Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
SAYNOTO0870.COM

<---- Back to main website

 
Home Help Search Login Register

Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
Security Industry Authority (SIA) again! (Read 24,120 times)
rogcal
Newbie
*
Offline



Posts: 3
South Lincolnshire
Gender: male
Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Dec 7th, 2007 at 4:16pm
 
Here is a direct quote from the Authorities Assitant Director of Customer Services, Paul Douglas.

"I can assure you that the 0844 number is non-revenue generating and costs 3p per minute from a BT landline phone".

Comments anyone?

This quote was made in response to an email I sent to Baroness Henig, the Chairperson of the SIA following a wait of 15 mins for an answer.

Her response together with Mr Douglas's indicated that things have been improved.

As I write this, I have noted that the timer on my phone is now showing 19 minutes since I was put on hold.

Fifteen days between the first call (15mins) and today's (now 23 minutes.

Some improvement!
Back to top
 

Roger
 
IP Logged
 
Dave
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 9,901
Yorkshire
Gender: male
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #1 - Dec 7th, 2007 at 5:31pm
 
rogcal wrote on Dec 7th, 2007 at 4:16pm:
"I can assure you that the 0844 number is non-revenue generating and costs 3p per minute from a BT landline phone".

If the SIA is not revenue sharing with its telephone provider, then it is allowing its telephone provider to keep the revenue. No revenue sharing doesn't mean that the call charge is any lower, so someone is pocketing somewhere.....
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
bbb_uk
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,041
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #2 - Dec 7th, 2007 at 6:35pm
 
You could question whether their number can be dialled from outside the UK because they are under the impression it can but last I heard very few, if any, countries outside the UK will connect to an 0844 number.

Their number is from BT so barring portability of number then going by this page it's even possible that SIA are actually paying for incoming calls as well !
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Heinz
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,362
Essex
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #3 - Dec 7th, 2007 at 8:55pm
 
0844 892 1025 is, indeed, 6p connection + 3p/minute from a BT landline - which is less than a 6p connection + 3.25p/minute (BT Together Option 1) 01 or 02 call.

OTOH, it's a lot more expensive than 5p for a call of any duration using 1899, 18185 or 18866 (or the 'free' UK 01/02 calls many people now get on inclusive packages).
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 8th, 2007 at 1:15pm by Heinz »  

After years of ignoring govt. guidelines & RIPPING OFF Council Tax payers using 0845 numbers, Essex County Council changed to 0345 numbers on 2 November 2015
WWW  
IP Logged
 
rogcal
Newbie
*
Offline



Posts: 3
South Lincolnshire
Gender: male
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #4 - Dec 8th, 2007 at 9:40am
 
Update on yesterday's call to the SIA.  Total of 43 mins (40 on hold and 3 of conversation).

Emailed Baroness Henig and Paul Douglas (Asst Dir Cust Ser) with my update on their "new and improved" service but doubt if I'll get a response this time.  Are the SIA just going to become another organisation accountable to no one, much like the CSA?
Back to top
 

Roger
 
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,493
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #5 - Dec 8th, 2007 at 11:34am
 
rogcal wrote on Dec 8th, 2007 at 9:40am:
Are the SIA just going to become another organisation accountable to no one, much like the CSA?

As I understand it, the SIA is an independent non-departmental public body accountable to the Home Secretary and its stakeholders, those who work and operate in the private security industry. (The CSA is an agency within the control of DWP.)

I will offer a few thoughts, some of which may be seen as contraversial.

1. There is no justification for forcing callers to wait on hold for more than a few seconds. Automated systems that provide the option to receive a call back are well established in the call centre industry. These should be used by every organisation that experiences irregular patterns of incoming calls producing peaks that cannot be addressed simply by proper staffing levels. Callers who prefer to wait need not be denied this option.

2. 0844 is a mess. It is available for revenue sharing, and is thereby recognised as such. There are however 35 different “call types” on the BT price list for 0844 numbers; some are fixed price, those charged on a pence per minute basis range from 0.5p to 5p. Some users of 0844 numbers receive income from calls, others pay to receive them. With the clear alternatives of 03 and a larger range of premium rate numbers now available, why would anyone with an interest in call price transparency move to a 0844 number in 2007?

3. Aside from the, most significant but separate, issue of profiteering by telcos, choice of the number for a public body to use comes down to the issue of who pays for services delivered by telephone. This is a balance between callers (service users) and those who fund the body (normally taxpayers). Regulatory bodies are generally funded by those who they regulate.

If most telephone calls to the SIA are from those who are regulated, rather than from citizens which every public body ultimately serves, is there any reason why they should not be paying towards the cost of providing the service? The alternative is higher licence fees for those who may not use the telephone service.

Obviously, there should be a separate telephone number for public enquiries (0800 or 03, if not geographic).


