The DVLA appears to have *finally* made the switch from 0870 to 0300 (albeit very quietly!):

http://www.dft.gov.uk/dvla/contactus/vehicles_enquires.aspx

The number on that page, 0300 790 6802, is currently unobtainable. However, other 0300 790 68xx numbers are answered by DVLA for various purposes.

The 0870 numbers and their underlying 01792 numbers are also now unobtainable.  :-?

Driver Enquiries has changed from 0870 240 0009 to 0300 790 6801.
Vehicle Enquiries has changed from 0870 240 0010 to 0300 790 6802.

Subsequent 0300 numbers are for other DVLA enquiry lines.


I am surprised that the 0870 numbers have apparently been withdrawn from service without redirecting to the new numbers. Or perhaps they should have been kept in service for a year before redirecting to the new 0300 numbers.

The plug shouldn't be pulled on these numbers in such a short space of time as they are likely to be on leaflets and forms.

Dave wrote on Sep 7^th, 2009 at 10:45pm:

The plug shouldn't be pulled on these numbers in such a short space of time as they are likely to be on leaflets and forms.

Very true - I've recently seen a letter from the DVLA quoting their old 0870 number which is presumably now dead. However, if the new 03 number is also out of order, perhaps they're having some issues with their transition...?

At least they've finally dumped their 0870 numbers!!

They waited until they could no longer take a cut of the call costs though!

The 0870 and corresponding 01792 numbers are now working as normal.

The new Driver Enquiries number, 0300 790 6801, says that due to high demand at present, all lines are engaged. The message refers callers to the DVLA's website and D100 form. It ends by saying that "you may wish to call back later and we apologise for any inconvenience caused.

The new Vehicle Enquiries number, 0300 790 6802, has a new menu with options for different types vehicle enquiry, i.e. 1: car/SORN/V5 log book enquiry, 2: other vehicle enquiry, 3: driver enquiry.


So it would appear that the new numbers are up and running yet and that the DVLA is changing the way calls are answered by designing new IVRs.

An enquiry to DVLA has confirmed that no accouncement of the telephone number changes, which took effect from 1 September has been made, nor has any media release been issued. The press office will be ready to address any media enquiries and could be promoted into issuing a statement, if necessary.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 8^th, 2009 at 3:49pm:

The press office will be ready to address any media enquiries and could be promoted into issuing a statement, if necessary.

prompted I think was the word you were struggling for SCV?

But doesn't DVLA's adoption of 03 along with Companies House (neither of which offer life saving medical services but are run by the government) provide you with further powerful ammunition against the Department of Heath and the arrogant and out of touch Permanent Secretary and Secretary of State at the Department of Health?

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 19^th, 2009 at 6:09am:

prompted I think was the word you were struggling for SCV? But doesn't DVLA's adoption of 03 along with Companies House (neither of which offer life saving medical services but are run by the government) provide you with further powerful ammunition against the Department of Heath and the arrogant and out of touch Permanent Secretary and Secretary of State at the Department of Health?

Forgive me, I am indeed struggling to get all my words right at present with so much going on.

Please do not forget NHS Blood and Transplant. There are other NHS examples, including some provided by NHS Direct.

The adoption of 03 by the DVLA is indeed very valuable as a lever on all other Departments. We have yet to see how far the announcement on Monday will cause more NHS bodies to switch from 084 to 03, where this is appropriate. As this will cause them to incur extra costs, including the one-off overhead costs of transition, we may have to be a little careful about this in the current political environment. In some cases it could be appropriate to wait until there is some service reconfiguration going on anyway to justify a change of number (that is what happened with NHS Blood and Transplant).

I do not believe that there is a lack of awareness of 03 at the Department of Health. It was not mentioned at any length in Monday's announcements, due to the state of on-going negotiations with the BMA. Had it been referred to as the obvious solution for certain cases (which it is), it would not have been possible to pretend that an outcome to the issue has been achieved.

The cost and disruption of full transition in the case of the main NHS Direct number has been said to be unacceptable, given the possibility of a further transition that is currently being discussed, even though unlikely to come into effect for several years (if ever). By explicitly stating that this number will not change, the possibility of other numbers being changed has not been dismissed, although there is of course no guarantee that they will. We are still awaiting the directions to NHS bodies and will doubtless study this carefully. I will continue to press for 0345 4647 to be immediately introduced alongside 0845 4647, as an exceptional measure with limited publicity, demanded only by these exceptional circumstances.

---

When it is said "... provide you with ...", I hope it is not being suggested that our campaign should be publicly seen as being conducted or run by the one person, or group of people, to whom the comment is addressed. I am heavily involved in these matters, working hard, as I am fortunate in having the time and the energy to do so, and achieving some results. I do however hope that this will continue to be an effort in which we can all feel involved.

It is "we" (us all) who have ammunition with which to campaign. My quoted posting was intended to draw attention to the existence of that ammunition so that anyone could use it, or indeed make it more potent by pressing for media coverage so as to get a positive statement of the advantages of 03 out of the DfT. I am unhappy that it has attracted a comment which perhaps suggests that rather than briefing others, I should be getting on with using it myself.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 19^th, 2009 at 12:18pm:

The cost and disruption of full transition in the case of the main NHS Direct number has been said to be unacceptable, given the possibility of a further transition that is currently being discussed.

