In their infinate wisdom Norwich City Council now have one 0844 number for contacting them.  The old number does not work, but I suspect there are many direct dial numbers which can circumvent this problem.  Is there a mole within the Council who will spill the beans or does anyone know these numbers please?  I have contacted Dr. Ian Gibson MP (Norwich North) and would urge other Norwich residents to do the same thing, or contact Charles Clarke MP (Norwich South) if they are in his ward.  I have also lodged a complaint with the Council and am awaiting replies to both.

I think this makes Norfolk officially the worst place to live for public services charging. Norfolk County Council proundly uses lots of 0844 numbers and Norfolk Police is happy to receive revenue payments from its 0845 number.

---

Source: Norfolk City Council

http://www.norwich.gov.uk/webapps/news/news.asp?cid=4908

One City, One Council - One telephone number!

<<
From July 1, Norwich City Council will have a new telephone number replacing the main seven numbers people call the council on.

The new number - 0844 980 3333 - will not cost the public any more to call from a landline and will be charged at 3p a minute.

The council, like other organisations who use 0844 and 0845 numbers, was given the option of charging more than the 3p minimum charge to make profit from the number. The council declined, feeling it was wrong to make money from delivering services to our customers.

Norwich City Council is following in the footsteps of many other organisations, including Norfolk County Council and Norfolk Police in introducing an 084 number. These numbers have a proven track record in helping organisations to improve the speed and efficiency of services delivered to customers.

[…]

“We have set the charge at 3p a minute - the minimum possible, and will not be making any profit out of the number. Calls from mobile phones can cost more than the standard 3p a minute on some tariffs, and it is disappointing to us that mobile phone companies set higher charges for these numbers.

“However, our customers can visit us in person at City Hall, access many of our services online or use the freephone at any of our area housing offices.”

[…]
>>

Norwich City Council knowingly imposes higher charges on those who cannot afford a landline. By selecting this number it is sanctioning the "disappointing" higher rates mobile providers charge.

Dave wrote on Jul 1^st, 2008 at 1:31pm:

I think this makes Norfolk officially the worst place to live for public services charging. Norfolk County Council proundly uses lots of 0844 numbers and Norfolk Police is happy to receive revenue payments from its 0845 number. Source: Norfolk City Council http://www.norwich.gov.uk/webapps/news/news.asp?cid=4908

Quite staggering. I will make no further comment at this stage. A FOI request has been submitted, requesting the number that callers from overseas can use.

Clearly <<Norwich City Council: City Hall, St. Peter's Street, Norwich NR2 1NH. Telephone: +44 (0) 844 980 3333>> as shown on the link provided is of no use to me!

Reply I received- largely just the leaflet repeated! Why would use of 03 incur a cost?

Thank you for your recent enquiry.
From July 1, Norwich City Council replaced the main seven numbers people use to call the council. The new number - 0844 980 3333 - does not cost any more to call from a landline and will be charged at 3p a minute. The previous charge was 4p a minute and so calls will be cheaper. Charges from mobiles vary depending on the contract and provider.  
The council, like other organisations who use 0844 and 0845 numbers, was given the option of charging more than the 3p minimum charge to make a profit from the number. The council declined, feeling it was wrong to make money from delivering services to our customers.
Whilst customers with mobile telephones or contracts that provide free calls will not always benefit from the change in number, the council looked at the benefits the change would provide to all its customers before making its decision to implement the new number.
Customers can make use of any the six area offices that have a free internal telephone or they can use the free internal telephone in the Customer Contact Centre at City Hall. The availability and usage of phone boxes is in decline and therefore this free service offers help those with limited telephone access. Customers can also contact by email and access many of our services via the website  www.norwich.gov.uk.
We have taken into account Central Office of Information Guidance, and looked into the '03' number options, however this service would have incurred a cost to Norwich City Council which would ultimately have to be subsidised by the council tax. Our research and information from other organisations such Norfolk County Council and Norfolk Police show that 084 numbers have a proven track record in helping organisations to improve the speed and efficiency of services delivered to customers.
The change to one number means that calls are directed to the right people, with the right skills, first time - ensuring they are dealt with more efficiently and answered more quickly. It also means staff can be moved to particular call areas at peak times - allocating resources where they are needed most.
To test the technology, last year we carried out a trial of menu options on housing calls. The results showed clearly we were able to respond to more customer enquires more effectively.
The introduction of the new number has already shown we can offer a better, and more efficient service with reduced waiting times, an improved call success rate and therefore quicker access to a customer advisor who can help with your enquiries.
I trust this answers your enquiry if you would like any more information please do not hesitate to contact the Customer Contact Team.

Yours sincerely,


Rachel Hardy
Customer Services Team Leader
-------------------------------------------
Sent: 03 July 2008 03:47:25
To: Residents Service Team
Subject: New 0844 number

I would be pleased if you could refer this letter to the department that can answer queries about why an 0844 number has been introduced by the City Council.

I am extremely disappointed to see that the City Council has adopted an 0844 number.
1) While it is correct to say that the cost of 3p per minute is similar to what many providers charge for 01/02 calls during the day, this ignores the fact that people who have inclusive calls allowances still have to pay extra for these calls;
2) Has the council considered the cost of these calls from phone boxes, which is considerably more than to a geographical 01603 number?
3) The council has obviously considered the cost from mobiles and the attitude seems to be - tough! "The council regrets that mobile phone companies charge more" hardly helps- of course they charge more, because 0844 numbers (like 0845 and 0870) are designed to be revenue sharing. Calls from mobiles typically cost 20p a  minute or more to 0844 numbers- so will probably cost about £1 before you even get to speak to the right person! As with landlines, the inclusive minutes with mobile contracts (or "free" minutes if you top up a certain amount on pay as you go) do not include calls to 0844.
4) The fact that the council has set the cost at 3p per minute so as not to take any revenue share is not as magnanimous as it looks- it simply means the telecom provider is raking the cash in instead!
5) The most disadvantaged residents of the city are more likely to use phone boxes or mobiles rather than a landline so you are targeting them particularly to pay more.
6) Did the City Council consider the guidance from the Central Office of Information that discourages the sole use of 08 numbers for access to public services? If those who made the decision to use 08 were not aware of the COI guidance, that suggests gross incompetence. If they were aware of it, why was it disregarded>
7) The spiel that 08 numbers have a proven record of improving service seems as if it has been lifted straight from a telecom provider's sales pitch. The main point about 08 numbers was that they could route calls to different destinations around the country (or even abroad). This feature is not needed where all calls are being made to Norwich, or is the council planning to outsource and privatise some of its call handling?
8) Was the use of an 03 number considered and if not, why not? If this decision was based on advice from the council's telephony provider?

My brother goes to uni in Norwich and these are several numbers we have used previously:

01603212832 gets through to business planning
01603213538 - property services
01603212237 - unknown direct number, unanswered
01603212949 - unknown direct number, unanswered
01603213456 - unknown direct number, unanswered
01603213474 - property services, electrical section
01603212237 - unknown direct number, unanswered
01603212582 - unknown direct number, unanswered
01603212057 - facilities
01603212888 - tenant services
01603212598 - accounts payable

01603 213 000 - Fax number

I will check them all again to find out where they go, Hope this has helped a lil bit.

I'm not a mole :) but i'd like to pass these on

I have discovered that The Chief Executive and their Assistant, Emma Bullen, can be reached on 01603 212001 so I suggest you call the CEO to give them your opinion on this decision and the disgraceful lies currently being used to justify their abusive 0844 phone number.

I found this number by the way just by making use of some of my unlimited 01/02 calls package and some basic deductive reason.  For instance the personal line of the Chief Executive of Mole Valley District Council is 01306 879101 while their main switchboard is on 01306 879100.

The CEO might also like to be directed to the excellent example of Mole Valley District Council, who unanimously passed a resolution in July 2005 that they would never use anything other than geographic phone numbers to provide council services.  See Motion 2/2005 (P.5 of the PDF) at www.molevalley.gov.uk/media/pdf/4/2/Council_Minutes_260405.pdf

I see that Norfolk County Council also uses 0844 phone numbers for all contact with them and are using the same lies to try to justify them.

