Acknowledging the useful information and links provided by other members, (see "GP 0870 numbers could be banned")  I have made some calculations which show that dialling 0870/0845 numbers from a BT call box costs on average 632% more than dialling a normal geographical number.

The BT call box price list is as clear as mud – the usual obfuscation on the part of BT.

Each call has a 10p connection fee.

Cost of dialling an 01 or 02 number:
7.5 min (450 sec) call time for 10p.
(min 20p + 10p connection .  Giving 15 minutes (900 seconds) for 30p)

Cost of dialling an 0845 or 0870 number:
55 second call time for 10p
(min 20p + 10p connection.  Giving  110 seconds for 30p)

I have calculates the cost for each type of call (01/02  or 0845/0870) and included the 10p connection cost.  The actual cost is rounded up by 10p - the smallest coin that can be used.

For example a 15 minute call to a 0845/0870 number will cost  £1.64 + 10p = £1.74, (based on a cost of 55 seconds for 10p or approximately 10.91 p/min), but rounded up to the smallest coin that can be used; which gives a total cost of £1.80.  The cost of dialling a 01 or 02 number from a phone box for 15 minutes is 30p.

The average premium for dialling a 0870/0845 number compared to a 01/02 number is 632%.

The BT’s g5 coin box price list, shows 0845 and 0870 numbers costing the same, from 31 December 2004.

Call time   01/02   0870/0845   Premium
10 min          30p                  £1.20                 400%
15 min          30p                  £1.80                 600%
20 min          40p                  £2.30                 575%
25 min          50p                  £2.90                 580%
30 min          50p                  £3.40                 680%
35 min          60p                  £4.00                 667%
40 min          70p                  £4.50                 643%
45 min          70p                  £5.10                 729%
50 min          80p                  £5.60                 700%
60 min          90p                  £6.70                 744%

Average premium 632%

Recently I wanted to report a faulty cash machine to my bank early in the morning. As I wondered whether it had been tampered with to clone my card I felt a sense of urgency. I called the relevant 0845 number from a callbox. I think I was only allowed 1 minute for 60p and there was still no sign of any reply so I gave up and worried for the next couple of hours till the banks opened. Until that incident I was unaware that 0845 calls were no longer "local rate", and I suspect that many businesses which provide them for their customers are similarly unaware.

My questions:

1. Does anyone know the correct procedure for complaining about payphone calls to BT and Ofcom ? I've complained to both (just now so even if I've done it right I wouldn't have had an answer) but I suspect under the wrong category.

2. Is there a simple way in which we can make it clear to businesses and public services that 0845 calls are no longer appropriate if they want to ensure that customers can call them at a reasonable rate ? These include the ever increasing numbers of rural public transport schemes that require advance booking so if one can't contact them one can get stranded.

3. Can someone recommend a calling card that doesn't charge transatlantic rates for local calls ? One would have thought that BT would be actively promoting these as it complains about the expense of emptying callboxes, most of which in rural areas no longer accept coins.

snorton wrote on Aug 11^th, 2010 at 11:12am:

Recently I wanted to report a faulty cash machine to my bank early in the morning. As I wondered whether it had been tampered with to clone my card I felt a sense of urgency. I called the relevant 0845 number from a callbox. I think I was only allowed 1 minute for 60p and there was still no sign of any reply so I gave up and worried for the next couple of hours till the banks opened. Until that incident I was unaware that 0845 calls were no longer "local rate", and I suspect that many businesses which provide them for their customers are similarly unaware.

Most banks provide a 01/02 number, supposedly for overseas callers, but they frequently work OK from the UK. I say "frequently" because some go to the lengths of blocking calls from the UK to their 01/02 numbers.



snorton wrote on Aug 11^th, 2010 at 11:12am:

2. Is there a simple way in which we can make it clear to businesses and public services that 0845 calls are no longer appropriate if they want to ensure that customers can call them at a reasonable rate ? These include the ever increasing numbers of rural public transport schemes that require advance booking so if one can't contact them one can get stranded.