Please forgive (and correct) any misunderstandings.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Dave
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 9,901
Yorkshire
Gender: male
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #6 - Dec 8th, 2007 at 2:44pm
 
In June 2003 the SIA signed a four year £23 million contract with BT:

http://www.the-sia.org.uk/home/about_sia/news/nr_030609.htm

A new contract was signed and BT is still the provider. See Annual report for 2006/07, page 63:

Quote:
Our contract with our managed service provider, BT, which is a mixture of fixed and variable service charges has been extended by three months to September 2007. Fixed charges of £2 million are payable for the six months April to September. From 1 October 2007 a new contract with BT will come into force which is based on lower fixed charges with a higher variable element depending on the level of applications forecast in the period. The fixed charges from October 2007 to March 2008 will be £632,727.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 8th, 2007 at 2:50pm by Dave »  
 
IP Logged
 
Barbara
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 598
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #7 - Dec 9th, 2007 at 2:29pm
 
In response to Silent Calls Victim's point 3 (the only part with which I take issue), as a taxpayer, I feel it is to my advantage that regulatory bodies exist therefore they should be funded through taxation.   I believe this could avoid problems such as experienced with OFCOM where, effectively, an industry is policing its own and will be more reluctant to take strong action when necessary.   Taking the SIA as an example, surely it is to the advantage of all of us who ever use a town centre at night or have events taking place near our homes where approved security staff might be needed?   Another example, I have always felt it wrong that people should pay for their own CRB checks.   These checks are what we as a society require to ensure the safety of members of society.   I do, however, object to paying to phone these people when I have already paid for a phone package (and the SIA were awful at replying to emails last year when I needed info from them to prevent a planned local rave!).
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,493
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #8 - Dec 9th, 2007 at 5:45pm
 
Barbara wrote on Dec 9th, 2007 at 2:29pm:
… I feel it is to my advantage that regulatory bodies exist therefore they should be funded through taxation.

Some of us would agree with this point (although not necessarily with the justification), whilst others would disagree strongly, especially with regard to paying for Ofcom. I specifically sought to avoid developing the issue, and going even further OT, by not giving Ofcom as an example of a NDPB (like the SIA), and HMRC as a departmental agency of the Treasury (like the CSA).

One could develop point 3 by asking if all public bodies should be required to have 0800 numbers, freepost addresses and provide free transport and / or car parking for visitors, thus placing all cost burdens on taxpayers rather than service users. I personally believe that the transparency and neutrality offered by 03 is sufficient for most cases where a non-geographic number is appropriate.

It is the current situation (whatever its merits) that gave rise to me posing the question about whether SIA service users (other than the public making enquiries) should pay towards the cost of its telephone service.

David
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Dave
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 9,901
Yorkshire
Gender: male
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #9 - Dec 9th, 2007 at 6:02pm
 
Let's face it, any revenue derived from a 0844 number is going to be pretty small compared to the cost of the call centre. What's more, the revenue paid to the service provider is usually tiny relative to the additional call cost. So NGNs represent an inefficient way of transferring money from caller to the called party.

In this case the service provider and the telco is BT as BT operates the call centre and does other administrative work such as issuing licences etc. So the use of 0844 number is (I think it's reasonable to assume) going into BT's pocket.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
ReleaseRoderick
Newbie
*
Offline



Posts: 26
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #10 - Dec 10th, 2007 at 5:22pm
 
Re: bbb_uk and Heinz posts` today.  Dialled +44 844 892 1025 from BTK Bulgarian landline: Unobtainable
Dialled same from Skype, answered(well,at least the recorded message) quickly.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Heinz
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,362
Essex
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #11 - Dec 10th, 2007 at 7:48pm
 


Which sort of emphasises the point, if your NHS GPs' surgery has changed to an 0844 rip-off system, don't get ill abroad!
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 13th, 2007 at 12:21am by DaveM »  

After years of ignoring govt. guidelines & RIPPING OFF Council Tax payers using 0845 numbers, Essex County Council changed to 0345 numbers on 2 November 2015
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Freakyknight
Newbie
*
Offline



Posts: 1
Gender: male
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #12 - Sep 6th, 2016 at 2:22pm
 
Has anyone got a number for the SIA as all the numbers on there website is dead and on sayno as well are dead.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,493
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #13 - Sep 6th, 2016 at 3:15pm
 
Freakyknight wrote on Sep 6th, 2016 at 2:22pm:
Has anyone got a number for the SIA as all the numbers on there website is dead and on sayno as well are dead.

The answer appears to be given by this message on the website.

It is good news that an unacceptable number has been withdrawn. Those without ready access to the internet are however disadvantaged when the government's "Digital by Default" policy becomes "Digital Only".


Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
CJT-80
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,665
London
Gender: male
Re: Security Industry Authority (SIA) again!
Reply #14 - Sep 6th, 2016 at 10:09pm
 
I have updated the entry for the SIA to indicate that online contact now needs to be made.
Back to top
 

Regards,

CJT-80

Any comments made are my own and are not those of SayNoTo0870.com
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
(Moderators: Forum Admin, Dave, bbb_uk, CJT-80, DaveM)

Website and Content © 1999-2020 SAYNOTO0870.COM. All Rights Reserved.
Written permission is required to duplicate any of the content within this site.

WARNING: This is an open forum, posts are NOT endorsed by SAYNOTO0870.COM,
please exercise due caution when acting on any info from here.


SAYNOTO0870.COM » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2021. All Rights Reserved.


Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge