irrelevant wrote on Sep 20^th, 2007 at 12:32am:

They certainly aren't low cost for those who use mobile phones, VOIP or payphones. Can't the government understand this very very simple fact?!

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmtran/435/435ii.pdf

House of Commons
Transport Committee
Passengers’
Experiences of Air
Travel
Eighth Report of Session 2006–07
Volume II

Q57 Clive EVord: Are there telephone booking
charges and how much do they vary?
Mr Evans: We have not done a survey on telephone
booking charges. The only ones we have come across
are those that have come through complaints. The
diVerences would be flat rate charges or using a
premium rate telephone line. When we discuss with
the carriers about the premium telephone lines, they
assure us they are all complying with ICSTIS
guidelines on using premium rate lines.

Q58 Clive EVord: We all know about ICSTIS
guidelines, do we not? Is there a problem with
airlines not telling customers about the charges they
may incur by booking over the phone?
Mr Evans: ICSTIS guidelines require the user of a
service to tell the person that they are speaking on a
premium rate line. That is generic. That is sometimes
the discussion we need to have, whether we have a
remedy in generic legislation or consumer protection
legislation, or whether we need to be calling for
something specific for air transport.

Q24 Chairman: Who are?
Mr Evans: British Airways and Easyjet. I think BA
has a flat rate charge and Easyjet has a premium rate
which you can call at. We only became aware of it
when a complainant told us it cost her £12.50 to
redeem her £20 voucher.

Q690Clive EVord: Without naming names, what
about the principle of additional charges for people
with disabilities?

Mrs Bates: We are against that. The DDA is very
much against that. It is not just the Ryanair thing
about paying for a wheelchair. There are other
hidden charges like, for instance, if I cannot book on
line for the assistance that I need. I have to ring what
is usually a premium rate number in order to book
the assistance which I am obliged to book and that
can run to an hour’s phone call. In my view and in
DPTAC’s view, that is a tax on my disability.

Submission 2: HM
I amcurrently in dispute with Ryanair who charged me 10 euros for booking my flights with a credit card.
In fact, I used a debit card but when I wrote to them (five lines of text which were absolutely specific about
the diVerence between credit and debit card charges) they responded, by e-mail, with a load of nonsense
about their tickets being non refundable! I then tried to contact them on that e-mail address to point out
the error of their ways but each time my e-mail was bounced back. I have now written to them again but
they won’t have received that letter yet.
I amsuggesting that Ryanair may deliberately charge a credit card fee even though tickets were purchased
with a debit card—and then deliberately send back letters or e-mails to complainants which do not address
that complaint. Considering that the loss to the complainant is 9 euros 53 cents it is likely that they get away
with hundreds or even thousands of instances of overcharging simply because the avenues of complaint are
so narrow and either “premium phone line” expensive or very slow.
Have I missed the boat on the Transport Select Committee or would it be worth sending you copies of
the correspondence? Better still, have you any evidence that my problem is not unique?

Memorandum submitted by Stuart Diack (PEAT 36)

The Daily Mirror (I understand Wednesday 25 April 2007), also reported that you are on a premium a
rate line (I think it’s 50p a minute ), that takes approximately 10 minutes to get through to someone at their
call centre. This is actually correct because I have had reason to phone them in the past and that’s roughly
how long it took me to get through to them.

irrelevant wrote on Sep 20^th, 2007 at 12:50am:



Recently?? BT stopped the differential in July 2004, over 3 years ago, and most if not all telcos followed suit

House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 01 Oct 2007 (pt 0001)

Health
General Practitioners: Telephone Services
Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list by primary care trust the medical GP practices which use 0844 revenue-shaving telephone numbers; and what guidance he has issued on the use of such numbers. [155523]


1 Oct 2007 : Column 2342W

Mr. Bradshaw: The Department does not collect information on telephone numbers in use by general practitioners practices.

Lord Warner wrote to primary care trust chief executives on 19 December 2006 about the use of non-geographical (084) telephone numbers by NHS services. The letter has been placed in the Library and is also available at:

http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Lettersandcirculars/Dearcollea...

idb wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2007 at 4:00am:


This answer does NOT seem to be true.
The NHS Choices website contains details of all GPs with their address and phone number listed.

http://www.nhs.uk/servicedirectories/Pages/ServiceSearch.aspx

We should write to Peter Bottomley MP and let him know of this information.

loddon wrote on Oct 3^rd, 2007 at 8:59am:


I sent this letter to Peter Bottomley MP today : ---

Dear Mr Bottomley,

I have read that you raised the following question in The House :--- Health General Practitioners: Telephone Services Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will list by primary care trust the medical GP practices which use 0844 revenue-shaving telephone numbers; and what guidance he has issued on the use of such numbers. [155523]

The reply was :--- 1 Oct 2007 : Column 2342W  Mr. Bradshaw: The Department does not collect information on telephone numbers in use by general practitioners practices.  Lord Warner wrote to primary care trust chief executives on 19 December 2006 about the use of non-geographical (084) telephone numbers by NHS services. The letter has been placed in the Library and is also available at:  http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Lettersandcirculars/Dearcollea...

This answer does NOT seem to be true. The "NHS Choices" website contains details of all GPs with their address and phone number listed. 
http://www.nhs.uk/servicedirectories/Pages/ServiceSearch.aspx ;
It would seem a simple task to extract a list of those doctors using 0844 numbers.

The reply from Ben Bradshaw refers to a letter from Lord Warner (NHS Minister) to PCT Chairmen dated 19th December 2006. This letter contains the phrase --- "ensure that patients telephoning practices do not pay more than they would if they called a local geographical telephone number".

