Some  Call Providers have started to make changes to the way that they provide calls to their customers, these changes will affect the 1280 service and result in higher bills for certain call features.


http://www.calls.bt.com/1280/

From the FAQ on that page

Quote:

These changes may affect customers that currently have a line billed by BT, but who make their calls through a different provider. Customers who do this can dial 1280 to make calls that are billed by BT. On the new service, a call pre-fixed with 1280 will connect in the normal way, but it will NOT be chargeable to a BT bill. It will actually be charged by your own Call Provider (and this could be at a higher rate). It will also NOT count towards the necessary calls quota to receive either BT Caller Display1 or BT Answer 15712 at no extra cost.

and

Quote:

How will I know if my Call Provider is making these changes? A number of Call Providers are making these changes. Some of these, such as Sky, have made this information public. However, other Call Providers have chosen not to do so, and the information remains commercially confidential.

So, if you usualy use 1280 to force a call via BT, not only could you suddenly be charged more for the call, but you won't even know about it until your bills come in because providers aren't telling you!  Nasty.

I imagine this just affects people who use CPS (carrier pre-selection) i.e. you don't have to dial a prefix to use the alternate carrier. If you dial a prefix or use an add-on box to do it, I can't see how it would affect you, as you don't need to use 1280 to force a call to BT.

I wonder if it means they are barring access to ALL other carriers ?

How can they do this if you pay line rental to BT?
I thought that was the reason for continuing to pay line rental to BT, as BT are obliged to allow calls via other suppliers!

Plus,IF they can do this, why are they allowed to do it covertly?

Or are BT scaremongering?

I think this only affects those who have handed over their line rental to a third party (e.g. Talk Talk or Sky) via the WLR or LLU arrangements and BT's 'announcement' is just a poorly-worded attempt to make sure those switching their line rental realise the implications for the 1280 prefix. i.e. the second sentence in that FAQ is still accurate.

Quote:

These changes may affect customers that currently have a line billed by BT, but who make their calls through a different provider. Customers who do this can dial 1280 to make calls that are billed by BT.

IMHO, those who still pay line rental to BT and use a third party calls provider on a CPS (Carrier PreSelect) basis, are unaffected.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?p=13028005#post13028005

BT Wholesale is now flogging "Wholesale calls line independent". This is a scam. Sky (or whoever) steals control of all calls, but the hapless customer goes on paying BT Retail for a "call plan" including calls he can't make. BT Retail has meanwhile had the nerve to purport to amend their t&c for telephony to say that 1280 may not work.

We are telling BT Retail that we do not accept this unilateral and unfair attempt to change our contract with them. They are contracted to route each call as we specify by a prefix, or, if we specify no prefix, to our CPS provider. I am also complaining to Ofcom, whose first response mistakenly claimed that Sky were switching their customers to WLR (which would require the customers' informed consent, of course).

If the BT Group is allowed to get away with this, the effect is that BT Wholesale is sure of the wholesale profit on all calls, and Sky etc add whatever retail margin they like, and the likes of Finarea are squeezed out of business.

We all need to complain to Ofcom over this otherwise all other CPS providers will just do the same. We need to complain to Ofcom as it restricts our choice of providers for which it was Oftel/Ofcom's intention that we could choose who we wanted to carry what type of call we decided. It's basically stifing competition.

bbb_uk wrote on Sep 17^th, 2008 at 11:32pm:

We all need to complain to Ofcom over this otherwise all other CPS providers will just do the same. We need to complain to Ofcom as it restricts our choice of providers for which it was Oftel/Ofcom's intention that we could choose who we wanted to carry what type of call we decided. It's basically stifing competition.

Is it the CPS provider which is blocking the 1280 prefix (and other prefixes) or is it BT?

Dave wrote on Sep 17^th, 2008 at 11:35pm:

Is it the CPS provider which is blocking the 1280 prefix (and other prefixes) or is it BT?

Going by what I've read on MSE here from Heinz and few others, it appears that BT have introduced a way that CPS providers can effectively block access to 1280 or other Indirect Access providers even if they still continue to pay BT for linerental.

