefixed phone numbers.

I suppose I could really do with an email circulation list for the CEOs of all BBC Local Radio Stations.

Keith wrote on Jun 12^th, 2008 at 4:09pm:

This statement appears to be a lie.

Yes it does.

Journalists commonly make mistakes. Recognising how often this happens with matters that I know about myself, I am left wondering about the truth of everything I read and hear. Such mild cynicism is however healthy and necessary if we are to have a free press.

Whether journalists have any greater duty of accuracy when reporting on the organisation that employs or commissions them is an interesting point. Given that they need (and seek) to show some degree of independence, I would probably say that they do not - the same standards should apply.

With the case at issue, I believe that this was not a quoted statement issued in the name of the BBC executive board but a comment by a reporter that was tangential to the story being covered - the Which? item did not mention the BBC, nor (I believe) does it refer to 084x numbers.

If a specific report was incorrect or misleading then it falls into the same category as most of what we read and hear. If a specific significant error can be identified, then a correction and apology must be demanded. If the BBC has deliberately set out to present false information with the intention of deceiving (i.e. "lied") then that is indeed a very serious matter.

We cannot dismiss the possibility that reporters were simply confused in the same way as some of us were. The BBC has a robust complaints system that should be used whenever appropriate.

BBC are now actually using 0370numbers :)

On You and yours today they announced their new number 0370.....

allegro wrote on Jul 1^st, 2008 at 12:26pm:

BBC are now actually using 0370numbers :) On You and yours today they announced their new number 0370.....

Yes it has happened.

The BBC information line confirm that with effect from yesterday ALL 0870 numbers are now 0370.

There may be odd exceptions and the 0870 numbers are still working.

09 competition lines and 0845 numbers are not affected.

The saynoto0870 campaign must celebrate this great victory.

Indeed, this is a victory for Say no to 0870! [smiley=beer.gif] [smiley=beer.gif] [smiley=beer.gif]

Radio 1's contact page now shows the 0370 number with a note "0370 numbers are called 'UK Wide' and cost no more than calls to 01/02 geographic numbers".

Let's hope other organisations follow suit.

As I am still awaiting a decision from the ICO re obtaining geo numbers for all 0870 numbers, it is now academic, probably why they have been holding off.

My application to the ICO was 14th September 2006!!

Dave wrote on Jul 1^st, 2008 at 1:03pm:

Indeed, this is a victory for Say no to 0870! [smiley=beer.gif] [smiley=beer.gif] [smiley=beer.gif] Radio 1's contact page now shows the 0370 number with a note "0370 numbers are called 'UK Wide' and cost no more than calls to 01/02 geographic numbers". Let's hope other organisations follow suit.

They are still using 5 digit text contact which I assume will be premium rate texts!

Don't pop too many champagne corks as Question Time will continue to use an 0871 audience participation line and all BBC radio and other 0845 numbers will remain in operation.

It is totally illogical to be using 0370 for some BBC numbers and 0845 and 0871 for others.  Either they accept the principal that charging extra for the privilege of calling them is wrong or they do not.

So any comments on the BBC change to 0370 must be limited to damning with feint praise their switch of only BBC Information and a few other major radio and tv program phone in lines to 0370.  I would also rather they had switched to 0301 rather than 0370 as at least this does not sound like it may be connected with the old 0870 high cost call rates.  0370 obviously runs the risk of being teinted in this way in view of any public education or publicity campaign on 03 numbers by Ofcom being non existent.  There is also a high risk your current telecoms supplier will still charge you at g6 multimedia rate for calling an 0370 number thanks to the predictable lethargy and incompetence of Ofcom in enforcing their amended General Condition regarding the cost of calling these numbers being the same as the cost of calls to 01 and 02 numbers. >:(

Both Post Office Homephone and yourcalls.net tried to charge me for calling 03 numbers at g6 multimedia rate.

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



http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7510000/newsid_7514800/7514804.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm&news=1&nol_storyid=7514804&bbcws=1

loddon wrote on Jul 19^th, 2008 at 8:38am:

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 http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7510000/newsid_7514800/7514804.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm&news=1&nol_storyid=7514804&bbcws=1

Are we now to believe what the BBC inform us? They are prolific liars, so maybe there is a cost to them by using 03 numbers, but they choose not to tell us.

