Partial Quote " The company also defended its use of the 0844 number saying it is relatively cheap to call from landlines.

Ms White added: "We can confirm that the charge to callers on 0844 numbers is currently set at a maximum of 5 pence per minute from a BT land line, but other network rates may vary and calls from mobiles can cost significantly more.

"These tariffs are put in place by each individual’s personal network provider and we have absolutely no visibility or influence on the level of charges passed on."

http://www.stalbansreview.co.uk/sport/hertssport/10454129.Anger_over_Watford_FC_Wembley_tickets_phone_charges/

Note no mention of a connection charge. :o

bigjohn wrote on Jun 1^st, 2013 at 3:02am:

Partial Quote " The company also defended its use of the 0844 number saying it is relatively cheap to call from landlines. Ms White added: "We can confirm that the charge to callers on 0844 numbers is currently set at a maximum of 5 pence per minute from a BT land line, but other network rates may vary and calls from mobiles can cost significantly more. "These tariffs are put in place by each individual’s personal network provider and we have absolutely no visibility or influence on the level of charges passed on."

It is worth pointing out that this line is outsourced and that the comment above is from that provider.

It will soon no longer be able to hide the Service Charge it enjoys which causes the charge to be greater than to a geographic or 03 number.

At the moment it cites, what many 084 abusers cite: the BT call rate which does not include a per minute Access Charge, and is in fact only the Service Charge, thus hiding the fact that it receives a Service Charge.

Perhaps the most disturbing point made is that where Mr Richard Walker (quoted in the comments) alleges that he has been repeatedly lied to by telecoms companies.


Quote:

Time and again we’ve asked telecoms companies about phone queueing on landline numbers, to be told it’s not possible. We wouldn’t use one here at the club unless we had to, rest assured

I am sure that his concern is about call cost, so by "landline numbers" he means calls at the same rate as that to a geographic number.

Sadly this specific issue has come to light a little late for anything useful to be done in time to have an immediate effect or draw wide public attention. If any Watford fan is interested in taking this particular case forward, the fair telecoms campaign would be delighted to assist.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jun 1^st, 2013 at 4:56pm:

If any Watford fan is interested in taking this particular case forward, the fair telecoms campaign would be delighted to assist.

Are you referring to the two man telecoms campaign formed by its two members and which has not so far chosen to try and be inclusive of any other long term campaigners against 084/7 numbers on this webiste.

Personally I would have thought it would be more appropriate for members of this website to help the OP with their issues and that your post in effect amounts to "poaching" by members of a rival website wearing a different hat.

NGMsGhost wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2013 at 2:10pm:

Are you referring to the two man telecoms campaign formed by its two members and which has not so far chosen to try and be inclusive of any other long term campaigners against 084/7 numbers on this webiste.

I am referring to a group, led by two contributors to this site, that musters whatever resources it can to campaign for "fair telecoms" outside the limitations of this forum.

It has been suggested that many members of this forum are committed to certain absolutist principles and therefore withhold their support. I had understood that many people who contribute to this site do not have the time to commit to ongoing engagement in active campaigning. I see that position as perfectly valid and acceptable, and in no way compromised by making occasional contributions to campaigning efforts, as time and energies permit.


NGMsGhost wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2013 at 2:10pm:

Personally I would have thought it would be more appropriate for members of this website to help the OP with their issues and that your post in effect amounts to "poaching" by members of a rival website wearing a different hat.

The specific issue raised by the OP was that of misrepresentation of call costs by Ticketmaster. I agree that more comment could have been made on this topic.

There are what could be said to be rival discussion forums that may seek to poach advertising revenue by drawing readers to hit their sites. I cannot however see how my comment could have had that effect.


My comment indicated a readiness to engage with the Watford FC Head of Supporter Communications, who appears to have been misled by telephone companies. Such contact would however only be likely to be effective if made in conjunction with a supporter.

I hope nobody misunderstood this offer as being intended to prevent anyone else from offering to do the same or more. I have however seen it suggested that those who "Engage with the Scammers" may not expect to enjoy the support of members of this forum.