See www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&ssDocName=NCC028647&ssSourceNodeId=&ssTargetNodeId=3702

Is this just a coincidence or an indication of a general county wide signing up to pirate revenue sharing numbers to make use of council services. :o >:( :'(

Those of you who are dissatisfied with the council's decision may also wish to raise it with the Labour councillors on the cabinet of this council who took this decision.

See www.norwich.gov.uk/webapps/atoz/service_page.asp?id=1566

Council Leader Steve Morphew's phone number is 01603 212267

The Executive Member for Residents and Customer Care is Julie Brociek-Coulton.  Her direct phone number is a mobile number - 07786 694325.  So it seems she really doesn't care about the high cost to residents of contacting the council.

Brian Morrey - Executive Member for Sustainable City Development on 01603 506694

Courtesy of my unlimited 01/02 calls package I have now been able to discover rather a large number of geographic phone numbers for calling the Council that I have posted on this website.

The Chief Executive's secretary was still sticking to the line that calls only cost 3p per minute and "its the same as the cost of a local call" when I telephoned her this morning.  However she refused to connect me to the Chief Executive and instead put me through to the Head of the Contact Centre.  This person parroted the same nonsensical lies to try to justify the switch to 0844.

The Leader of The Council Councillor Steve Morphew (pictured on the website launching the 0844 number) and his other cabinet colleagues (or at least those in the Cabinet who list geographic phone numbers) were not available to take my calls when I attempted to contact them.

I see that at the bottom of every page on their website they list their phone number as +44 (0) 844 980 3333.  Has anyone told them that it is almost impossible to call an 0844 phone number from overseas?! :o >:( :'(

01603 212998 goes to switchboard.

Dave wrote on Jul 15^th, 2008 at 9:01pm:

01603 212998 goes to switchboard.

01603 412180 is the Out of Hours Emergency line (the number given on the switchboard Answerphone when it is closed).

I have tried ringing the alternative numbers, but no answer!. If you ring 01603212998 (switchboard), the system is set up to tell you that the switchboard is closed, and it provides an 'emergency' number. Of course, if you ring the 0844 number, the switchboard is open - at least in theory, after you have pressed about 4 different menu options!!

Here you go a number for Norwich Council and the correspondence that lead to it in reverse chronological order (ie go to the end and read upwards if you want the full drama rather than just the number:


Dear Sir,

As advised last week I passed your issues reagrding calling the 0844 number from abroad to my manager. She has now got back to me with further information. We have  been advised by our supplier that not all 084 numbers work from abroad and that it depends on the which country you are calling from and whether the number has been registered.

While the preferred option would be to contact us via email we accept this is not always possible.  So far, yours is the only feedback we have received on this issue, however as a result we will be monitoring the situation. In the meantime, if you do need to contact us from abroad you can use 01603 214125 which is will connect you to one of the Team Leaders within the Customer Contact Team.

Kind Regards
                        ---------------------------------

XXXX,

This is silly.

a) No 0844 number can be called from anywhere abroad so I don't know how you can make that statement. Please check with OFCOM if you have any doubt.

b) It is silly to say I should check with my telephone provider as I won't know who the telephone provider is as it will be different in each country, region or hotel. As you must know as you move around your mobile phone links up with a different provider from area to area and you will have absolutely no idea who that will be and if I use a public phone or hotel phone I will also have no idea who the provider is. How on earth can I check and even if I did what can I do about it.

This is a serious point. Any resident while abroad just can't contact you. What are we supposed to do?

                 -----------------------------------------


Thank you for your reply. Norwich City Councils telephone number has been tested and can be accessed from abroad. However certain service providers do put bars on 0844 numbers. Therefore if you wish to call Norwich City Council, and are finding you have problems, you would need to contact your service provider.

The 0844 number was introduced after thorough research and was decided to be the best option to allow the majority of Norwich City Council residents to contact the authority and receive an improved service in terms of call wait times and directing of the calls.

Yours Sincerely

          --------------------------------------


XXXX,

So how do I get hold of you if I have an issue to resolve when travelling? Like most people when travelling I only have a phone and don't have access to a computer and even if I did I would not be able to resolve something that needed a call or instant action.