All the info I have read,(and that is not a lot), has suggested that there  is a cost to receive calls on 03 numbers, unless you know of some links that disprove this!

of course they have to pay for 03 - it's about 1/2 a penny less than 0800 to them... but, they're only using 03 for some of their enquiry lines which receive very little traffic... and they still have to print geo alternatives for all the calls they receive from outside the uk

this is purely a publicity stunt - the vast majority of their inbound calls comes from TV licencing area and they are using revenue bearing 0844 800 (BT) numbers @ 5 pence per minute (at all times) - great victory in that now it costs a little less to call 'em in the day, but much more at evenings and weekends... well done

loddon wrote on Jul 19^th, 2008 at 8:38am:

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.

As far as i'm aware, there is a incoming charge for anyone owning a 03x.  I have yet to find a company that doesn't charge for incoming calls.

Either BBC is lying as mentioned earlier, or that they have struck a deal with their supplier of 03x but chances of that are slim.

At the end of the day, the facility to hold people in a queue, intelligent transfer, etc all cost money so they have to be charged for somehow.  On 084x/087x this paid for in the price of the call for most of the time (except maybe the really expensive providers of these numbers).  On 03x this means incoming call charges and/or higher linerental.

loddon wrote on Jul 19^th, 2008 at 8:38am:

.... they could all switch easily to 03 numbers

There is much confusion around these issues. If we wish to exploit it, we must be very careful not to simply add to it.

The BBC statement about the costs involved in moving off 0870 may have been with reference to what it was told the costs to it would have been if the Ofcom changes proposed for 1 February 2008 had come into effect. Many decisions go back to the time when it may have been believed that this would happen.

The term "revenue share" is commonly used to describe the situation where a user of a revenue sharing number takes the benefit in the form of cash income from their teleco. Those who decline this in favour of a reduced fee for their telecommunications services feel able to say that they are not receiving a "revenue share". I would suggest reference to "benefiting from", rather than "receiving".

I would urge members to consider the possibility that many organisations involved in this matter simply do not fully understand what is going on and then convey their genuine and unrecognised misunderstanding to others.

I have now, eventually, after nearly 2½ years from original reqest to the BBC and over two years from going to the ICO, received the Decision Notice.

http://www.ico.gov.uk/tools_and_resources/decision_notices/2008_12.aspx

Click on the PDF link on the above webpage to take you to the Notice.

It goes only partially in my favour and they have 35 calendar days to supply the information,(much if not all will now be academic as they don't use many 0870 numbers now!).

Also I do not see them complying and will more than likely appeal to the Appeals Tribunal, unless none of the numbers they have been told to give up are now out of use and useless to anyone.


Steps Required


47. The Commissioner requires the public authority to take the following steps to
ensure compliance with the Act:
    The BBC is to supply the complainant with the equivalent geographic
number of its non-geographic numbers not accompanied by a call plan.

48. The public authority must take the steps required by this notice within 35 calendar
days from the date of this notice.

49. Failure to comply with the steps described above may result in the Commissioner
 making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of
 the Act, and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.  

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 11:34am:

Also I do not see them complying and will more than likely appeal to the Appeals Tribunal, unless none of the numbers they have been told to give up are now out of use and useless to anyone.

Derrick,

As I think I have tried to mention before the body in question is actually called The Information Tribunal and not the Appeals Tribunal.

See www.informationtribunal.gov.uk

Also there would be no point in appealing over this as most of the 0870 numbers in question are no longer in use and have been replaced by 03 numbers.

There would be more point in submitting a request for the geographic alternate numbers for the 0844 and 0845 numbers still in use by the BBC and by tv licensing and then appealing on those if the BBC won't supply any GN alternatives.

From a very quick reading, this looks to me like complete victory on the point of principle. The BBC has been found to be under a legal duty (imposed in the FOI Act) to release all known geographic equivalents for its non-geographic numbers.

The whole point about FOI in this type of situation is not that the body has to wait for a decision by the Information Tribunal, the ICO, or even a formal request. These are just the mechanisms that have to be used when information that should be published in the normal course of events is being withheld.

I would suggest that an approach to the BBC, at a senior level, to ask how it proposes to now act in the light of this decision would be a very simple task for any member, or indeed any journalist. The consultation by the DH has made the issue topical, as has an issue with phone calls to the BBC last weekend. I suspect that someone in the media would wish to run with it.

One hopes that this would force the BBC to consudct an immediate review of its policy with regard to all non-geographic numbers, leading to adoption of 03 or geo numbers throughout the coporation. This could be alongside already well-known numbers with proper price information.

