I must apologise if this message is confusing.  I have attempted to isolate the quote from the letter but can only do this by the use of ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,  

I wonder if any members of this forum are aware of an article published in last week’s Sunday Times.  It is by Stewart Mitchell and is  titled "Talking point: New phone codes aim to curb those premium-rate rip-offs".  Much of it is taken up with Trojan Horses, premium line "free offer" rip offs and the like and the apparent inability of Ofcom and Icstis to contain the problem but it contains the following observations.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Quote starts

Yet rip-offs are merely one symptom of a telephone numbering system that is plainly out of control and confusing to all but the super-numerate. Most people know that it costs nothing to call, say, Amazon on an 0800 number, to check up on your order of Alan Sugar’s The Apprentice. Yet how are we to know that calling Lastminute’s 0871 number to book a fancy weekend in Brooklyn costs 10p per minute? Or that a glimpse into the future from Live Psychic Readings’ 0906 hotline costs £1.50 per minute? They must have seen us coming.

Thank heavens, then, that public vexation has persuaded Ofcom to propose simpler, tariff-related dialling codes and enable consumers to bar premium-rate scams, too. For a start, both 08 and 09 prefixes would, in future, be followed by a digit that reflects price. Calling 082, for example, would be cheaper than 089.

As well as indicating cost, these new numbers would, in theory, enable parents to bar children from calling premium-rate sex-talk lines. Even better, if you hate companies that use high-priced 0870/1 numbers to increase profit while providing basic customer services, Ofcom is proposing a new 03 nationwide prefix, charged at the same rate as geographic numbers such as 0161 (for Manchester).

Whether companies will use the new numbers and forgo revenue is debatable. If they were serious about customer service, they would have adopted the free 0800 numbers.

Simplifying the current brain-taxing system sounds sensible, but initial reactions were mixed from Craig Skinner, a numbering expert at the telecoms researcher Ovum. "Most concern centres on the 08 and 09 number ranges, where the changes will be difficult to manage. This will require education of customers and significant cost for individual business."

What of the scammers? Ofcom plans to change the way numbers are allocated, and threatens to deny numbers to phone networks that have hosted service providers which have abused consumer trust. So, if fraudsters use their networks illegally, the responsibility for policing the premium-rate market passes to the private sector. Skinner said: "The ban on revenue-sharing on 03 numbers might help, but this won’t clear up scams among companies that choose to stick with 08 and 09 numbers."

Ofcom has a table illustrating its proposals at tinyurl.com/ezgww, and the consultation runs until May. Doors invites your suggestions for improving telephone numbering, which we will forward to the regulator. Mail them to doorscampaign@sunday-times.co.uk.
Quote ends
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Bracketing 08 with 09 numbers as the writer does, suggests that he has not grasped the essence of the rip-off although in a later paragraph he seems to do so.

I wish to make two points about this article

1. He has not publicised the Ofcom consultation site, merely the site illustrating the pricing differentials
2. This article gives all forum members access to a national newspaper which has invited comment.  

It will be recalled that the Sunday Times spearheaded a campaign on Rip-Off Britain which resulted in a OFT enquiry.  Unfortunately the outcome of this was that Rip-Off Britain was a myth.  

I suggest that it would do no harm if forum members responded to Stewart Mitchell’s invitation.  I have already done so.

Well done NGM.
And surely free front-end announcements can not be that expensive if the Finarea Group, amongst others, can manage it.
After all, what could they have to hide?

And, when they've done, they'll still not be able to tell you what's the difference between the numbers which are charged at g7 and p9 rates (both are 10p/minute incl. VAT at all times) or give a reason why all chargeable 08 numbers can't simply be moved to the 09 range for 'transparency' (that's a word even their New Labour bosses know now).

For example:

0871 660 xxxx – g7 - 10p/minute at all times

0901 71x XXXX - p9 – 10p/minute at all times

jrawle wrote on Mar 20^th, 2006 at 5:25pm:
But not, I fear, as profitable - nor in line with the decisions already taken?
We may merely be going through the motions (pause, to check medical meaning).  

I note a remarkable lack of responses at http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/numberingreview/responses/

kk wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2006 at 12:37pm:
I completely believe you are correct.

Quote:
Have they emailed you back with a response to your email yet?

Most likely a lack of response would mean they know you have a very good point.

The dealine for this consultation is exactly 3 weeks today on 4 May 2006

   

Like a lot of people I feel overwhelmed by the 61-question-response form, even though I feel strongly about the subject.  I know I can ignore them and just structure my response as I so wish but I thought it might be useful to perhaps highlight a dozen or so of the key questions.  I need help with this though! 

Personally speaking I would find that helpful in focussing my reponse and maybe it would be helpful to others too.  I've cut and past the questions below within further posts:

PS May I also request that a count-down clock be added to the site's Home page and Search page (as was done previously) as well as links to updated consultation information, so to raise awareness and encourage responses...