It is surely ridiculous to stop people being able to contact you while they are away from home. I can't believe this is the case. There must be someway to make contact, particularly in an emergency. You can't just cut people off, what sort of service is that?

                  ----------------------------------------

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your email. Unfortunately, we cannot offer an alternative telephone number for you to dial from abroad. However you can access many of our services online at www.norwich.gov.uk

Yours Sincerely

                      -------------------------------------------

Hi,

You have introduce a new 0844 number for contacting the council. I travel a substantial amount of the time and the 0844 number is unobtainable outside of the UK. What number should I call from abroad.

It's like getting blood out of a stone isn't it?  I gave in with emailing after they comletely ignored what I had written and sent me a standard reply - twice - my second mail quoting my original email and asking for specific responses.

Hi there!

Why not badger the councillors at Norwich, and try and knock some sense into them?  Would they like to pay the 0844 rates?  I doubt it!

James Bond

At least I got it. The logical argument seemed to work. I can think of many organisations where the logical argument of why an alternative number is needed falls on deaf ears and to hell with you if you wish to call from abroad, a mobile, etc, etc.

jamesbond wrote on Jul 31^st, 2008 at 9:22pm:

Hi there! Why not badger the councillors at Norwich, and try and knock some sense into them?  Would they like to pay the 0844 rates?  I doubt it!

We must be a little careful here. This is not the same situation as with the call type "g6" 0844 numbers. It is only those with inclusive landline packages in effect at the time and callers from mobiles who pay more than for calling a 01603 number, others pay less.

I share the view that this was a daft decision that needs to be criticised, a 03xx number would have been far more suitable and would probably have cost council-tax payers little or no more.

It will probably have to wait until the people of the "Fine City" of Norwich start getting their inclusive package and mobile telephone bills listing charges for calls to this number before the issue explodes locally. This is when the local media will be able to pick up on it.

FOI response to a request for the geographic number for Norwich City Council:

<<
Thank you for your email, I apologise for the delay in responding to your request.

Norwich City Council has introduced an 0844 telephone number which replaced several 01603 numbers.  The change of telephone number means customers will need just need one telephone number when contacting the council about any matter and will improve customer services.

The former 01603 numbers have been replaced and are no longer available.


Yours sincerely

Chris Lambert
Democratic Services Officer
Norwich City Council
01603 212490
>>

Internal review now requested due to the original question not being answered.

What a waste of time an effort just to obtain something as simple as a telephone number.

idb wrote on Aug 6^th, 2008 at 3:07am:

Internal review now requested due to the original question not being answered. What a waste of time an effort just to obtain something as simple as a telephone number.

As he ended his response to you with; -

"Yours sincerely

Chris Lambert
Democratic Services Officer
Norwich City Council
01603 212490 "


It seems a bit silly to include a number that according to him; - "The former 01603 numbers have been replaced and are no longer available. "


Have you tried that number? does it go to NCC ?


Actually I have just tried that number and got through to Democratic Services, (so not ALL 01603 numbers  are no longer available),  don't know if it was Chris Lambert, but he did not sound the full shilling, he told me to ring the 0844 number for NCC switchboard, and when I said why should I ring a premium rate number he said, "it is not a premium rate number, then the line went dead!

Source: Norwich Evening News

http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/news/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=News&tBrand=ENOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=NOED01%20Jun%202009%2014%3A27%3A03%3A493

New council number will make a big difference

David Bale
01 June 2009 17:00

Norwich City Council is changing its telephone number from Monday, August 3 - to make it cheaper for customers to call.

The new number - 0344 980 3333 - is very similar to the existing one - 0844 980 3333 - as it only has one digit that is different, but will make a big difference to customers.

A council spokeswoman said: “Changing the number from an 08 to an 03 number has three important benefits.

“Our customers told us it was too expensive to call us so we are changing our number to address the problem.

“Most of our customers will be able to call us at low cost regardless of the phone they are calling on. Many customers can use their mobile or landline 'inclusive' minutes package to call us for free.”

Steve Morphew, leader of the council, said the 0844 number was introduced last year as it appeared to be the most cost effective way forward for customers and the council.