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 11:50am:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 11:34am: Also I do not see them complying and will more than likely appeal to the Appeals Tribunal, unless none of the numbers they have been told to give up are now out of use and useless to anyone. Derrick, As I think I have tried to mention before the body in question is actually called The Information Tribunal and not the Appeals Tribunal. See www.informationtribunal.gov.uk

You know what I mean, stop playing semantics, anyone who goes to that tribunal is "Appealing a Decision" so whilst you maybe strictly correct, everyone, including you, knows what is meant by Appeals Tribunal.

Quote:

Freedom of Information Act 2000 (Section 50)                                Decision Notice                             11 December 2008 Public Authority: British Broadcasting Company Address:          Media Centre                   201 Wood Lane                   London                   W12 7TQ

How are we supposed to trust the Information Commissioner to do things properly when they can't even get the name of the BBC right? To find the British Broadcasting Company, you have to go back to 1926!!!

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 12:26pm:

You know what I mean, stop playing semantics, anyone who goes to that tribunal is "Appealing a Decision" so whilst you maybe strictly correct, everyone, including you, knows what is meant by Appeals Tribunal.

Derrick it seems they have just altered how the whole damned Tribunals system works on 3rd November 2008 so my comments were clearly historic.

See www.tribunals.gov.uk/Tribunals/Documents/Releases/0708.pdf

Bizarrely the Lands Tribunal, who I have a case ongoing with, have told me nothing about these changes or how they will affect my case.

They continue to use a mix of 0845 and geographic phone numbers though.

See www.tribunals.gov.uk/Tribunals/Common/contact.htm

Actually they only have one central Customer Service Centre on an 0845 number though so the position for contacting them has clearly now got worse. :o >:( :'(

jrawle wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:30pm:

Quote:               Freedom of Information Act 2000 (Section 50)                                Decision Notice                             11 December 2008 Public Authority: British Broadcasting Company Address:          Media Centre                   201 Wood Lane                   London                   W12 7TQ How are we supposed to trust the Information Commissioner to do things properly when they can't even get the name of the BBC right? To find the British Broadcasting Company, you have to go back to 1926!!!

Weird that, as all correspondence to me, including a covering letter with the hard copy of the Decision Notice, calls it "British Broadcasting Corporation", although the actual hard copy DN does state as the website "British Broadcasting Company"

I wonder if this mistake in the BBC's correct name is covered under the "slip rule" or if it invalidates the whole of the Commissioner's decision? :-/

The Decision Notice was dated 11th December 2008, the 35 days expired on 15th January 2009,on the 16th January I e-mailed the ICO informing that I had not been furnished with he info re the DN. I was told they would contact the BBC and get back to me.

On the 22nd January  Richard Lawanson, (IC caseworker), e-mailed me with; - I write to inform you that I have nowspoken to the BBC regarding the disclosure as per the Commissioner Decision Notice. I was told that the numbers ordered to be disclosed should be with you during the start of next week. If they are not, do not hesitate to contact me.

Yesterday, (Wednesday), as the BBC had not complied, I e-mailed R. Lawanson again and requested  the following; -  
I request that you invoke bullet point 49 of the Decision Notice as, in my opinion, they are clearly in contempt of court!

49. Failure to comply with the steps described above may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act, and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.  


I received the following; -
I have forwarded this series of correspondence on to the legal department here at the ICO for their general advice. When I have that advice, I will inform you of the same and on how the matter will be progressed.

If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Richard


The numbers are probably academic now,(re the 03 number use), but it does go to show that the BBC think they are above everyone including the IC!

Lets see if the IC dares to take legal action!

derrick wrote on Jan 29^th, 2009 at 1:32pm:

The numbers are probably academic now,(re the 03 number use), but it does go to show that the BBC think they are above everyone including the IC! Lets see if the IC dares to take legal action!

Well done Derrick.  Keep up the good work.  It will be interesting to see what you get in the end.  You might get some numbers for which the BBC still uses 0844, 0845 or 0871 numbers with a bit of luck as some of those are still in place.

I was listening to The Westminster Hour on BBC Radio 4 on the evening Sunday 18th January and one of the reports there was having a go at MP's expenses and the proposal to exempt them from disclosure and interviewing various MPs on the matter and the reporter then said that if anyone wanted to see his expenses he was sure it was a simple matter to submit an FOI to the BBC and get them. ::)

Well as we know MPs are not now to be exempted from the FOI over disclosure of expenses and I really meant to submit an FOI to the BBC at the time to ask for this reporter's expenses but have not yet got round to doing so.  Unfortunately I don't have his name and its now over 7 days since broadcast so its no longer available on the BBC Iplayer.  I don't know if anyone else perhaps heard the program and can tell me who this reporter was so I can submit that FOI.  I bet if I do they find a reason to refuse it. :o >:(

Well it has arrived, but we do not know what they do or did relate to,(they will not give any more info as they have complied with the DN, so NGNsGhost and SCV don't ask ;D), unless anyone still has the relevant numbers to compare with!



Mr * *****
By email to: ***************


30 January 2009


Dear Mr ******,


ICO Decision Notice FS50133140 (Original BBC Ref: RFI2006000462)

I refer to the Information Commissioner’s Decision Notice of 11 December 2008, regarding your request to the BBC under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (“the Act”) of 31 July 2006, asking a series of questions about the BBC’s use of 0870 numbers.

The ICO accepted that the BBC does not hold the information you sought regarding non-geographic numbers accompanied by a call plan, but required that the BBC disclose to you the equivalent geographic number of our non-geographic numbers not accompanied a call plan.  
Please see below the 31 numbers referred to in the Decision Notice, as at the date of your request, being 31 July 2006.  


      NGN                                                                CallPlan  
    (Prefix with '0')                       TAD                  Y or N?

1  8700100088                    02074650264                 N
2  8700100180                    02085760639                 N
3  8700100500                    02076495512                 N
4  8700100611                    01413075974                 N
5  8700100612                    02074650264                 N
6  8700100613                    02074650264                 N
7  8700100700                    02074650264                 N
8  8700100720                    01386421129                 N
9  8700100882                    01214329956                 N
10  8700100883                  02087438000                 N
11  8700100884                  02087494272                 N
12  8700101010                  01204770270                 N
13  8700102867                  01386421129                 N  
14  8700102897                  01214328958                 N
15  8700106676                  02082258222                 N
16  8700107070                  02076490636                 N
17  8700108891                  01216060323                 N
18  8703332772                  01787223300                 N
19  8703333046                  02087524777                 N
20  8703334988                  02087527973                 N
21  8703336000                  02074650071                 N
22  8709002155                  02072089039                 N
23  8709002626                  02076495634                 N
24  8709003550                  02076495633                 N
25  8709008833                  01413075973                 N
26  8709009595                  02089141820                 N
27  8709022002                  02074650264                 N
28  8709022003                  01619532003                 N
29  8709030304                  02890535990                 N
30  8709090225                  02087494272                 N
31  8709090555                  02920323782                 N

We apologise for the delay in releasing this information to you.  When collating the information a question was raised as to whether any further numbers were in existence at that time and we sought confirmation of this from a number of our third party suppliers.  We apologise that this has taken longer than we would have wished.  It has been determined that, in addition to the 31 numbers listed above, that the TVL ‘Minicom’ number of 0870 575 8604 was also in use.  Its geographical equivalent was: 0117 302 1400.

I hope you find this information useful.

Kind regards,


Stephanie Simmonds
Senior Advisor
BBC Information Policy and Compliance

Well done. There is nothing more to ask, except ...

Does this establish a precedent for an equivalent list for all the current 0845 numbers to be provided?

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 30^th, 2009 at 1:42pm:

Well done. There is nothing more to ask, except ... Does this establish a precedent for an equivalent list for all the current 0845 numbers to be provided?

Are you volunteering?  ;D

This took 2½ years!

derrick wrote on Jan 30^th, 2009 at 1:46pm:

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 30th, 2009 at 1:42pm: Well done. There is nothing more to ask, except ... Does this establish a precedent for an equivalent list for all the current 0845 numbers to be provided? Are you volunteering?  ;D This took 2½ years!

Yes but the precedent has now been set that they will lose on this so they ought to come up with the alternatives for their 0844 and 0845 and any 0871 numbers within weeks of a request being submitted to them.

NGMsGhost wrote on Jan 30^th, 2009 at 2:12pm:

derrick wrote on Jan 30th, 2009 at 1:46pm: SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 30th, 2009 at 1:42pm: Well done. There is nothing more to ask, except ... Does this establish a precedent for an equivalent list for all the current 0845 numbers to be provided? Are you volunteering?  ;D This took 2½ years! Yes but the precedent has now been set that they will lose on this so they ought to come up with the alternatives for their 0844 and 0845 and any 0871 numbers within weeks of a request being submitted to them.

Do you actually think that they would?