The vast majority of organisations in the private sector and many in the public sector are still asleep on this one, despite the fact that it's been going on for well over six years. Our campaign has recognised the issues and has brought about the introduction of 03 numbers in 2007. These are essentially the solution, but no organisation using 084 numbers apparently recognised the ensuing issues you have been on the sharp end of and no organisation said it would like a non-geographic number that doesn't cost customers a premium to call.


I suspect that some small businesses are aware having looked at their phone bills as they need to ring these numbers in order to operate.

Those private companies that choose to increase their subsidy from customers by using 0844 numbers clearly do not regard ensuring that customers can call them at a reasonable rate.

snorton wrote on Aug 11^th, 2010 at 11:12am:

1. Does anyone know the correct procedure for complaining about payphone calls to BT and Ofcom ? I've complained to both (just now so even if I've done it right I wouldn't have had an answer) but I suspect under the wrong category.

There are many issues around payphone charges for BT. The relatively low rates charged for calls to 01/02/03 numbers do not go far towards addressing these.

Ofcom is reviewing the whole issue of non-geographic numbers at present and will be making announcements in the Autumn. When I next speak with them I will ensure that payphones are clearly on the agenda and get a contact point for representations if not.

The primary target for a complaint should be the bank. Ask them if they think that the difference between the cost of making an ordinary call and that which you incurred in calling their 0845 number represents a "premium". Then ask them why they are using a number that causes a premium rate to be incurred for reporting suspected fraud. I would then go on to ask who is being defrauded when they claim that 0845 is not a "premium rate number".

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 11^th, 2010 at 2:46pm:

The primary target for a complaint should be the bank. Ask them if they think that the difference between the cost of making an ordinary call and that which you incurred in calling their 0845 number represents a "premium". Then ask them why they are using a number that causes a premium rate to be incurred for reporting suspected fraud. I would then go on to ask who is being defrauded when they claim that 0845 is not a "premium rate number".

I just thought I'd give some imput on a slight side not about the use of 084 Numbers in the private sector.

I work for a fairly major Insurance company, who insist on using 084 Numbers for 90% of their departments.  As with any call centre environment the que's sadly build up and I end up appologising to everyone for the wait, however most of my complaints are not about the wait, but about the COST of waiting on an 084 number on a mobile phone!

In a recent colleague feedback forum, I pointed out the use of alternative 01/03 numbers to contact the companies departments, hightlighting the cost to our customers and the complaints it generates.

I have been told the matter will be looked into, and I have told them I will be chasing them up on it.  I do currently give out one 01 number for one of our departments, as it's the only direct 01 number I know....

Sites like SNT0870 are to be commended, as it the fight to stop companies using these numbers!

:)

CJT-80 wrote on Aug 11^th, 2010 at 10:16pm:

As with any call centre environment the que's sadly build up and I end up appologising to everyone for the wait, however most of my complaints are not about the wait, but about the COST of waiting on an 084 number on a mobile phone!

And the reason of course they are kept waiting and spending money on listening to music are the  lies being spouted out, 'like your call is important to us' If it was important, they could do a couple of things, one is to stop useing revenue sharing numbers or/and employ more staff to answer the damn telephone, so that their supposedly 'important customer's are being treated like c**p. Now,  CJT-80 if your company and others, treated your customers like this, i.e. answering the telephone straight away, their customers would be in a better frame of mind when you talk to them.

I have visions of great big call centres, with advisors sitting their watching the phone ring and saying that this customer has spent a couple of quid hanging on now, we better take the call. That share of the revenue will buy me a cup of coffee and a cake :-?