Going by the thread on SkyUser forums, it appears that Sky have already started switching customers allegedly without their knowledge!

bbb_uk wrote on Sep 17^th, 2008 at 11:52pm:

Dave wrote on Sep 17th, 2008 at 11:35pm: Is it the CPS provider which is blocking the 1280 prefix (and other prefixes) or is it BT? Going by what I've read on MSE here from Heinz and few others, it appears that BT have introduced a way that CPS providers can effectively block access to 1280 or other Indirect Access providers even if they still continue to pay BT for linerental. Going by the thread on SkyUser forums, it appears that Sky have already started switching customers allegedly without their knowledge!

This shows the lengths that some CPS providers will go to in order to close down any alternative call providers. BT is simply providing services to its customers (Sky Talk etc), so I don't see that it is doing anything wrong. It is surely the CPS provider who is doing wrong by subscribing to such a service.

If you get a speeding fine, it is hardly the fault of the manufacturer of the vehicle you were driving at the time for providing that vehicle to you, now is it?

This is just typical Sky behaviour. It's strange how the BT bashers come out of the woodwork, as too do those who consider the BBC licence fee unfair, but yet happily accept the monopoly that is Sky.

Dave wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 12:01am:

This shows the lengths that some CPS providers will go to in order to close down any alternative call providers. BT is simply providing services to its customers (Sky Talk etc), so I don't see that it is doing anything wrong. It is surely the CPS provider who is doing wrong by subscribing to such a service.

I agree it's not BTs fault however one wonders what their motives were for introducing this service/facility?  I assume that this maybe costs CPS providers slightly more but in return they have full control over what their customers (us general public) use.

Remember that this wont stop with just Sky as other providers like TalkTalk, etc will just follow by example because it is in their interest to stop their own customers from accessing Indirect Access numbers (18185, BT 1280, etc) even if they have linerental with BT.

Oftel and its useless successor Ofcom, both say that with CPS the ability to override calls and route them to the a cheaper alternative is our right providing we continue to pay linerental to BT.

If this continues, which I suspect it might unless we all complain to useless OfcoN, then this right will no longer exist and we will be tied to using only the (CPS) supplier where we get our calls from regardless if we pay our linerental to BT.

I guess the answer is not to use CPS, and always dial a supplier prefix, or get a dialer box to do it for you.  Although I subscribe to a couple of indirect suppliers, as well as the VoIP we normally use, I've never been tempted to hand over that much control of my calling paterns to a third party.    Some, of course, will only operate on the basis of CPS, to try and lock you in.

I guess CPS was introduced at the request of the other carriers to save the cost of distributing dialer boxes,  and to try and catch more of the calls being made.  This latest initiative is just a logical extension of that.

(as an aside, I've been an indirect customer since the days of Mercury 2300, when you had to dial 131 and a ten digit account number, which I knew {and still know} off by heart as I could never afford the vast amount of money for a dialer in those days!  It turned out to be very handy, as you could use it from any phone, even payphones, and be charged home phone rates!)

irrelevant wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 12:31pm:

I guess the answer is not to use CPS, and always dial a supplier prefix, or get a dialer box to do it for you.

Actually I've just moved back to BT for their unlimited calls because they were second cheapest (Sky the cheapest but getting rid of Sky) so it was a choice between BT or Primus.  However, I heard Primus was moving their call centre outside the UK which would no doubt mean if I had a problem it can be so much harder/longer to sort it out due to language barrier, etc.

Primus do 90min per call before getting charged whereas it's only an hour on BT.

However, the point is that the whole idea of CPS was to increase competition and allow us more control over who carries some or all of our calls.

This new thing that BT are doing is most likely going to be snapped up by other big CPS providers just so they can block people from using Indirect Accesss providers thereby forcing them to pay their own rates for calls which for those Sky customers mean paying upto 10p/min for 0870 numbers and 6p/min for 0845 numbers.

I was using 1280 for making 0844 calls to make international calls, last month all my calls were charged by sky. I thought I made calls without 1280 prefix. Sky didn't tell me about the change. This is really annoying. Who is reponsible for all these changes? Is it sky or BT?  >:( >:(

But how much do Sky charge for 0844 numbers? As far as I can see, their prices are currently the same as the standard BT prices. So for international calls, you are currently OK. The problem will be in the future if they decide to block cheap dial-through operators!