With this FOI they have lied and refused relevant information to be disclosed both to the IC, and myself, and continued to flout the IC’s authority, by not disclosing until 3 weeks after the time limit re the DN had expired.

They would probably have some excuse that because the radio stations, (as that is where the majority of 0845 numbers are), are somewhat "independant" we would need to request from each and every radio station fro the geo numbers, or that the numbers are "accompanied by a call plan", and if so will not need to disclose them.

I have been told by the BBC Information Policy department that each FOI request has to be assessed on its merits.

The bitter experience with the previous case has however given them a clearer understanding of their duties under the FOI Act in this respect. It has also given them an understanding of the network of internal responsibilities and external contractors that had to be unravelled to get to the information that was sought.

I believe this to suggest that a further request would be handled more speedily than the previous one.

I would be happy to deal with this, however I am busy with other things, including involvement with a piece planned for BBC Radio 5Live this afternoon at 5:45 dealing with Ofcom's approach to Silent Calls.

We are being very succesful at present, let's share this success around.

derrick wrote on Jan 30^th, 2009 at 2:23pm:

They would probably have some excuse that because the radio stations, (as that is where the majority of 0845 numbers are), are somewhat "independant" we would need to request from each and every radio station fro the geo numbers, or that the numbers are "accompanied by a call plan", and if so will not need to disclose them.

Their FOI website ([url=www.bbc.co.uk/foi/[/url])suggests]www.bbc.co.uk/foi/)suggests[/url] a centralised approach for all FOI requests to the BBC but why not make one and find out?  If the FOI comes in under your name they are far more likely to roll over as they now know you are tenacious and will not give up.

If I make one they might not think I am aware of my rights to appeal to the ICO etc, etc.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 30^th, 2009 at 3:31pm:

The bitter experience with the previous case has however given them a clearer understanding of their duties under the FOI Act in this respect. It has also given them an understanding of the network of internal responsibilities and external contractors that had to be unravelled to get to the information that was sought.

I believe derrick should make the request and also attach correspondence of all relevant adjudications and letters from the ICO in respect of the BBC's 0870 number.

Also if the initial response from the FOI department is no then Derrick should write to the Director General, Mark Thompson, referring to the BBC losing with the ICO over the 0870 numbers.

I have finally lost my patience with the BBC and their rather two faced Mr Michael Stock (the man nominally responsible for introducing 03 numbers but in fact also the man responsible for fighting to the last to keep their 0870 numbers and who has still let Question Time hang on to 0871,  BBC licensing to 0844 and BBC local radio stations to 0845).

After he failed to do anything to honour his promises to sort out the incorrect call price announcements for the 03 number for the BBC Feedback program on BBC Radio 4 (the program you are supposed to use to complain about things one is not happy with on other BBC Radio programs) I today sent off the following broadside:-


Quote:

-------- Original Message -------- Subject:      Feedback Call Cost Error & Question Time 0871 Number Symptomatic of Chaotic BBC Phone Number Policy Date:      Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:10:22 +0000 To:      Michael Stock <michael.stock@bbc.co.uk> CC:      feedback@bbc.co.uk, philip.reevell@citybroadcasting.co.uk Dear Mr Stock, Feedback Call Cost Error & Question Time 0871 Number Symptomatic of Chaotic BBC Phone Number Policy Further to my previous email of 20th February I am now writing to express my disappointment that you did not pick up the following week, as you promised you would, the issue of the incorrect call cost announcement for BBC Radio 4's Feedback program's 03 phone number by the station announcer immediately after the two airings on Friday at 1.30pm and Sunday at 8pm. As I originally reported to you this occurred following the airings of the show on Friday 20th and Sunday 22nd February 2009 (see below earlier email) and this error was then again repeated on Friday 27th February and Sunday 1st March 2009.  If I knew who the name of the station announcer was I would email them myself but the station announcer does not say they who they are most of the time on BBC Radio 4 (for instance Zeb Soanes usually only indicates his identity on station sign off at night) and ultimately the incorrect call cost announcement must be the responsibility of a combination of City Broadcasting (who make this show and script it), the show's producer (who has an unpronounceable name like Cathu Pak that my Googling shows no trace of) and the station controller, Mark Damazer.  In addition it will also be the responsibility of yourself and of the BBC's head of editorial policy and its head of radio broadcasting. Clearly City Broadcasting (who make the program) seem to have something of a problem with using accurate phone numbers as the Contact link at www.citybroadcasting.co.uk brings up an over complicated Flash page that quotes an out of date phone number of 0161 240 2446 that is answered by a switchboard receptionist at a business centre in Manchester who says City Broadcasting are no longer there and from her tone clearly couldn't care less where they have gone to now.  There is also a number listed for City Broadcasting in the Manchester area via a search at www.192.com of 01565 889601 at an address in Alderley Edge, but during normal business hours today (Thursday) that number was not answered. So coming back to the bottom line problem City Broadcasting now have their own 03 phone number that points to an unknown real world phone number that is now read out immediately after the show by the Radio 4 station announcer but whoever scripts the show clearly does not realise that 03 calls cost the same as 01/02 calls and that they are using the old 0870 call cost announcement.  And then despite the previous Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand humiliations your editorial control still apparently remains so poor that no one at Radio 4 who screens the program before it is aired is picking this up and/or perhaps it is not picked up because the incorrect price announcement is done by the station announcer.  But then why have your have full time station announcers not been religiously schooled by now that "calls cost up to 8p per minute from a BT landline" is not a correct announcement any more for one of the BBC's new fanged 03 phone numbers. It is perfectly obvious to me that as a head of several of the BBC's various external commercial enterprises you were the man primarily responsible for keeping 0870 in use by the BBC for so long (I have seen some of your previous statements attempting to justify the retention of your 0870 phone numbers) and now having finally capitulated you are still making a mess of things by not disseminating the correct information to your staff about how these call costs should be described. You also previously expressed to me on the telephone a kind of mock surprise that Question Time was using an 0871 number for its audience participation line and said you would be looking in to that but incredibly Question Time is still ripping off its viewers who wish to provide it with audience fodder by earning a revenue share on what is now a true Premium Rate number range (controlled by PhonePayPlus).  There is also the shambolic and inexplicable chaos relating to your local radio stations and them all still using 0845 numbers, meaning that there is no overall clear message to viewers and listeners about the BBC's position on phone numbers and phone call cost.

                                                                                                                                                                        Continued/........

Quote:

In view of all the previous scandals involving BBC phone numbers if I was Mark Thompson I would be inclined to think that you had not done a very good job in properly resolving the BBC's phone number use situation so that all BBC normal phone numbers start 03 and only true voting lines or competition lines use 09 numbers on which the call cost is fully disclosed and on which all PhonePayPlus regulations are fully complied with.  The continued use by one of your main current affairs shows (Question Time) of a phone number range associated with scams is nothing short of a disgrace and your failure to get back to me as promised or to ensure that your station announcers are properly briefed about how to announce the call costs of Feedback's phone number suggests to me that you are not doing a very good job in successfully rolling out the BBC's new phone number use policy. I think I have been patient for quite a long time but I have really reached the end of my tether with your repeated failure to offer me any rational explanation as to why the BBC is now using 03 for some of its main phone numbers but is still using both 0845 and 0871 numbers elsewhere.  I wonder if Mark Thompson is not similarly baffled about the thoroughly confused phone numbering policy that you managed to persuade him and the rest of the BBC Executive Board to adopt? If you do not feel resolution of this matter is your personal responsibility then perhaps you can ensure the matter is now referred to whichever executive at the BBC is responsible for it? I look forward to hearing from you. Regards,

I also sent this follow up email to David Dimbleby regarding Question Time's continued use of an 0871 audience line phone number.  He does have a BBC email address (despite his antiquity) as the email was not bounced back.

Quote:

-------- Original Message -------- Subject:      Acting As The Advertising Agent For Question Time 0871 Phone Number Scam Date:      Thu, 05 Mar 2009 18:09:05 +0000 To:      david.dimbleby@bbc.co.uk CC:      steve.anderson@bbc.co.uk, gill.penlington@bbc.co.uk Dear Mr Dimbleby, You may care to comment on the below email viz a viz Question Time's continued use of a premium rate 0871 phone number (now controlled by the premium rate regulator PhonePayPlus - formerly ICSTIS) for viewers wishing to become part of the audience line at your next Question Time show. I am not sure if you are aware that 0871 is specifically a revenue earning premium rate number but since you personally read it out on air each week and since the BBC has switched to 03 numbers that cost no more than normal 01/02 calls from landlines and mobiles for all its other television audience phone numbers I think it is something you should be looking in to.  At the moment you unfortunately and perhaps unwittingly seem to be the direct advertising agent for the direct perpetration of a covert premium rate number scam on your viewers who want to come along to the show in person. I look forward to your comments. Regards,