So, I suggest if your outfit ignores your suggestion, suggest that they employ more staff.

sherbert wrote on Aug 12^th, 2010 at 12:23pm:

And the reason of course they are kept waiting and spending money on listening to music are the  lies being spouted out, 'like your call is important to us' If it was important, they could do a couple of things, one is to stop useing revenue sharing numbers or/and employ more staff to answer the damn telephone, so that their supposedly 'important customer's are being treated like c**p. Now,  CJT-80 if your company and others, treated your customers like this, i.e. answering the telephone straight away, their customers would be in a better frame of mind when you talk to them. I have visions of great big call centres, with advisors sitting their watching the phone ring and saying that this customer has spent a couple of quid hanging on now, we better take the call. That share of the revenue will buy me a cup of coffee and a cake :-? So, I suggest if your outfit ignores your suggestion, suggest that they employ more staff.

Sherbert, I have had a long think before replying to what appears to be a rather rude response. Lets get something VERY clear, I am 100% against the use of 084 numbers which is exactly why I have highlighted as soon as I was able to the benefits of them NOT using them!  

As to your suggestion them employ more staff, how do you think I started working there ??? I was recruited!

On average we do our best to answer calls in under 1 minute! When there are approx 100-150 staff in one department alone that's pretty impressive, we also have targets for the lowest average time on a call, and the lowest not ready times (ie when I am NOT answering a call as I am waiting for assistance) , I certainly do not sit there watcing the phone ring thinking "oh lets keep them holding a bit longer"...

You may ask why I don't, the answer is simple, if I was the customer I want to be on and off that call as soon as I can!

Sadly they can't employ an endless supply of staff, unless YOU fancy working for free, I sure don't!

8-)

It was not meant to be rude, I was just stating my opinion.

Now, if you are 100% against the use of 084 numbers, why are you working for a company that uses them?

Because the current market is hardly flooded with available jobs!

Hypocrisy at its best. ::)

Really...

don't temp me to lower myself to your level, or I may tell you where to shove it!

[smiley=angry.gif] [smiley=angry.gif]

I am alarmed at the suggestion that employees should totally align with their employers' policies on this subject. What else should they align on?

If those who work for organisations that use 084/087 numbers are hypocritical, hitherso are many of the users of this website who come solely to look-up alternatives for those companies in order to do business with them. There is an opening here for a campaign website SAYNOTOSAYNOTO0870.COM.

Why do those who apparently consider a swathe of this site's visitors to be hypocritical for partaking in the 084/087 market, visit it themselves? That in itself, by the same definition, is hypocritical!!

By the same logic, one must conclude that working for an employer that does not use 084/087 numbers but which provides services to an organisation that does do as being equally hypocritical.

How can one ensure that he or she dows not indirectly provide services to (work for) organisations that use these numbers indirectly?


Complaining to a organisation is also pointless if it is believed that all those employed by it subscribe to its views. There will thus be no change in policy as employees see no need for change. The whole ethos of competition relies on businesses changing in response to changes by competition.

I never suggested that that employees should totally align with their employers' policies on this subject


I also never suggested that employees should 'walk out' if the employees did not agree with any of their employees policies, whatever they are.

What I did say was in my post was a reply from CJT-80,  (who said I am 100% against the use of 084 numbers)

Now, if you are 100% against the use of 084 numbers, why are you working for a company that uses them?


All I am saying is that if someone is 100% against any idea that is being used, surely it is the time to leave?

I myself have indeed in the past, left an employer when something 100% I disagreed with  what was happening in the company I was working for. I hasten to add I was not one of lifes trouble makers as I was in full employment for over 44 years.

I am very sorry if I have caused any offence to CJT-80, this was not intended, especially as I know he puts a huge amount of effort into this site by helping to find alternative numbers, I was merely stating my thoughts on the subject and  his post

Sherbert, firstly I am equally sorry if I have offended you I was tired and my reponses were rash. I also accept your appology, and hope we can continue as we had originally started.

I will send you a seperate PM regarding some of the points previously mentioned/discussed.