The Sky prices can be found here:

This file has the charge band codes:
http://www.sky.com/Assets/PDF/StaticFiles/1212410.pdf

And this file has the costs for each charge band:
http://www.sky.com/Assets/PDF/StaticFiles/1210910.pdf

I was using 1280 to make minimum calls to qualify free caller display from BT, now i have to pay BT for my caller display.

The current Sky Talk Terms and Conditions say

Quote:

5.1 We may restrict your ability to make calls using a prefix number to access a different telephone provider ("Indirect Access Calls") at any time by giving reasonable notice to you.

Were you given any notice at all?  If not, then they are in breach of contract.  At the very least, you should be given a refund for all the calls they didn't allow you to make.  I'd suggest you take the oportunity to cancel the contract, too, and find a better supplier for your 'phone calls.

i am planning to quit sky talk, i am wondering anybody can give some ideas about a new service provider with free evening and week end calls. i know primus saver 2 is a good option, but who knows they will also restrict over riding CPS.

gudman wrote on Sep 25^th, 2008 at 12:40pm:

i am planning to quit sky talk, i am wondering anybody can give some ideas about a new service provider with free evening and week end calls. i know primus saver 2 is a good option, but who knows they will also restrict over riding CPS.

There's always BT... £10.50 per month for free evening/weekend calls (if you sign up for 12 months), free caller ID, and the rules prohibit them from blocking any numbers for cheap international calls, etc. You can also use prefixes for cheap daytime calls should you need to.

If you're worried about companies blocking CPS override, the only alternative to BT is to take your line rental from someone else - there's no advantage in sticking with BT line rental if you can't make calls through them.

jrawle wrote on Sep 25^th, 2008 at 2:54pm:

gudman wrote on Sep 25th, 2008 at 12:40pm: i am planning to quit sky talk, i am wondering anybody can give some ideas about a new service provider with free evening and week end calls. i know primus saver 2 is a good option, but who knows they will also restrict over riding CPS. There's always BT... £10.50 per month for free evening/weekend calls (if you sign up for 12 months), free caller ID, and the rules prohibit them from blocking any numbers for cheap international calls, etc. You can also use prefixes for cheap daytime calls should you need to. If you're worried about companies blocking CPS override, the only alternative to BT is to take your line rental from someone else - there's no advantage in sticking with BT line rental if you can't make calls through them.

Remember with BT if you do not pay by direct debit or do not agree to have a 'paperless bill' you will get charged extra. However I have to say that I have my telephone line rental, all calls and broadband connection with BT and they have never ever given me any trouble.

jrawle wrote on Sep 25^th, 2008 at 2:54pm:

If you're worried about companies blocking CPS override, the only alternative to BT is to take your line rental from someone else - there's no advantage in sticking with BT line rental if you can't make calls through them.

Many, but not all, companies will allow you to access their service by dialing a shortcode before the number.  CPS, Carrier Pre-Selection, was brought in to provide a "default provider" for your calls should you not dial the code, and is therefore beneficial to providers, hence why some insist on it now.

If you specifically don't allow a call provider to instigate CPS on your line, but opt to always dial their access code, then BT is still your default, nobody can do anything about it, and you can pick and choose per-call.  Or get a dialer box to dial the code for you.

As for whom to use, there is a plethora of companies available.  It depends on your calling pattern - i.e. how many, how long, where to, and when your calls are.  this post is a good starting point.

Remember unless an official complaint is made to Ofcom that this goes against the whole idea of CPS and the fact that Sky haven't informed anyone, then Sky will get away with it and if they do then its possible other CPS providers will follow suite.

irrelevant wrote on Sep 25^th, 2008 at 3:11pm:

Many, but not all, companies will allow you to access their service by dialing a shortcode before the number.  CPS, Carrier Pre-Selection, was brought in to provide a "default provider" for your calls should you not dial the code, and is therefore beneficial to providers, hence why some insist on it now.

