simonclark123@hotmail.com

> ...and/or have to pay for incoming calls/call routing/additional
> features currently provided by their suppliers and paid for by the caller.

It is also planned that anyone with an 0871 number will have to play a
message stating the cost per minute and that 0871 will come under the
control of ICSTIS.

So it seems that something is being done at last.

It's been a right pain having to carry round an extra phone (albeit on
a 100% cashback deal) *just* so that I can ring 0870 numbers without
being ripped off (Orange would charge me 35p per minute!).

Regards

Simon Clark
Business Telecoms

Bob Eager

On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:43:15 UTC, J.Clavox@btinternet.com wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 18:54:22 GMT, "Steve Terry" <g4wwk@tesco.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Paul Cupis" <paul@cupis.co.uk> wrote in message news:45d73df2.0@entanet...
> >> BBC are running a news story on the Ofcom "clampdown" on 0870 numbers
> >> every hour or so on News 24 today.
> >>
> >Ofcom couldn't clamp down on hemroid cream
> >It's all talk, which is all Ofcom are good for.
> >
> >Steve Terry
> >
> You are quite right Steve I have had cause to contact Ofcom a couple
> of times just lately and all they do is take the side of the offending
> company/person .

Faced with a choice of them or you, one is hardly surprised.
--
Bob Eager
begin 123 a new life...take up Extreme Ironing!

Bob Eager

On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:46:18 UTC, J.Clavox@btinternet.com wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 19:16:53 +0000, Paul Cupis <paul@cupis.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >Steve Terry wrote:
> >> "Paul Cupis" <paul@cupis.co.uk> wrote in message news:45d73df2.0@entanet...
> >>> BBC are running a news story on the Ofcom "clampdown" on 0870 numbers
> >>> every hour or so on News 24 today.
> >>
> >> Ofcom couldn't clamp down on hemroid cream
> >> It's all talk, which is all Ofcom are good for.
> >
> >You've not read http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/news/2006/04/nr_20060419
> >or the linked documents, then?
>
> Ofcom should be imposing a total ban on the use of all numbers other
> than 0800/0808/01/02 numbers in the uk numbers other than those I
> mentioned are all making money for some person/company .

Then you've not read it either.
--
Bob Eager
begin 123 a new life...take up Extreme Ironing!

Bob Eager

On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:50:12 UTC, J.Clavox@btinternet.com wrote:

> On 17 Feb 2007 20:09:14 GMT, "Bob Eager" <rde42@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
> >Why is it a rip-off, when it's charged at the same rate as geographic?

> And I have been told quite a few times by stupid women in company
> call centers that 0870 numbers are charged at normal rates , I wonder
> just how much these companies are making out of unsuspecting
> customers with their use of 0870's .

Oh, so have I. But in this case it'll be enforceable. You clearly
haven't read the document.
--
Bob Eager
begin 123 a new life...take up Extreme Ironing!

Owain

Paul Cupis wrote:
> Ivor Jones wrote:
>> 03 is just another excuse to rip people off in a different way. There
>> is *no need* to ever use anything else except normal numbers, with the
>> exception of freephone numbers.
> They are non-geographic numbers which are charged at exactly the same
> rate as 01 and 02 geographic numbers, and will be included in call
> packages if they include 01/02 geographic numbers.

That used to be the case for 0845/0870 numbers, charged at the same rate.

> But don't let the facts get in the way of a good rant, Ivor.

Nothing wrong with a little healthy scepticism.

Owain

Paul Cupis

Owain wrote:
> Paul Cupis wrote:
>> Ivor Jones wrote:
>>> 03 is just another excuse to rip people off in a different way. There
>>> is *no need* to ever use anything else except normal numbers, with
>>> the exception of freephone numbers.
>> They are non-geographic numbers which are charged at exactly the same
>> rate as 01 and 02 geographic numbers, and will be included in call
>> packages if they include 01/02 geographic numbers.
>
> That used to be the case for 0845/0870 numbers, charged at the same rate.

It still is the case for BT customers, before call discounts/packages.

