Quote:

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION : TELEPHONE NUMBERS

Thank you for your request for information of 16 October.  I have now received details from colleagues in our Business Services Department which I set-out below in response to the questions you raised.  I trust this information is of assistance to you but if you have any questions in the matter please do not hesitate to contact me.

The provision of telephonic systems , including telephone with freephone access internally to all students within the system , modem internet access and cable television for terrestrial television channels , is determined by a commercial agreement made between the University and ntl after a public tendering process.  The current agreement is for a term of seven years and will expire in 2007 at which time the University will review its performance and effectiveness.

The capital costs of the system have been met by a termly charge to users and the operating costs offset by all external calls being charged as 0870 numbers.  The charges for external calls are believed to be commercially competitive.

The University does not receive an income based on a unit / minute rate ; rather it receives a commission based on a percentage of internet and telephone usage , and a summary on which the commission is based is supplied annually.

The revised COI Guidelines will be taken into account as part of the tendering process in 2007.

Yours sincerely
Rowland Williams
University Records Manager / Rheolwr Cofnodion yr Brifysgol
Vice-Chancellor's Office / Swyddfa'r Is-Ganghellor
University of Wales Swansea / Prifysgol Cymru Abertawe
Singleton Park / Parc Singleton
Swansea / Abertawe
SA2 8PP

Note: they have completely ignored my questions and haven't given the standard response which has been sent by most other institutions - I asked the same questions as the request made to Hull University and seem to have been fobbed off with this rubbish.  What should my next move be?  Perhaps emailing them to let those eejits know how they should reply to a FOI Request? So angry .

Thanks mc661 - I didn't ask for the tender to copy document - what is this document?

I'm drafting the below response to their email - if you think of anything to be added, please let me know.

btw, I have added my request at the top of the original message so you know what I actually asked in the first place.

Quote:

I'll add that to the reply - thanks I did mention it to ntl but completely forgot with the FOI!

SWANSEA UNIVERSITY'S REPLY:

Dear Smasher,

Thank you for your email to the University of 13 November , a copy of which I have forwarded to my colleagues in the Business Services Department for their comment.  However , I must advise you that the Freedom of Information Act 2000 relates to recorded information held by the University and which is not subject to an arguable exemption ; it does not establish the right to a dialogue , and there is a significant difference between requesting copies of information  , or having that information summarised and conveyed , and setting a list of questions.

In making its reply to your original request  the University sought to assist you by consulting a number of documents and extracting information that in its view met your requirements.  I am sorry that you  feel the information was insufficient.  I should therefore be pleased to learn what information  you feel is still outstanding.  If you are unsure of the nature of the information you are requesting please describe it in general terms so that the University can fulfil its obligation to advise and assist.

You may wish to receive copies of information but we shall require a postal address to which copies can be sent.  There will be a charge for this in line with the  Fees Regulations set-out in the Act and which must be paid in advance.  Alternatively , you may wish to receive copies electronically , in which case a fee will be charged for staff time spent in converting hardcopy information into an electronic format.  The University can , of course , extract information from records and supply that information directly to you by email , as was the case in our earlier response to you.  You may wish to advise the University of your preferred manner of receiving information.

All public bodies subject to the Freedom of Information Act are required to have an internal complaints and appeals procedure.  At Swansea University such complaints and appeals are heard by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor ( Administration ) and this route should be used before any appeal is made to the Information Commissioner's Office.

As was indicated earlier I should nevertheless be pleased to learn  what information you feel has not been conveyed to you so that the matter can be looked at again.

Rowland Williams
University Records Manager / Rheolwr Cofnodion yr Brifysgol
Vice-Chancellor's Office / Swyddfa'r Is-Ganghellor
University of Wales Swansea / Prifysgol Cymru Abertawe
Singleton Park / Parc Singleton
Swansea / Abertawe
SA2 8PP


Note: What am I supposed to do to get these eejits to actually answer the b***** question?  In my reply, I've referred them to my initial list of questions and they respond by asking what I want from them.

I would just like to point a few things out to you:

1. Why do you use 0870 numbers?

Mr Williams clearly states that they are using 0870 numbers because of the commercial agreement between University of Wales, Swansea and NTL. Presumably, they would not have chosen the most expensive option for people to contact their students in view of the fact that NTL were chosen following a public tendering process.


2.What is the equivalent geographical number (01792 xxxxxx)?

Mr Williams clearly states that the institution does not hold that information.


3. What revenue do you receive per minute and in total from the use of 0870 numbers?

Mr Williams clearly states that contrary to your ill informed presumption, they do not even calculate revenue based on a 'cost per minute' figure. Their revenue received 'in total' is in the form of a commission which is made available for public inspection annually. I do not see how this would not comply with the Act taking into account their method of calculation i.e. a percentage of all calls made during the year. It would be impossible for them to make this information available in a piecemeal fashion due to the nature of the contract. This is not contrary to the Act, because to comply with it in this particular context would involve banning the use of such clauses in commercial contracts, which is not feasible in the slightist.