But he added: “But due to the pricing structure and call charges of some phone companies, lots of our customers who only have pay-as-you-go mobile phones were paying over the odds when they called us.

“We thought this rip-off would have ended by now but phone companies haven't changed their pricing structure as expected so we have found an alternative way forward which is to introduce an 0344 number.”

Under the existing 0844 number the customer bears all the call costs, but once the new number is adopted, the city council will pay a share of the cost for inbound calls.

Dave wrote on Jun 1^st, 2009 at 8:48pm:

Norwich City Council is changing its telephone number from Monday, August 3 - to make it cheaper for customers to call. The new number - 0344 980 3333 - is very similar to the existing one - 0844 980 3333 - as it only has one digit that is different, but will make a big difference to customers. A council spokeswoman said: “Changing the number from an 08 to an 03 number has three important benefits. “Our customers told us it was too expensive to call us so we are changing our number to address the problem. “Most of our customers will be able to call us at low cost regardless of the phone they are calling on. Many customers can use their mobile or landline 'inclusive' minutes package to call us for free.” Steve Morphew, leader of the council, said the 0844 number was introduced last year as it appeared to be the most cost effective way forward for customers and the council. “We thought this rip-off would have ended by now but phone companies haven't changed their pricing structure as expected so we have found an alternative way forward which is to introduce an 0344 number.” Under the existing 0844 number the customer bears all the call costs, but once the new number is adopted, the city council will pay a share of the cost for inbound calls.

Although the original screw-up by these councillors and especially the council leader in first being conned in to using an 0844 number and the lies then told to justify it was on a quite monumental scale it is heartening to see this error being put right so relatively quickly in Norwich City Council's case.  So well done to the local public there (and no doubt also to some dissident councillors on the group in power and also some vociferous members of the opposition) for forcing the council to backtrack and switch to an 03 number so quickly.  If only the NHS or HMRC's capacity to correct their errors were of the same relatively speedy pace.

The one thing that does concern me in a way though is the Council being left with an odd 0344 access code that very few other governmental bodies will be using and so that may still not be recognised as part of call allowances by some callers.  I really think that having realised its error that Norwich City Council would have been much better off switching over to an 0300 number with the clearer inclusive calls qualifying and public sector organisation branding that this number block now carries.  Also Councillor Morphew still seems a little confused about who will be able to call them either out of inclusive minutes or at standard national rate on their new 03 number when he refers to Most and Many of the council's customers benefiting from the new number.  Were the council to have previously used an 0845 number then the councillor would have had some legitimate reasons to qualify his statement due to the cheaper weekday daytime rate to 0845 for those with BT not on their Anytime calls plan.

I am still a little curious to know though why Councillor Morphew thought that "this rip-off would have ended by now". Also if he and his Cabinet colleagues recognised that 0844 numbers were a rip-off at the time then why did they ever sign up for them in the first place. ;) ::)

I also doubt that anyone is now likely to believe anything Councillor Morphew or his senior council employees tell the public after the quite horrendous lies they told everyone about their 0844 number.  Perhaps in order to restore its public credibility Norwich City Council should have outed the telco that conned them in to signing up for the 0844 number in the first place and explained the precise method of the confidence trickery no doubt used by that telco in order to sell the 0844 number to the Council.

NGMsGhost wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2009 at 1:17pm:

I am still a little curious to know though why Councillor Morphew thought that "this rip-off would have ended by now". Also if he and his Cabinet colleagues recognised that 0844 numbers were a rip-off at the time then why did they ever sign up for them in the first place. ;) ::)

The cost of calling an 0844 number from a BT line is down to the respective telephone provider. The vast majority of these charges are passed to this telephone provider and BT keeps a tiny part.

The customer of the telephone provider operating Norwich City Council's 0844 number is the Council. So it is directly responsible for selecting the amount callers pay for its own benefit!

This is the "rip-off" that Councillor Morphew refers to and it is his council that opted in to it.

There is undoubtedly a significant degree of ignorance, confusion and misunderstanding involved here. Some of that from the past has not been acknowledged and some of it remains.