IPGURU

Ivor Jones wrote:
> "Anti Spam Bloke" <dnsblfeeder@emailssl.com> wrote in
> message news:er7obl$jac$1@posting.glorb.com
>
> [snip]
>
>> Ofcom are going to FORCE 03 numbers to be charged at
>> geographic rates from wherever the originating UK point
>> is (mobile or landline), by changing terms in the General
>> Conditions.
>
> I'll believe it when I see it.
>
> Will these 03 numbers be included in mobile phone packages and so on I
> wonder..? I'm not holding my breath.
>
> Ivor
>
>
that is an issue you should take up with the mobile phone companies.
for that mater so is excluding calls to 0845 (local rate) & (0870)
National rate from these schemes

it is not the owner of the NGN number that is exploiting/ripping off the
caller but the telephone provider that excludes them from their free
call entitlement

Ivor Jones

"Bob Eager" <rde42@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:176uZD2KcidF-pn2-e4YKsnpkc3di@rikki.tavi.co.uk
> On Sat, 17 Feb 2007 20:26:53 UTC, "Ivor Jones"
> <ivor@despammed.invalid> wrote:
>
> > It misleads people by *not* telling them of the true
> > location of the destination.
>
> But what if the destination varies from say London to
> Edinburgh, depending of traffic load or time of day? If
> people have to call a different number, it'll actually
> cost them more.

Not for the majority of residential customers.

> > > > 03 is just another excuse to rip people off in a
> > > > different way.
> > >
> > > Why is it a rip-off, when it's charged at the same
> > > rate as geographic?
> >
> > If it *is* charged at that rate.
>
> It has to be charged at national rate. That's what is
> going to happen. Ergo, saying it's a rip-off (especially
> when there is no evidence to the contrary) is merely
> inflammatory, emotive puff.

I'll believe it when I see it and not before. I am willing to be proven
wrong, but I'm not holding my breath. People have been making money out of
non-geo numbers for too long, they'll soon find another way.

> > > I disagree. See abive. If you have a non-geographic
> > > number, you have it because you often want routing to
> > > different destinations (time or traffic based).
> >
> > More likely because you get a revenue cut.
>
> At present, but not with 03. There will be no room for
> revenue.
>
> > > To use a geographic number could be positively
> > > misleading.
> >
> > Why..?
>
> Because if it was a number routed to different places at
> different times/traffic levels, it would mislead as to
> the true destination. An 03 number will TELL people that
> they can't be sure.

I want to know. Not being sure isn't good enough.

Ivor

Ivor Jones

"Paul Cupis" <paul@cupis.co.uk> wrote in message
news:45d7732b.0@entanet
> Ivor Jones wrote:
> > "Anti Spam Bloke" <dnsblfeeder@emailssl.com> wrote in
> > message news:er7obl$jac$1@posting.glorb.com
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > Ofcom are going to FORCE 03 numbers to be charged at
> > > geographic rates from wherever the originating UK
> > > point is (mobile or landline), by changing terms in
> > > the General Conditions.
> >
> > I'll believe it when I see it.
>
> Read:
>
> http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/numbering03/
> http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/cond...ing03/summary/

I meant I'll believe it when I see it actually happening. Anyone can write
a document, writing it doesn't make it happen.

> > Will these 03 numbers be included in mobile phone
> > packages and so on I wonder..? I'm not holding my
> > breath.
>
> Yes they will.

Where does it say this..?

Ivor

Ivor Jones

"Paul Cupis" <paul@cupis.co.uk> wrote in message
news:45d78089.0@entanet
> Owain wrote:
> > Paul Cupis wrote:
> > > Ivor Jones wrote:
> > > > 03 is just another excuse to rip people off in a
> > > > different way. There is *no need* to ever use
> > > > anything else except normal numbers, with the
> > > > exception of freephone numbers.
> > > They are non-geographic numbers which are charged at
> > > exactly the same rate as 01 and 02 geographic
> > > numbers, and will be included in call packages if
> > > they include 01/02 geographic numbers.
> >
> > That used to be the case for 0845/0870 numbers, charged
> > at the same rate.
>
> It still is the case for BT customers, before call
> discounts/packages.

Ah, here we go again. The majority of *residential* customers (of which I
am one) are forced into discount schemes so this doesn't apply, as you
well know.

Ivor