My dictionary defines ENSURE as meaning "to make certain", "to guarantee". This is surely a directive rather than mere guidance. The letter tasks PCT Chairmen with making sure that patients do not pay more than a geographic call rate when phoning their doctor. Allowing surgeries to impose an 0844 or 0845 number on their patients appears to be a total dereliction of duty by those PCT Chairmen. The letter from Lord Warner is absolutely clear that any higher cost number is not to be used. It advises that the new 03 numbers may be considered. It certainly does not mean that 0844 or 0845 numbers are allowed. Indeed it is probably the use of 0844/5 and complaints by the public that caused this letter to be issued in the first place.

PCT Chairmen have now had 9 months to implement the directive given by Lord Warner. The current position should now be thoroughly investigated. How many more surgeries have set up 0844 numbers since December 2006?
Should Mr Bradshaw now be pressed to follow up by insisting that PCTs explain what they are doing to meet Lord Warner's instructions and what they are doing to correct those situations where 0844 was in use prior to December 2006?Should a deadline be set for the removal of 0844/5 numbers from surgeries?

Surely Mr Bradshaw should issue another letter to PCTs making it clear that 0844/5 numbers are NOT to be used, that no more surgeries must be allowed to go to 0844/5 and that before the deadline all existing use of 0844/5 numbers be replaced by 01,02 or 03.

This whole issue is of major concern to the public as evidenced by the petition against doctors using 0844 on the Prime Ministers website. This petition has gained over 10,000 votes in just a few weeks despite receiving virtually no publicity. http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/NGN-use-by-GPs/ ;

If I can be of any further assistance please let me know.

Yours sincerely,

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Oct 9^th, 2007 at 11:16am:
The above, from the UK parliament web site

House of Commons Hansard Debates for 08 Oct 2007 (pt 0002)

Jobcentre Plus (Telecoms Charges)
5. David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire) (Lab/Co-op): What recent discussion he has had with Ofcom on the charging policies of telecommunication companies toward the 0845 numbers used by Jobcentre Plus; and if he will make a statement. [156107]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Mrs. Anne McGuire): Jobcentre Plus conducted a review, which was completed in July, which investigated the inbound telephone numbering plan that supports the contact centre and benefit delivery centre operations. During the review, Ofcom's call numbering team was approached on an informal basis for advice on developing the Jobcentre Plus internal numbering strategy, particularly regarding the future tariff structures of the 0845 range.


8 Oct 2007 : Column 10

David Taylor: Some telecoms providers charge higher than normal rates for all 08 numbers, even so-called freephone numbers, which means that some unemployed Jobcentre Plus clients are paying charges that they cannot afford for the advice, information and assistance that they need. Will the Minister tell the House why those people cannot ring a local centre, at lower, local rates? Will she expand the review to which she has referred to include this issue, and reassure us that the Department is not receiving a rake-off from the excess charges generated at the moment?

Mrs. McGuire: I am aware that some mobile phone companies charge significantly over the basic rate. We have had discussions with them, but their pricing policies are very much a matter for them. I want to give my hon. Friend some comfort, however. Since 1 August, the cost of an 0845 number on BT lines has fallen from 3p to 2p a minute. When someone calls our helpline, we are careful to make them aware how long the call will take, and to ensure that they are aware of the mobile phone charges that can accrue to the call. We then advise them that they can phone back on a land-line if they want to do so. If they cannot do that, our advisers will call them back. That ensures that nobody is disadvantaged because they cannot afford the price of a telephone call.

Andrew Selous (South-West Bedfordshire) (Con): Is the Minister aware that many people trying to claim benefits over the phone either cannot get through or are told that they will be called back even though they do not have a phone? The social fund commissioner's office found that fewer than one in five calls were answered, so will the Minister end the Government's complacency about the effect of the faceless state on people in real difficulties and ensure that those in particular need can either see a Jobcentre Plus official or have an official make the call on their behalf?

Mrs. McGuire: I appreciate the enthusiasm that the hon. Gentleman brings to his post, but we do of course offer face-to-face interviews with Jobcentre Plus advisers in appropriate circumstances. The hon. Gentleman shakes his head, but I can assure him that that is the case. It is very clear in some application processes that a third person can speak on behalf of the applicant. More than 90 per cent. of calls are answered, but we are aware that we have to continue to review matters in order to ensure that the system is made even better. I take great exception to the hon. Gentleman's comment that this amounts to a “faceless state”. We have a whole range of committed and dedicated benefit advisers across the country whose main job and principal occupation and commitment is to ensure that people get the help that they need at the time that they need it.

Mrs. Gwyneth Dunwoody (Crewe and Nantwich) (Lab): The benefit advisers do a very good job, but is it not fairly tacky to use such a system for people to apply for the assistance and help to which they are entitled? Would it not be better simply to ask that no Government Department anywhere in Whitehall continue the growing practice of using 0845 numbers? If people have already paid through their taxes to receive services from Her Majesty's Government which are of a high standard, no impediment should be placed in their way.


8 Oct 2007 : Column 11

Mrs. McGuire: With the utmost respect, may I say to my hon. Friend that we have discovered that contact centres are generally more convenient for customers to access, because they remove the need personally to go to a local jobcentre. On cost comparisons, I have already said that the cost of a land-line telephone call is 2p a minute. Again, with the greatest respect, I have to say that, in comparison with the cost of a bus or train journey to a local office, contact centres are appropriate for most people. Harking back to my response to the hon. Member for South-West Bedfordshire (Andrew Selous), we will ensure that where people want an interview and in some instances a face-to-face application process we will deliver that.

Questions for Oral or Written Answer
beginning on Monday 8 October 2007
(the 'Questions Book')

Part 1: Written Questions for Answer on
Monday 8 October 2007

Order Book Part 1

1374
Mr Stephen O'Brien (Eddisbury):To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will place in the Library the NHS's contract with Patientline.