The people of Norwich may wish to explore the competence of their elected representatives. I am simply delighted at them having done the right thing and provided a good example of what is right and what is wrong. (I do however regret the money that has been unfairly made by telcos in the meantime.)

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2009 at 10:12pm:

I am simply delighted at them having done the right thing and provided a good example of what is right and what is wrong. (I do however regret the money that has been unfairly made by telcos in the meantime.)

On those two points I find myself in agreement with you. :o

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jun 2^nd, 2009 at 10:12pm:

There is undoubtedly a significant degree of ignorance, confusion and misunderstanding involved here.

As there is with the whole 084/7 covert revenue sharing system.  Which is why I remain utterly and implacably opposed to its use by either the private sector or the public sector.

Source: Norwich City Council

http://www.norwich.gov.uk/intranet_docs/corporate/public/committee/reports/2009/Council/QUE_Council_2009_06_09.pdf

COUNCIL
9 June 2009
Questions to Executive Members and Committee Chairs

Question 13
Councillor Brian Watkins to the Leader of the Council:-

‘Last July Councillor Morphew launched the council's new 0844 number saying 'We are committed to getting it right first time, every time'. Would he explain why the council failed in this goal and why proper research was not carried out into the cost of the 0844 number before the switch from the old numbers? Would he also inform council of what the full cost (advertising, reprinting of literature, staff time etc) of changing telephone numbers twice in a year has been and where this money is coming from?’

Councillor Steve Morphew, Leader of the Council’s reply:-

‘Introducing the 0844 number was the means of making significant improvements to front line delivery of services to our customers. This was achieved by having the menu behind the single number and this has given us the tools to drastically improve the time it takes to handle a customer’s query, and has proved to greatly reduce the amount of customers that need to call us back for issues as they are dealt with at first point of contact. It has reduced our average waiting times from 1 minute 33 seconds (July 2008) to 51 seconds (April 2009).

At the time of the original change, both options of 08 and 03 were investigated. Although we fully expected to improve service delivery in the long term, the installation of a 03 number at the very beginning would have had a significant cost attached to it, as the council would be paying for every second that a customer was sat waiting in a queue, had to call us back, or had to be redirected. We also tried to lobby the telecom providers to include 0844 numbers in packages and not to make them premium rate calls.

Now that the new system has been implemented, and service delivery is greatly improved, we have re-evaluated our position, and reworked the costs. We also recognised from feedback that some of our customers were unhappy with the cost of their calls, mainly due to the telecoms companies’ reluctance to include 0844 numbers as part of their inclusive minute’s packages. In recognition of concerns raised, the telecoms providers not making changes, and the recession, we are reducing costs to our customers by introducing the 03 number. However, although they have now changed arrangements for 0845 numbers, they have not made changes for the 0844 numbers. The 03 numbers are included in any customers free minutes package, landline or mobile, and calls can also be dialled directly from outside the UK.

There are no telephony set up charges for changing from the 08 to the 03 number and both numbers will be running side by side initially, so this reduces the need to change leaflets etc. until they need replacing. Changes to signs for the one digit change together with associated publicity will be covered by existing budgets.’

The reported comments again reflect the confusion and misunderstanding referred to previously.

Although in this case a reversal of the original mistaken decision has been achieved, the degree of attack suffered on account of having had to make a u-turn shows why this has not been possible in other cases.

It is vital that local authorities and other public service providers are properly made aware of the issues before taking decisions. This cannot be expected to be provided by those tendering to provide services, as this is not their affair and they cannot offer disinterested advice.

Proper briefings on these matters must be widely distributed by DCLG and the Cabinet Office, notably from the Contact Council and the COI. Ofcom should also have a role, probably in support of such initiatives.

Some work to this end has been undertaken, but much more is required.

Maybe a briefing, perhaps by SCV, to the Local Government Association would be useful?   That is often a main point of contact and advice for local councils.  I don't know if the LGA has any current position or advice on this matter but it would be helpful if they had the facts as there is a danger they, too, would rely on the telecoms companies for information.

The number change is reported in the Norwich Citizen (page 4), the council's newsletter:

http://www.norwich.gov.uk/intranet_docs/A-Z/Citizen/Citizen_July_2009.pdf