SilentCallsVictim wrote on Apr 4^th, 2008 at 1:34am:


But as long as it is helpful and entertaining  to do so then we may continue. Correct?

I do not mean to personalise issues SCV but you always have had, ever since you came to the forum, and probably always will have I believe a quite different agenda from most of us in the forum.  Most noticeably you quite clearly attempt to take over as the leading activist on many of the forum's existing main issues and yet your views are frequently not fully in tune with those of the majority of the forum's more longstanding members.  That is bound to promote some areas of different opinion.

Contrary to what you say I have not declared our cause as utterly hopeless I merely think the chances of getting Ofcom to bring about justice on the issue at anything other than the point of the Parliamentary Ombudsman's, EU Commissioner's or Competitition Commissioner's guns are almost non existent.  We must therefore pursue the other avenues such as the last three mentioned.

You say you do not want to personalise the issues but then you accuse me of basically being defeatist.  It seems to me that you cannot have it both ways?

As almost always NGM'sG you and I seem to concur. I am glad also to see that you seem to have finally come around now to my previously stated view that the only way in which Ofcom will ever be forced to cease their corrupt support of the telecommunications industry (and particularly BT) at the expense of the consumer, is through EU intervention. They will never otherwise exercise what is supposed to be their primary duty under the Acts - to protect the interests of the citizen consumer - with the vigour which ought to be at the heart of all their activities. As I have previously pointed out, this is the stupidity which comes out of privatising monopolies. It is extremely difficult if not impossible to implement any truly independent regulation where large amounts of revenue are at stake, human nature being what it is!

It ought to be clear to all observers by now that the present volte face is not the temporary situation which was originally claimed to be. Ofcom do not want to end chargeable call queuing on NGNs other than 09. Indeed there is even some evidence now emerging that there is a marked desire to increase the maximum permissible period of chargeable call queuing on 09, which has to some extent already been slyly done.

I still believe that Ofcom's intention now, unless there is EU intervention to prevent their skulduggery, is to gradually move all NGNs other than "freephone" (which is not always free!) and 03 to the new category of Premium numbers with chargeable call queuing permitted, under the auspices of PhonePayplus.

If they are not to be dissipated and wasted, all further campaign efforts must be directed to MEPs and the EU commissioner only. It has been pointless for quite some while having any further discourse with Ofcom, or wasting time participating in any of their sham "consultations", or playing any of their further games, deliberately designed to deceive and parry. As you point out NGM'sG, only those who have seen Ofcom's true profile over the years of deception (moulded by and allied to Lucifer himself) understand the position, and many of those coming new to the campaign are still easily deceived.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Apr 3^rd, 2008 at 5:47pm:

An update to correct a typo has just been issued:

Quote:

The error was to say:
Quote:


Sadly, due to Ofcom's neglect and the failure of the Cabinet Office in particular, 0300, or indeed 03xx, has no meaning at all to the vast majority of consumers.

NGMsGhost wrote on Apr 9^th, 2008 at 4:19pm:

I feel no shame in sounding like those noble warriors who were sending emails trying to get Oftel and Ofcom to address the issue of NGNs properly for long before I got involved with these two organisations on this issue. I genuinely commend their continuing efforts, despite them having been worn down by achieving only limited success.

I too get worn down at times, but address this by lowering my expectations (although not my ambitions) and perhaps re-focusing my efforts.

I try to avoid discussing specific campaigning tactics in this public forum. In general terms, the fight goes on, even if success is achieved at a disappointingly slow rate and to an inadequate degree.

Flutty wrote on Apr 11^th, 2008 at 1:21pm:


Flutty,

I believe the only thing that the highly cynical, manipulative, devious and overpaid senior executive of Ofcom will ever take seriously is some form of legal challenge in the courts alleging that they are not fulfilling the duties given to them under the Communications Act 2003 by Parliament to look after the interests of UK citizens and UK consumers.

However I don't know what form such a legal challenge would take or how it could be mounted.

Its perfectly clear that Ofcom regards almost any other form of accountability for their corrupt and industry biased management of the UK phone numbering system as a joke and that they effectively simply sneer at the actions of the public and campaigners who try to make them take the corrective actions required to protect the interests of UK citizens and UK consumers.

http://www.politics.co.uk/opinion-formers/press-releases/opinion-former-index/bu...

BSIA lobbying leads to Ofcom rethink on 0870 regulation
Monday, 14 Apr 2008 17:32

<<
Lobbying by the British Security Industry Association and partner organisations on the regulation of calls to 0870 numbers has led to Ofcom no longer requiring telecoms networks to introduce pre-call announcements on 0870 calls.

BSIA Technical Director, Alex Carmichael, comments: "The changes proposed by Ofcom would have had major consequences for the intruder alarm industry and its customers. The big issue for the industry was the introduction of pre-call announcements on an 0870 number before the caller is connected. If this proposal had been implemented, security communications devices which use the 0870 range of numbers could well have 'timed-out' if a pre-call announcement was added and a recognised phone signal not heard. This could have resulted in alarm signals not getting through to the emergency services, with potentially life-threatening consequences."

"The BSIA has worked closely with Flextel and other key partner organisations to lobby Ofcom to rethink their plans. The news that pre-call announcements will no longer be added to 0870 numbers is an achievement for the security industry and demonstrates the value that this kind of lobbying work can bring."

Ofcom will explain their revised proposals on this issue in a statutory consultation document which will be published in the next few weeks.

Press contacts: Naomi Ocansey, 0845 389 0741, n.ocansey@bsia.co.uk
Kiri Gray, 0845 389 0755, k.gray@bsia.co.uk

Editor’s Notes
The British Security Industry Association is the trade association covering all aspects of the professional security industry in the UK. Its 570 members provide over 70% of UK security products and services and adhere to strict quality standards. For more information see www.bsia.co.uk, email info@bsia.co.uk or telephone 0845 389 3889
>>

NGMsGhost wrote on Apr 14^th, 2008 at 11:40pm:
Indeed; in fact tens of thousands of 'citizen consumers' signed the original 0870 PM petition. Many have responded to Ofcom 'consultations' over many years. At the last possible moment, corrupt Ofcom abandons its 0870 regulation due to some perceived 'health and safety' issue regarding PCAs whilst it conveniently overlooks more substantial h&s matters relating to, for example, the inability to terminate calls to GPs using 0844 numbering from overseas. The 'regulator' is a joke. The public/citizen consumer has made it clear that it is fed up with being scammed by premium rate numbers for everyday calls. Ofcom isn't interested. It's clearly a crooked organization and no one seems to be able to curtail its continuing abuse of the UK public.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Apr 15^th, 2008 at 12:24am:
Ofcom's primary duty is now clearly focused on preserving the revenue stream for NTS suppliers and end-users. It used the 'get out' clause regarding PCAs as a cynical move to allow the remaining major 0870 users to shift to 0844 as th Feb deadline wasn't sufficient for the likes of Sky and the banks. The alarm PCA so-called 'issue' was simply a smokescreen. NTS revenue will continue, albeit on an alternative number range. Ofcom is not interested in the public, and never has been with respect to NTS. It allows scams and abuses. It takes no account of public or even parliamentary pressure. It simply passes the problem to another entity which also has little if any interest in addressing the underlying problem.

It doesn't matter who one turns to - Ofcom, ASA, Trading Standards, parliament - NTS revenue is a key part of OCP, TCP and end-user business strategy. Ofcom's own research shows an increasing number of people, often within the lower income groups, reliant upon mobile telephones as their only means of using telephony. Ofcom continually states that customers have a choice. Well, if you happen to live in Norfolk, your only choice in the provision of local council services is through Norfolk Council - there is little point in contacting say, Kent County Council. I choose Norfolk as it is an example of a massive 0844 abuser. So, if you are reliant upon a mobile phone, and are of limited income, and happen to need to contact Norfolk CC, you will be ripped off at up to 40p/minute. For what reason? SImply to generate a merry-go-round of cash to be shared amongst telcos.

Wonderful stuff, and no-one can put a halt to it as no-one gives a toss.