And how exactly did mr Kip Meek, the chief Policy guru of Ofcom, allow BT to get away with this little lot from the last BT Update magazine?  That's in addition to the 6am to 8am change to peak rate scam.  As you can see 087/084x is not exactly BT's only overcharging outrage but the others are so subtle that you will never get a journalist to take an interest in them.  Except possibly the guy at Motley Fool.

Here they are:-

Amended charges

From 6th January 2005, the duration of calls will be rounded up to the next second and the cost of each call on the bill will be rounded up to the next tenth of a penny.

From now on, if a product or service is provided, changed or given up on the first of the month, we'll calculate the charge or refund until the end of your current billing period by dividing the quarterly charge by the appropriate number of complete months. If the charge occurs after the first day of the month, fees will continue to be charged or refunded until the end of the current billing period, based on the remaining number of days within that period.

wrote on Mar 1^st, 2005 at 3:31pm:

From now on, if a product or service is provided, changed or given up on the first of the month, we'll calculate the charge or refund until the end of your current billing period by dividing the quarterly charge by the appropriate number of complete months. If the charge occurs after the first day of the month, fees will continue to be charged or refunded until the end of the current billing period, based on the remaining number of days within that period.

Of course, that means it costs you more in a shorter month!!

Last year was a leap year, and when they refunded or charged part month/quarter, they divided by 365 instead of 366!!!! I think it was talked about on MoneySavingExpert, but I can't find the thread.

This is from The BT Price List:

Quote:

For customers paying by Monthly Payment Plan or Direct Debit, BT Together Option 1 is available for an inclusive fee of £26.80 exc. VAT per quarter (£31.49 inc. VAT). For customers paying by other means, the fee is £29.36 exc. VAT per quarter (£34.50 inc. VAT). ... From: SECTION 55. PERSONAL (RESIDENTIAL) CUSTOMER OPTIONS Part 1. BT Together Option 1

They state that they bill per quarter not per calendar month. By definition, each quarter has the same number of days (including part days). That is 91.25 days in a normal (365 day) year and 91.5 days in a leap year.

So, I think that means that the BTPL is wrong!

Edit: BT Update says that these changes will have effect from 1 April.

wrote on Mar 1^st, 2005 at 4:41pm:

BT Update says that these changes will have effect from 1 April.

I thought that the longer peak rate working day from 6am to 6pm had definitely already taken effect.  And this was announced in exactly the same part of the last BT Update leaflet.

Do you think Ofcom has anyone who even vaguely has a consumer rather an industry oriented outlook?

So far as i can tell Matt Peacock is the only one which is perhaps why they made him their press comments and interviews man?   By contrast the policy forming Kip Meek seems to keep a very low profile, but if that was your name perhaps you would too.

It appears that the 're-monopolisation' of telecommunications is not just something that is happening in Rip-Off Britain. These telcos really do not like giving up the cosy income they have become used to, and will find any method to maintain it - ie 0870, early morning 'peak time' etc etc. Here is an article from the USA. It might not be quite the same thing, but you can see the common thread!

"Is Big Telecom Out Of Control

By Preston Gralla  - Networking Pipeline

Imagine a world in which there was only one telephone company. A world in which government passed laws to curb telecom competition. A world in which...hold on a minute! That's the world we used to live in before the breakup of Ma Bell. No worry about going back to those days, is there?

Unfortunately, the new world of telecommunications is starting to look suspiciously like the bad old days of Ma Bell. Telecom companies are gobbling up each other up so fast, it's hard to know how many will be left after the feeding frenzy.

At the same time, telecom and cable companies (which are increasingly one and the same) have pulled the strings of politicos to ban cities, towns and states from providing free WiFi and other telecommunications services.

All of this is bad for consumers and bad for business. The reason is very simple. It means less choice. Let's take the big telecom fish gobbling up the little telecom fish first. When Verizon or Qwest or whoever is the telecom choice du jour ends up buying MCI, it means that there's one less company looking for your business, one less company willing to provide better services at lower prices in order to get you as a customer. This is especially important because SBC, is in the midst of buying AT&T.

What should be done? The Justice Department should look very closely at whoever buys MCI, with an eye towards stopping the deal if it proves to be too anti-competitive.

As for the telecom companies pulling the strings of politicians to outlaw municipalities from providing services like free WiFi, that's one of the most outrageous special interest giveaways I've heard of in some time. If a town or city wants to provide a telecom service, and its taxpayers agree, more power to them. It certainly shouldn't be made illegal, especially at a time when there are a shrinking number of big telecom companies from which cities and towns can choose.

To a certain extent, the telecom competition we've seen in the last few years has led to a sort of golden age of choice, where advanced services are being offered at increasingly lower prices. Let's make sure that continues by watching out for anti-competitive mergers, and not allowing the telecom companies to put politicians in their back pockets."

Does all that sound cynically familiar?

More price changes on the way, as published in this month's BT Update:

• On 1 August some international call prices were increased by 2p/min. The price of 'many' of BT's 'most called countries' remains the same.
  
• On 1 December 2005 the cost of calling the speaking clock will increase from 20p to 30p. IIRC it went up not long back. ::)
  
• Changes to terms and conditions, re faults and rental rebate/compensation:
  
  Quote:

  If you choose to take a call diversion when you suffer a loss of service, we will no longer pay a daily rental rebate if we are late in repairing the service. We are also changing the rates of payment available if you do not take a call divert. For each day that you claim for loss of service, we will reduce your next bill by the equivalent of the daily rental that you pay us, for as long as you are out of service. You may also claim Actual Financial Loss for any additional losses. We are making appropriate changes to your terms and conditions; these will become effective on 1st January 2006.

wrote on Oct 1^st, 2005 at 10:40pm:

If you choose to take a call diversion when you suffer a loss of service, we will no longer pay a daily rental rebate if we are late in repairing the service. We are also changing the rates of payment available if you do not take a call divert. For each day that you claim for loss of service, we will reduce your next bill by the equivalent of the daily rental that you pay us, for as long as you are out of service. You may also claim Actual Financial Loss for any additional losses. We are making appropriate changes to your terms and conditions; these will become effective on 1st January 2006.

So if BT diverts the calls to your mobile due to a fault who pays the call forward cost?  The subscriber or BT?

As to the cuts in compensation paid if you don't take up a divert these are outrageous when BT has about the highest standing charge of any utility for what is blatantly the cheapest service (out of gas, water, electicity and phone) to deliver.  I'm sure 35p a day compensation compared to the old compensation of £10 or so a day or so will really motivate BT to get off its arse and fix your fault.  What's behin the change?  Is BT about to axe 1,000 engineers or something?

Why is this change necessary when the cost of BT line rental keeps going up and not down in real terms?  Why did BT previously have to pay compensation that gave them an incentive to fix the fault and not any more.  Is it because Mr Stephen Carter or someone else at OfCon (for instance Mr Snoozing Non Confrontationally) has just enjoyed a particularly good lunch at a 5 start London restaurant with somone senior at BT?

Why is BT allowed to further ramp up its profit margin on line rental while still being allowed to prevent customers who only want an ADSL connection from going on the Light User Scheme or InContact Plus.  Is it because OfCon is only on the side of the telecoms industry it is meant to control?  Did OfCon even have to sign off this latest anticustomer change in BT's terms & conditions?

wrote on Oct 1^st, 2005 at 11:33pm:

As to the cuts in compensation paid if you don't take up a divert these are outrageous ....

I find it quite outrageous that the quality of service is being allowed to be degraded like this. I blame the regulator. Over the last few years Ive noticed changes like this that it has allowed to be made which provide a poorer service to the public.

wrote on Oct 2^nd, 2005 at 11:16am:

I find it quite outrageous that the quality of service is being allowed to be degraded like this. I blame the regulator. Over the last few years Ive noticed changes like this that it has allowed to be made which provide a poorer service to the public.

If a childminder or a nanny looked after children as poorly as Ofcom looks after telecoms industry regulation they would have long been sent to prison for an extended jail term.

OfcoN will maintain that BT is now subject to greater competition so that less regulation is required.  But if BT is subject to greater competition then why can I not take line rental on my country exchange from any other phone company than BT and still have a full choice of prefix using telecoms call carriers?  Also why is BT Wholesale allowed to charge its competitors far more for network services (call waiting, caller display , call diversion) than it charges for those same services to BT Retail?

And why does the cost of my already unreasonably expensive PSTN phone line rental continue to rise in real terms year after year and not fall?

More on BT, I had the update magazine with my monthly bill yesterday, as of 1st Oct 2005 all calls exceeding the 1 hour evening and weekend limit for the 5.5p calls for people on option 1 will now be charged at 3p per minute a rise from 1p per minute.

At least highway men wore masks

Off topic replies have been moved to This Thread