Regarding the companies use of 084 numbers, my hope is that my continued input into their use will convince them as to why they should NOT use them and revert to 01 numbers instead.

I would also point out that ALL documentation they send out has an 01 number on it, so anyone who would choose to attempt to avoid calling the 084 number has a number in plain sight to call, obviously I appreciate this does not solve or excuse the use of 084 numbers, but I am not in a position to make them stop using them (though I wish I was).

With regards leaving the company, whilst in an ideal world I would based on the use of such numbers, I do not live in an ideal world, and I need a job, and I chose this one as it's local to me.

I hope this clarifies some points for you.

CJT-80 wrote on Aug 13^th, 2010 at 9:44pm:

and hope we can continue as we had originally started.

Agreed. ;)

I have responded to your pm.

I've come across an advantage for 0845 numbers. My office phone is barred for long distance calls but allows local calls. It also allows 0845 calls.

snorton wrote on Aug 20^th, 2010 at 7:35pm:

My office phone is barred for long distance calls but allows local calls.

What is your explanation of a long distance and a local call?

They cost the same. ::)

snorton wrote on Aug 20^th, 2010 at 7:35pm:

I've come across an advantage for 0845 numbers. My office phone is barred for long distance calls but allows local calls. It also allows 0845 calls.

If the idea is to prevent more expensive calls, then I take it as read that calls to mobile telephone numbers are also not allowed.

In order that this bar has the intended effect (to stop more expensive calls), then the calls which are prevented must indeed be more expensive than the ones which are allowed.

In general terms, 0845 calls are more expensive, although there are some exceptions. If your employer is on one of these perverse tariffs, then 0845 numbers can be used as an alternative to geographic calls (we know this to be the case most notably with some BT residential tariffs).

Or perhaps the bar was put in place and has not been considered with respect to the current tariff on your office's telephones.

I may say that this bar dates back to when there were real distinctions between local and long distance calls. I remember studying the contention that one could get a long distance call by dialling a series of local call numbers, as a way of avoiding the bar rather than paying less, but never managed to get that to work for even the 2 step link between Cambridge and Huntingdonshire.

How this bar works now is probably an accident. As I said, I can still make calls from my office to those areas which used to be classified as local, and I can still make 0845 calls.

snorton wrote on Aug 20^th, 2010 at 8:09pm:

I may say that this bar dates back to when there were real distinctions between local and long distance calls..

It was I think 2004 when the distinctions stopped

snorton wrote on Aug 20^th, 2010 at 8:09pm:

I may say that this bar dates back to when there were real distinctions between local and long distance calls. I remember studying the contention that one could get a long distance call by dialling a series of local call numbers, as a way of avoiding the bar rather than paying less, but never managed to get that to work for even the 2 step link between Cambridge and Huntingdonshire. How this bar works now is probably an accident. As I said, I can still make calls from my office to those areas which used to be classified as local, and I can still make 0845 calls.

Surely the point of any barring in a corporate environment is stop employees ringing unnecessary expensive telephone numbers. If any number that is necessary is barred and this causes inconvenience (and thus increased cost to the business), then surely the bar is actually costing the company more.

The calls in question were personal. I dare say they don't want me booking hotels in Scotland but don't mind me arranging an appointment with my doctor, which is of course a local call.

snorton wrote on Aug 20^th, 2010 at 10:09pm:

... arranging an appointment with my doctor, which is of course a local call.

Now there is a controversial comment, if ever I heard one!;D

The amalgamation of local and national rates in 2004 did not necessarily apply to rates on business tariffs. I have however been looking for a current example of a difference without success, which may suggest that the two are now generally the same on business tariffs also. I do not have the reference material to confirm when this came about, although I can recall seeing many examples of differences a couple of years ago. I would be most grateful if someone could through some light on this.

It is important to note that the difference between local and national calls does still exist for landlines. It is just that the respective rates are generally the same, with just a few particular exceptions.