That's what I meant by, "You can also use prefixes for cheap daytime calls should you need to." If CPS providers are now allowed to block the override number, having BT as the default is the only way to be sure you can make calls via BT as desired.

irrelevant wrote on Sep 25^th, 2008 at 11:10am:

The current Sky Talk Terms and Conditions say Quote: 5.1 We may restrict your ability to make calls using a prefix number to access a different telephone provider ("Indirect Access Calls") at any time by giving reasonable notice to you. Were you given any notice at all?  If not, then they are in breach of contract.  At the very least, you should be given a refund for all the calls they didn't allow you to make.  I'd suggest you take the oportunity to cancel the contract, too, and find a better supplier for your 'phone calls.

Yet Part A. 4.5   Says . If you are a Sky Talk Calls only customer, some calls may not be carried by Sky Talk (e.g. reverse charge calls, some calls to directory enquiries, calls made to emergency numbers and some internet calls). These calls will be automatically routed via your line rental provider and may appear on your line rental provider’s bill.

I use www.18866.com for phone calls you just pay the connection fee 4or 5p,free calls after 1900 for an hour but you have to hang up and redial free at weekends too same script,I have the post office for line rental ,while I am on I have just rang Sky at 1245 on 01506 421884 ;D using my 18866 prefix it cost me 4p

It is definitely BT Wholesale which dreamt up Wholesale Calls Line Independent, in full knowledge that CPs that take WCLI gain control of Openreach lines that consumers are paying BT Retail to use.

Ofcom's latest response to my complaint about this scam is:

03 October 2008

Please accept my apologies for the delay in responding to your query.

We are currently in discussions with BT to clarify the situation and will respond to you as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely

:: John Ingham

I have responded as follows:
Thank you. As one of the citizen-consumers that Ofcom serves, may I summarise the legal position.

1. BT Wholesale appears to have slipped WCLI past Ofcom with the lie that it is equivalent to CPS.

2. BT Retail has purported to introduce a new condition 3 for domestic telephony which is plainly unfair, and therefore void.

(see this link)

3. Sky is, so I read in several web forums but cannot personally confirm, slamming from CPS to WCLI consumers who are paying BT Retail for use of an Openreach line, and also taking SkyTalk (or whatever they call it).

4. In these circumstances, if the consumer instructs BT Retail to route a call via BT, by using the 1280 prefix, BT is contractually bound to obey that instruction, and only BT (Retail) can bill the consumer for that call.  If Sky bills the consumer for the call, the consumer has no contractual obligation to pay Sky for it. On the contrary, the consumer should insist that he instructed BT to carry the call, and if BT has capriciously subcontracted it to Sky, Sky must look to BT for payment.

5. Moreover, the consumer has claims for damages against BT Retail for misrepresentation, against BT Wholesale for inducing a breach of the contract between BT Retail and the consumer, and, if Sky persists in seeking payment, against Sky for harassment for payment of a non-existent debt.

6. Finally, all this seems to me to be prima facie evidence of a conspiracy between BT Wholesale, BT Retail, and Sky. If so, Ofcom should not only be regulating against it, but also informing the police.

# Link edited ~ DaveM

Caller display is free as part of the privacy package

a very nice man wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 8:15pm:

Caller display is free as part of the privacy package

I presume you are referring to BT Privacy which requires the subscriber to make two chargeable calls per month. If the 1280 prefix is barred from a particular CPS provider, then this will not be possible and BT Privacy will cost £1.75 per month.

Dave wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 8:19pm:

a very nice man wrote on Oct 6th, 2008 at 8:15pm: Caller display is free as part of the privacy package I presume you are referring to BT Privacy which requires the subscriber to make two chargeable calls per month. If the 1280 prefix is barred from a particular CPS provider, then this will not be possible and BT Privacy will cost £1.75 per month.

I was concerned about this when BT moved from 5p/hour calls to free calls for an hour, as I rarely make any other calls, so might be charged for caller ID. However, they have now changed the terms and conditions to say it's free for "customers who make at least six inclusive or chargeable calls (excludes calls made with BT Broadband Talk) with BT every three months." Similar wording is used for free 1571 (although you just have to make "some" calls). The total number of inclusive calls is now listed on the BT bill. Of course, this won't apply to people who use CPS.

jrawle wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 9:00pm:

… However, they have now changed the terms and conditions to say it's free for "customers who make at least six inclusive or chargeable calls (excludes calls made with BT Broadband Talk) with BT every three months." …

Thanks. I didn't realise this.

The main page detailing BT Privacy which I linked to only mentions chargeable calls in the small print at the bottom, although it does provide a link to the terms and conditions which are as you've said.

jrawle wrote on Oct 6^th, 2008 at 9:00pm:

... this won't apply to people who use CPS.

Er, it will apply to BT Retail customers who use honest CPS of another provider, because Ofcom requires that the customer can over-ride honest CPS by using access codes including of course 1280.  The trouble is that at present it does not apply to people who have been slammed from honest CPS to BT Wholesale's evil 'Wholesale Calls Line Independent' product.

For anyone who finds that their calls provider is doing this I would note that I take my WLR line rental from www.yourcalls.net and they do not block 1280 access, even though this is a WLR product where I also take my line rental from them.  The calls come through on my yourcalls.net bill but seem to be at a different rate to yourcalls.net's normal stated tariffs to those codes.  They also do not block indirect access carriers like 18185, 1899 etc.

Complaining to Ofcom will unfortunately have very little effect for anyone who has this happen to them.  What needs to be done is to make a complaint to your own CPS calls provider, presumably achieve deadlock with them and then refer the matter on to the telecommunications ombudsman - Otelo - www.otelo.org.uk   A complaint to Trading Standards should also be made as Trading Standards counts numbers and acts where there are a fair few complaints.

This is a further example of so called competition in utilities being annihilated by ludicrous contract lock ins and ridiculous terms that the regulator does not prevent.

For instance I just checked alternatives for Scottish Power for my gas and electricity with www.energyhelpline.com and www.energylinx.co.uk and each pointed me to Npower being £45 a year cheaper and I can also get another £40 cashback for switching with www.topcashback.co.uk

However careful examination of the Npower terms and conditions shows that both my gas and electricty tariffs would have gobsmacking standing charges of £100 each (even though the unit cost is very low) and there is also a £50 rebate for paying by direct debit on each utility (£50 for gas and £50 for electricity so £100 rebate total) only paid after 12 months in each case.  In other words Npower's tariff is such that unless you stay exactly one year and leave immediately at the end of the year you are shafted.  If you try to change supplier to a cheaper one after 4 months or 16 months you lose out massively.  So it is not worth changing from Scottish Power Online Energy Saver 4, who do not have these lock ins, and I await a better deal without lock ins from a rival.  But how many members of the public would spot the lock in as it is not made clear by the energy saving websites or in any of their headline information on the packages.

A decent regulator who wanted competition would make these kind of unfair lock ins illegal as they distort customer price perceptions of whether switching is sensible but unfortunately the kind of in bed with the industry regulators we have do absolutely nothing. :o >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

I just had a look at yourcalls.net, and have to question their comparison table with BT:
https://www.yourcalls.net/Features/LeisureSaver.aspx

They claim their "Leisure Saver" package is "free", while BT's is £2.70. Yet theirs is only free with a 12-month contract, just the same as BT. It seems the only difference is that BT offer this package without a 12-month contract if customers don't mind paying. But that's not comparing like with like.

If you have contacts there, perhaps you can point this out to them, as it's misleading advertising.

I also note that they don't compare features such as caller display. As far as I can tell, this costs £1.50 per month, while being free with BT.

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 8^th, 2008 at 9:19am:

For anyone who finds that their calls provider is doing this I would note that I take my WLR line rental from www.yourcalls.net and they do not block 1280 access, even though this is a WLR product where I also take my line rental from them.

That may well be the case,but the thread is about people who have left their line rental with BT and cps their calls to another supplier,and are now stopped from placing some calls via BT to get cheaper calls ,or because they want to qualify for free calling features. If you move your line rental away from BT and attempt to use 1280 its always going to be billed by your line rental provider as you no longer have an account with BT.

See here: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/Oftel/ind_groups/op_policy/cpscgm/docs/cpsconguidev3.htm

Ofcom say :

"Q: Do I have to make every call using my CPS provider?

No, you will be able to use any other provider with whom you have arranged services (including BT) by dialling extra digits before the phone number you want to call. (This is called an 'over-ride' or 'indirect access' code.) For example, you may want to use a CPS provider for most international calls but use another provider just for calls to a particular country. "

But now without warning allow the over-ride code to be blocked !!!!!

Talk Talk no longer allow access to 1280.