With the help of this site; as a guest I drafted the letter found at http://skippy.org.uk/new-doctors-and-0844/ to which I received this response http://skippy.org.uk/new-doctors-and-0844-response/

My Questions are:
* What should I write as a further to the response I got from Chris,
* What should I write to my MP to address this issue to him (I will include my original letter and her response as reference)
* how else should I follow this up?

There are two essential points to make to Mrs Gebel.
     
The first is obvious.
If she knows that calls from mobiles to the 0844 number are more expensive than equivalent calls to geographic numbers then she knows that the information provided to her is false. Furthermore, because she acknowledges that she is required to consider "the arrangement as a whole" the use of a selected atypical example, which formed the basis for the advice which she received, was of no benefit to her anyway.


The second addresses her attempt to justify a breach of the NHS contract.
She acknowledges that the practice receives financial benefit at the expense of patients from the use of a 0844 number as this is used to offset the cost of other services which it provides. She is attempting to argue that the benefits which patients receive represent good value for money. That could be a fair argument were it not for the fact that she is providing NHS services, which are funded from our taxation, not from payments made to providers.

---

The SI referred to was effected as a revision to the terms of the contract which the practice has with the PCT - it is enforced by the PCT. As the practice manager now admits that she is aware that patients do pay more than the cost of an equivalent call to a geographic number to call the practice, this amounts to an admission of a breach of contract.

The features of Surgery Line are equally available on a 03 number, to which the surgery could migrate at any time, so there is no need for patients to be concerned about a reduction in levels of service. I am advised that NEG would not block any request for such a migration, so the practice need not fear that such a move would incur "unreasonable" penalty charges.

If the practice fails to immediately move into compliance with the terms of its contract, then the PCT should be urged to use the powers which it holds to take the necessary enforcement action.