And surely you know that is a load of old bull thought up by mean and grubby telecoms salesman at NEG, BT Global and other such places to hang on to their profitable revenue share for as long as possible.

If it is actually difficult to change phone numbers and ensure operational integrity then how have the BBC, Sky, DVLA Companies House etc managed to change all their numbers to a different number range without a hitch.

Surely you don't accept any of the ludicrous arguments of the scammers to hang on to their revenue share.  But assuming that is the case then why do you so frequently quote them as though they are fact?

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 19^th, 2009 at 1:42pm:

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 19th, 2009 at 12:18pm: The cost and disruption of full transition in the case of the main NHS Direct number has been said to be unacceptable, given the possibility of a further transition that is currently being discussed. And surely you know that is a load of old bull thought up by mean and grubby telecoms salesman at NEG, BT Global and other such places to hang on to their profitable revenue share for as long as possible. If it is actually difficult to change phone numbers and ensure operational integrity then how have the BBC, Sky, DVLA Companies House etc managed to change all their numbers to a different number range without a hitch. Surely you don't accept any of the ludicrous arguments of the scammers to hang on to their revenue share.  But assuming that is the case then why do you so frequently quote them as though they are fact?

The costs and disruption arising from changing a contact telephone number may be understated and overstated. I would hope to do neither.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 19^th, 2009 at 2:48pm:

The costs and disruption arising from changing a contact telephone number may be understated and overstated. I would hope to do neither.

You try too much to be all things to all men at all times rather than a resolute campaigner who resolutely sticks by their guns.

We know the other side have their devious and evasive excuses for continued 084/7 number misuse but we simply don't agree with them root and branch.  So why do you always act as an apologist for the other side by stating their ludicrous untruthful and totally distorted arguments.  I don't ever notice any of their campaigners putting forward our arguments as to why it is immoral for them to continue to use these covert revenue share numbers.  Why are you even prepared to countenance the ludicrous argument that it is too technically complex to change a humble telephone number?

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 19^th, 2009 at 2:59pm:

You try too much ...

I understand that this is a discussion forum. It is not a feedback site for those who are discontented about how their leaders are conducting a campaign, although that is how this thread is starting to appear. We have no leaders to attack and complain about, we are all working together towards certain shared objectives, which require us to pursaude those outside this forum of the strength of our arguments.

There is nobody who I oppose root and branch. (How would I look now if I had taken that position in relation to the DVLA?) I have always declared my views and argued my points, but I do not believe that I occupy any position that makes me accountable for them in this forum.

I can see the benefits of campaigners who are naturally drawn to enter into battle with particular organisations, refusing to acknowledge any validity in positions that they may hold and disagreeing with every word that they say. I hope it is well known that this is not my way; I cannot see any benefit that may be derived from deploying this type of argument directly against myself in public discussion.

I cannot recall ever stating any general acceptance of the argument that "it is too technically complex to change a humble telephone number", nor can I recall ever hearing an argument expressed in such terms. I am not aware of any counter campaign group that specifically seeks to promote or defend the inappropriate use of revenue sharing numbers. The essential truth of our position and the massive public support it enjoys would deny any determined opponent even the slightest bit of room for reasoned generosity in their approach. I am aware that the arguments we present are gradually coming to be recognised by those who would have not advanced them previously. This is also being seen in practice as organisations are adopting 03 numbers.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 19^th, 2009 at 5:02pm:

I am not aware of any counter campaign group that specifically seeks to promote or defend the inappropriate use of revenue sharing numbers.

So you are not aware then of the members of Ofcom's NTS Focus Group who regularly meet to discuss how to hang on to their earnings from connecting NTS calls then?

See www.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/groups/nts_focus/

All the big names who run profitable NTS origination termination and call connection operations seem to attend:-

BT
Cable & Wireless
CarPhoneWarehouse
Easynet
Flextel
Kingston Communications
Skycom
Tiscali
Thus
Virgin Media

And it convenes behind closed doors at Ofcom almost every month or two.  I don't notice Ofcom bothering to meet with consumer campigners on that kind of regular basis or indeed at all. :o >:( [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 19^th, 2009 at 5:16pm:

hang on to their earnings from connecting NTS calls ... I don't notice Ofcom bothering to meet with consumer campigners on that kind of regular basis or indeed at all.

Perhaps the time is long overdue for anyone who cares enough about this to set up a formal group to campaign for something else to happen to those earnings. With sufficient membership, such a group would be able to demand recognition by Ofcom. If that is the issue, then it needs to be addressed. Ofcom cannot be seen to formally consult with individuals who do not seek or claim to represent anyone, such as myself.

Source: DVLA

http://www.dft.gov.uk/dvla/pressoffice/pressreleases/29102009.aspx

<<

DVLA launches new memorable Vehicle Tax Line – 0300 1234 321

Release Date: 29/10/2009

DVLA has launched a new memorable 0300 telephone line for motorists to tax their vehicles.


The new number, 0300 1234 321, is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and takes less than 4 minutes to use. The service automatically checks that correct insurance and MOT documents are in place.

The popularity of the environmentally-friendly phone and online service is growing, with more than half of last month’s vehicle tax renewals completed this way.

Andrew Rhodes, DVLA’s Director of Products and Services, said:
‘We listened when our customers told us they wanted to have the option to interact digitally with DVLA, and we are constantly aiming to improve our services. By providing a new memorable renewal number we hope to make it even easier for motorists to tax their vehicle."

>>