4. Are you aware of the revenue collected by your telecom provider (NTL), from your callers?

Mr Williams clearly states that the operating costs of NTL are met by charging for 0870 calls, which is common sense. On what feasible basis do you beleive that NTL would make this information available to the insitution? Would it not be more sensible for you to have asked NTL that question?


5. Are you aware of the high costs incurred by callers and if so, is the University satisfied with this arrangement?

Mr Williams clearly states that the insitution beleives the costs are 'commercially competitive'. This means that relative to other potential providers, who were presumably rejected as part of the tendering process, NTL provide the best value for money. It is common knowledge that high costs are incurred when dialling 0870 numbers. This question is therefore non-sensical. It is also non-sensical for you to ask if they are satisfied with this arrangement. In this type of contract there would be a confidentiality clause. As well as being a breach of contract on which NTL could sue, it would not make commercial sense to reveal this to Joe Public. In any case, Mr Williams clearly states that the performance and effectiveness of the agreement will be assessed when the contract is up for renewal. This gives them ample time to gauge their satisfaction Most pertinently, however, read s.16 properly. I will tell you how to do this below.


6. Have you considered the revised COI guidelines?

Mr Williams clearly states that the revised COI guidelines will be taken into account as part of the next tending process in 2007. Presumably, if they have been revised, then they did not take the revised guidelines into account at the time of entering into the NTL contract. To do so would have involved a crystal ball. I assume you wanted to know whether they had followed the unrevised guidelines into account. Clearer wording on your part would have better explained your request. As far as your question went, it was answered satisfactorily. It is not their job to mind-read.


7. If so, what conclusions did you come to?

Clearly, this is negated as they did not consider the revised guidelines when agreeing the NTL contract.


8. Are you aware of the cost implications to your callers, when using 0870 numbers?

This is a slightly different version of your question 5. It is therefore answered as such.


Despite the misguided nature of some of your questions, particularly question 4, it appears quite plain that Mr Williams answered each of your questions to an acceptable standard. All it would have taken was some reading between the lines on your part. It is especially naive for you to think that any public body would answer an email with a series of yes and no answers, however more straightforward this would be for you to understand. This would be very unprofessional.

Most importantly, it is also interesting that you and other posters in this thread have focussed solely on your entitlement to information. This is not a point I am arguing with - it is, after all, the whole aim of the Act. However, the effect of s.16 has been completely ignored; the public authority only has to reveal information to you if it is reasonable for them to do so. In other words, no member of the public has a complete and unadulterated right to every scrap of information that is in the possession of the public authority. They have a right to refuse disclosure if it is unreasonable for them to do so. Clearly, then, they do not need to rely on an exemption to do this if they view it unreasonable for them to dislose.

So, read the Act to make sure you are fully aware of not only your rights, but those of the public authority. Secondly, read the response that you receive properly. Thirdly, obtain an ability to interpret what has been written for you. You are not a child and you have therefore been corresponded with as such.

Rob

You have once again misconstrued a reply. I am fully aware that the use of 0870 numbers is completely unfair to the consumer. I came across this website last night and am so glad that I have, as it will save me lots of money in the future when I need to ring HSBC, Barclaycard etc. Please, please, please do not get me wrong on that.

I took issue with your using the FOIA to pester Swansea University unnecessarily. The only reason why you were unhappy with their reply, and thus replied to them under the absurd notion that quoting sections of the Act to them would make them crack, is because they did not bow down to you and admit that 0870 numbers are expensive. That was what you wanted at the end of the day, wasn't it? It is a shame but it will take a lot more to rid us of 0870 numbers than repeated requests for public authorities to admit that 0870 numbers are unfair to consumers because no public authority in their right mind would admit to the public that it is expensive to use their services, FOI notwithstanding. The most effective way would be to avoid using those company's services if you feel that strongly about them, or at least use the alternative numbers on websites like this to dodge the more expensive charges. Emminently straightforward.

As I have stated, I am fully aware that 0870 numbers are deceitful. And certainly I am not a perpetrator of 0870 scams. I am a postgraduate student who had the guts to point out the bleedin' obvious to you.


Rob

Lol    no, he isn't my teacher. I just decided to adopt a consistent writing style with which to further emphasise the point that I felt he answered adequately the questions.


Rob

larky, Thank you for your guidance but I, like the others who have posted here, are perfectly capable of interpreting your beloved "Mr Williams'" words.  My words echo idb's in that Mr Williams gave an unsatisfactory and wooly-answered reply and that while it met FOI regulations, it did not help answer my original questions.

And another thing - I sent that FOI so that I could add the non-rip-off number to this site to save future students and families/friends from paying extortionate prices to contact loved ones.  Do you have a problem with people being charged extortionate rates to contact family and friends?  I bet you'd be a little cheesed off if you had to pay 8p per minute whenever you called anyone!  I suggest you lie down in a darkened room for a while and let this sink in before you make another snap reply!