I notice from a posting on the MSE site that 18866 increase there connection charge  tomorrow from 2 to 3p.Calls to 01/02 numbers from a landline using 18866 access are still free.

So doesn't this make 1899 a better option as it has the same connection charge but lower cost to mobiles.

wrote on Sep 6^th, 2005 at 8:25am:

So doesn't this make 1899 a better option as it has the same connection charge but lower cost to mobiles.

Yes unless some of its intl rates r better for u

The other advantage is if you havent got a dialler.you want make the mistake of dialling 118866 and being charged for an expensive dq call.

hi
i noticed that 18866 says
"calls via 18866 are subjected to a connection fee of 3p per minute"

Is this a typo (per minute)
Max

Yes, its a typo.

It is now the same as Call1899 and that is 3p connection charge and 0ppm for geographical calls (in other words 3p per call).

I haven't received an email to tell me about this change. Has anyone else?

wrote on Sep 6^th, 2005 at 6:09pm:

I haven't received an email to tell me about this change. Has anyone else?

No one seems to have Dave.

WHat would stop 18866 raising their connection charge to say £1 or £10 or £10000 without warning and hammering unsuspecting punters for the charges? Many people will be using it not reaslising its gone up, so is this the big scam on the way? Rise the charge without notice or warning - maybe the next rise will be much bigger...

Thanks Big John for keeping us up to date.

wrote on Sep 6^th, 2005 at 6:52pm:

WHat would stop 18866 raising their connection charge to say £1 or £10 or £10000 without warning and hammering unsuspecting punters for the charges? Many people will be using it not reaslising its gone up, so is this the big scam on the way? Rise the charge without notice or warning - maybe the next rise will be much bigger...

It went up a couple of months back (can't seem to find the thread on it; maybe bigjohn can point us to it). Did they email everyone then?

wrote on Sep 7^th, 2005 at 4:24am:

It went up a couple of months back (can't seem to find the thread on it; maybe bigjohn can point us to it). Did they email everyone then?

It went up on the 23rd March 2005 and I got an email and some other people as well.  I also couldn't find it on this forum but managed to find it on MSE forum here & here.

Back then we were given a few days notice this time though it came as a surprise and I don't think anyone got an email from them.

wrote on Sep 7^th, 2005 at 7:44am:

Back then we were given a few days notice this time though it came as a surprise and I don't think anyone got an email from them.

You beat me to it Kev i had just found the MSE link. :)

The annoying thing is that they just think a few lines on there site a couple of days beforehand  is suffecient notice.Are they getting two big for there own boots? i wonder.The recent Which report must have brought them a few new customers.

wrote on Sep 7^th, 2005 at 8:48am:

...Are they getting two big for there own boots? i wonder.The recent Which report must have brought them a few new customers.

I'm not sure.  All I know is I had an interesting conversation with bunking_off on the MSE site about termination fees that BT get when calls end on their network.

BT charge 0.77ppm daytime for calls ending on their network which means any call over 4mins then Call18866/1899 are now making a loss.  They must hope that they make enough money from the calls that are less than 4minutes.

The was discussed here (post number 13 onwards).

18866's Terms and Conditions:


Quote:

Charges and Payment We withhold the right to vary any charges or rates at any time by posting the resulting price changes on our website or otherwise giving you notice. All Charges are subject to any applicable UK tax or duty, including Value Added Tax, at the prevailing rate. There is a connection fee in respect of any call made using the Call18866 Service which is published on the Call 18866 website at all times. The Call18866 Service is billed in one-second increments and all call Charges are rounded to the nearest penny.

questa has a valid point about whether they could suddenly hike the prices and post the 'announcement' on their website.  Because realistically, how many of us check their website every day?  If they hiked the price then nobody would have a case against them because of the T&C's.   >:(

I'm sure that is an unfair t&c in that they can change the prices at anytime without notice period of somekind.

The problem is though because they operate a call cost notification service then they could simply say well before you made your call you would have been informed that it is now 3p per call.  If we haven't got this call cost notification service on then that isn't their fault as such.

Their call cost message only says "zero p per minute"... no mention of any connection charge so we still wouldn't know >:(

That's a very good point.  The thing is I'm not going to complain and rock the boat with them with regard to this just yet as I still prefer the per call charge than the per minute charge most other providers charge.

They increased it in March and again now in September so I'll wait and see if they increase it again but I can't see that happening as then they would be dearer than Call1899 unless of course they plan on increasing their charges?

wrote on Sep 9^th, 2005 at 9:04am:

That's a very good point.  The thing is I'm not going to complain and rock the boat with them with regard to this just yet as I still prefer the per call charge than the per minute charge most other providers charge.

That's assuming they bother to even read or reply to your email in the first place.  Personally if they can't even reply to my email then i'm not going near them with a bargepole.  what if there's a problem with billing and they claim a large amount of your credit card? nobody to phone and an email address which nobody reads.  no thank you ::)

If you set up a direct debit with call18866 then you can tell your bank that you have been charged incorrectly and they have to put the money back immediately.  It's the Direct Debit guarantee.   8)

I would point out that nobody here or on the MSE Forums appears to have had any problems. ;D

fredflintstone,

I agree with Smasher that no one (including myself) have reported problems with Call18866/1899 incorrectly charging loads amounts, etc neither on here or the MSE forum.

The Direct Debit Guarantee as pointed out by Smasher ensures we get a refund if any mistakes are made.  It can be read here, or from the quote below:-


Quote:

The direct debit guarantee applies to all banks and building societies taking part in the direct debit scheme. It says that: If there is a change in the amount to be paid or the payment date, the person receiving the payment (the originator) must notify the customer in advance.   If the originator or the bank/building society makes an error, the customer is guaranteed a full and immediate refund of the amount paid. Customers can cancel a direct debit at any time by writing to their bank or building society.

It is far safer to use Direct Debit than to use debit/credit cards.

The reason why they don't operate a call centre is the expensive costs of the equipment and call centre staff wages', etc.  If they did then we wouldn't be paying 3p per call and probably more like 2-3p per minute same as the other companies that operate call centres.  Therefore the saving they've made by not operating a call centre they pass back on to their customers by extremely low call charges.

wrote on Sep 6^th, 2005 at 6:09pm:

I haven't received an email to tell me about this change. Has anyone else?

No email here and I am a regular customer.  They have emailed me to tell me about price cuts so this is pretty shoddy behaviour .  If I hadn't read this thread I would have carried on in blissful ignorance for weeks which is pretty shoddy.  I will make a complaint to them.  Must be a clear breach of trading standards rules not to notify customers of a price change, especially when they have an automated announcement system but leave the connection charge out.

Why does most of modern business seem to rely on fleecing the current customer who has already been captured.

The moment to take more active steps on Voip nears.

Does anyone here use VoipBuster and does it actually work if you have the right kit?

wrote on Sep 8^th, 2005 at 3:34pm:

questa has a valid point about whether they could suddenly hike the prices and post the 'announcement' on their website.  Because realistically, how many of us check their website every day?  If they hiked the price then nobody would have a case against them because of the T&C's.   >:(

This is totally unethical shoddy behaviour when they have all our email addreses and its easy for them to send us an email.

I used to regard 18866 as my friends and I have tirelessly promoted them.  Now I feel like they are stabbing us in the back.

I plan to seek my revenge by trying out Voip.

Of course a change like this makes it obvious that calls with http://www.voipbuster.co.uk won't be free forever and a day.

Here is my message of complaint to 18866.

I filed this as a complaint about my bill on the basis that it was most likely to actually get looked at and receive a reply from them.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Message of Complaint to 18866 about increased connection charge:-

Dear 18866,

You have changed your connection fee for uk geographic calls from 2p to 3p but have failed to email customers to tell them about this.  This means that I did not know about the increase for several days after it had happened but it could have been weeks and weeks until I had looked at my next invoice.

Given that your call price announcement feature does not include the connection in the announcement fee this is sigraceful sharp practice by 18866 of the worst possible kind.

I was a loyal customer of yours who promoted your service extensively but now you have breached my trust and shown that you are untrustworthy sharp operators.

I will be acquiring a voip handset and begin making my calls via voip in retribution for this bad behaviour by your company.

Yours in extreme disappointment.

For good measure I have also just completely cancelled my whole account with 18866.

It was with a very heavy heart but one has to take a stand on such matters.

Anyhow it no longer makes sense to run a 18866 and 1899 account and I didn't have a point to make with 1899 who have not so far tried to rip me off or lie to me.

I would encourage all of you who use 18866 to cancel their service and if you still need an equivalent service to set up an account with 1899.com instead.  After all it is one digit less to dial each time.

If enough people cancel with 18866 they will start to realise that they have crossed a bridge too far.

Of course it may well be that their own underlying call supplier costs have for some reason increased but they should have had the decency to at least write to us and explain this instead of sneakily trying to increase prices behind our backs.

Come on guys please cancel with 18866 to teach them a lesson.   Then they won't dare to try and pull such a stunt again.

wrote on Sep 14^th, 2005 at 6:01pm:

Then they won't dare to try and pull such a stunt again.

But still a nasty taste, possibly spreading to the sister companies?  >:(
In any event I am working my way round advising all my clients using them.  :(

wrote on Sep 14^th, 2005 at 6:01pm:

I would encourage all of you who use 18866 to cancel their service and if you still need an equivalent service to set up an account with 1899.com instead.  After all it is one digit less to dial each time.

And no chance of falling foul of the alleged (and expensive) 118866 fat finger dialling problem.

wrote on Sep 14^th, 2005 at 7:29pm:

And no chance of falling foul of the alleged (and expensive) 118866 fat finger dialling problem.

I never seem to have done that in the last year or so.  And that's in the course of making thousands of calls with 18866.

Of course there has been the odd time when I have forgotten to diall 18866 altogether or when I have been making an 0845 call and have forgotten to dial the 1280 prefix for BT to avoid TalkTalk.  I only have TalkTalk for their 30 minutes a month of free mobile phone calls.

As my least cost routing device can insert an indirect code by a combination of: time of day, day of week and number dialled (including translating a full PSTN number - handy for adding 1470 to friends and families numbers 'pre' the indirect code)  I think I'll change my weekday routings, for 01 & 02 codes, to have Monday's, Wednesday's and Friday's daytime plus Tuesday and Thursday evenings 'pre' 18866. Then Monday, Wednesday and Friday evenings plus Tuesday's and Thursday's daytime 'pre' 1899.


As both companies switch calls for the price, why not share your calls around!  ;)

You still save money and 18866 'pay the price' for increasing their connection charge. :'(


 

wrote on Sep 15^th, 2005 at 7:08pm:

[font=Verdana][color=Blue] As both companies switch calls for the price, why not share your calls around!  ;)

Why not teach 18866 a lesson by routing all your calls with 1899 and closing your 18866 account and sending an email to say that their own disgraceful dishonesty is the reason for the loss of your custom.

Of course 1899 charge the same price but at least they haven't tried to deceive me about their call prices so far, whereas 18866 have.  Therefore 1899 deserve my business and 18866 do not.  Also 1899 mobile calls are cheaper so in short why use 18866 any more.

One may or may not be giving one's business to another part of the same operation in a Procter & Gamble and Unilever washing powder kind of a way.  That aspect seems far from clear.  Although I suspect that each variant (18866, 1899 and 18185) is a franchise?  Otherwise surely it would be far better to consolidate them all and then do press or tv advertising for one indirect prefix number?

Also 18866 haven't even replied to my email today so I definitely did the right thing in closing my account with them.

wrote on Sep 15^th, 2005 at 8:09pm:

Also 18866 haven't even replied to my email today so I definitely did the right thing in closing my account with them.

Tks NGM. One down, eight to go. Typing as fast as I can  :)

wrote on Sep 15^th, 2005 at 9:47pm:

Tks NGM. One down, eight to go. Typing as fast as I can  :)

I put up with the 1p to 2p connection rise because they were still cheapest but to go from 2p to 3p is too much to suffer.

When they started off they charged 1p a minute and no connection charge, which was a very honest and admirable position.  But since then they have chosen to be devious by bringing in an ever large connection charge not stated in their call price announcements.

Where are you telling your clients to move to Tanllan?  To 1899.com perhaps?

to 1899?
Yup. Pro tem anyway.
Tks again NGM  :)

Actually I think it is even worse than you guys have indicated, since 18866 have not even been honest on their web site! At the right hand side they state the connection charge is 3p, but in the middle under the boast that calls cost only 0 p per minute they still state the connection charge as "2 p". That really is an attempt to deceive customers who do not examine the detail.

It seems their strategy was to obtain a customer base by offering very low cost calls, and then relying on customer lethagy in changing to gradually increase the charges. This seems to be an increasingly common marketing tacket nowadays. I shall watch them extremely carefully now. This increase means that for short calls they will not now often be competitive.

wrote on Sep 16^th, 2005 at 3:10pm:

This increase means that for short calls they will not now often be competitive.

Who would you use for very short calls then Dorf?  Either Toucan Telecom or the Post Office who I believe don't have a minimum charge.

The problem with that is surely that one doesn't know at the outset exactly how long a call may last?

And although 18866 are no longer cheapest out on their own surely for a non subscription package there is still no one cheaper than them and 1899 for weekday daytime calls.

They also have not replied to my email which is equally shabby.

If you go to the any questions section of the 18866 site,and look under (How much will i be charged for my calls) you will see another misleading statement which suggests that BT and One tel charge a connection fee.

wrote on Sep 16^th, 2005 at 3:41pm:

If you go to the any questions section of the 18866 site,and look under (How much will i be charged for my calls) you will see another misleading statement which suggests that BT and One tel charge a connection fee.

But in effect BT and Onetel do charge a connection fee.  Albeit that the connection fee is refunded if your call duration costs exceed the connection fee price.  But since 18866 doesn't charge anything other than the connection fee I don't see this as an attempt to be dishonest on their part.

I only see not telling us about a 50% price rise as being dishonest.  This following on from not telling us about their 100% price rise.

I accepted the previous price change because I could see 1p a call was probably not sustainable.  But given ever lower wholesale voip call costs to PSTN and lower all inclusive (for 01 and 02) PSTN prices I really felt 2p a call should have been sustainable.

Also there was no need to try and hide the price rise from us.  That was just cretinous marketing man thinking.

I have just posted this in the other 18866 vs 1899 thread.  It unfortunately shows that in cancelling 18866 and using 1899 I am indeed cutting off my nose to spite my face!

-----------------------------------------------------------------

http://order.internic.co.uk shows that http://call18866.co.uk is indeed registered to Finarea SA of Lugano in Switzerland but http://call18866.com is registered to Melbourne IT Ltd, a domain name specialist, but it still points to the same website.  http://www.18866.co.uk is registered to Finarea but http://www.18866.com is registered to Melbourne IT.   Again they all point to the same site.

http://www.1899.com is registered by The Registry at Info Avenue and points to 1899s site, whereas http://www.1899.co.uk is registered to an I Ramirez of 8 Liverpool St of Ealing, London W5 - this address does not point to a live website and Mr Ramirez seems to have failed in his effort to make a killing on this one.  http://Call1899.co.uk is interestingly also registered to Finarea of Lugano, Switzerland, but http://www.1899.com is registered to Network Solutions LLC and yet both point to the 1899 site

http://www.18185.co.uk is also registered to Finarea SA, again in Lugano but at a PO box number that differs from other Finarea addresses.  It was first registered on 20th March 2002 and renewed on 20th March 2006, so strange they held it for so long without launching the product.  http://www.18185.com and http://www.18185.net are both pointing at Japanese websites that are unreadable to me but clearly nothing to do with Finarea or 18185.  http://www.call18185.co.uk was first registered to Finarea on 6th Dec 2002, whereas http://call18185.com was also first registered on 6th Dec 2002 but to Melbourne IT.  There seems to be a pattern developing here.

http://www.dialaround.co.uk is again registered to Finarea SA at the Viale Carlo Cattanea 1 in Lugano as with various other above registrations.  It was first registered on 8th Oct 2003 though.  Other Dialaround name variants do not point to the Dialaround site.  So anyhow Dialaround really is linked in with Finarea (its web site presentation is very different to 1899 and 18866 and 18185 and it also uses NGNs instead of a dial prefix) and yet they can offer 5p per minute to 0870 and 18185 4p per minute but 18866 and 1899 stick to 9p per minute.  That makes no sense.

http://www.dialwise.co.uk is again registered to Finarea SA at the good old Viale Carlo Cattaneo 1 in Lugano and was first registered on 8th Oct 2003. No other dialwise www variants point to this website.

http://www.telesavers.co.uk is also registered to good old Finarea SA at the Viale Carlo Cattaneo 1 in Lugano.  It was first registered on 8th Oct 2003 like 18185.co.uk which is interesting.  It also has access to the 5p 0870 rate offered by dialaround but not by Finarea's prefix brands.  No other telesavers www variants point to this website

Call18866, Dialwise and Telesavers are also all linked with Finarea at http://www.magsys.co.uk/telecom/opnotes.htm but only the entry for Call18866 shows the link with Connect Telecom.  The Companies House website shows a Connect Telecom Ltd in Manchester created in 1997 and now in liquidation - not seemingly the one.  It also shows a Connect Telecommunications Ltd of Cumbernauld, Glasgow with Full accounts Exemption so unlikely to be the one given the scale of the Finarea uk telecoms business.  Then finally it shows Connect Telecom UK Ltd of 12 Sheet Street, Windsor, Berkshire.  The previous name of this company is Web.Coms Ltd until 2001.  Looks very promising to me and Windsor is close to my mother's home.  Must investigate.

But the Ofcom website shows a listing for Connect Telecom UK Ltd, PO Box 44714, London
SW1Y 4XD, Tel: 0845 056 1237
Provision of international simple voice resale services
There is no Ofcom listing for Finarea.

In short the Finarea telecoms web is a complex one and also seems to possibly involve Connect Telecom as a middle man.  As to why some of the www addresses are done through domain registering middlemen instead of direct to Finarea I suppose that's anyone's guess.

Interesting though to finally confirm all these sites are one operation.  I don't believe there are in fact any franchises involved and having 6 brands and 2 different calling formats is obviously an attempt to maximise the calling business against the extensive competition.  So no doubt 18866 will be losing absolutely no sleep at all over me cancelling my account with them due to their hiding their connection charge increase from 2p to 3p.  The fact that I am now only using 1899.com will clearly not be bothering them one

It now appears http://www.telestunt.co.uk and http://telediscount.co.uk are also part of the Finarea stable.  That's 8 uk calling brands and counting.  Can anyone name any others!

See http://niftylist.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=12.0

NGN.

I have been tracking these people for some time.Their are 5 more uk sites to my knowledge.See list below.They have some sites registered on Eire Domains,and a lot of other European Countries.

www.topupnow.co.uk
www.mobileminutes.co.uk
www.cheapestcalls.co.uk
www.bestminutes.co.uk
www.budgetcom.co.uk


PS.Come to think of it they also have a Uk Voip site which i cant recall the domain name of.

Sometime ago there was a lengthy thread entititled i think "who is behind 18866" which covered some of this ground.I cant find it at the mo.

wrote on Sep 17^th, 2005 at 7:21am:

NGN. I have been tracking these people for some time.Their are 5 more uk sites to my knowledge.See list below.They have some sites registered on Eire Domains,and a lot of other European Countries. www.topupnow.co.uk www.mobileminutes.co.uk www.cheapestcalls.co.uk www.bestminutes.co.uk www.budgetcom.co.uk

So Bestminutes offer 10p a minute to a Spanish mobile and the next best rate is 15p per minute.

Then some Finaria busineses like 18866 and 1899 do not bother with offering calls to the smaller countries like Liechtenstein but the services on the NGN numbers, on 084/7 and 09, often do offer this facility.

Do you think it is just one company with the equivalent of many washing powder brands on the shelves or that each of these different services is a franchise?

A domain lookup reveals that you can also add http://www.voipcheap.co.uk and http://www.voipbuster.co.uk to the list of brands owned by Finarea.

They are quite cunning as for instance MobileMinutes doesn't look at all like their other sites and yet is still registered to Finarea, although not at the Villa what not address.

It would perhaps be more interesting to know which smaller call companies are not owned by Finarea?

Some of the other companies like Pennyphone and Abroadtel seem to be run by an outfit called Callax.  So its not a total Finarea monopoly.  The seemingly small and independent www.ratebuster.co.uk (nobody else has a jolly little message saying Greetings Earthling and Welcome to Your Low Call Hero when you dial) is in fact owned by none other than Centrica who also own Onetel.

Oh what a tangled web they weave.

wrote on Sep 17^th, 2005 at 7:40am:

Do you think it is just one company with the equivalent of many washing powder brands on the shelves or that each of these different services is a franchise?

I have always thought it to be one company, with different brands.

wrote on Sep 17^th, 2005 at 7:55am:

I have always thought it to be one company, with different brands.

Yes so it would seem.

But just how many brands do they have?  Have you done a domain name lookup for all of the companies in the http://www.niftylist.co.uk  That might reveal they in fact have about 25 different brand names?

Seem to be quite a few genuine indepndents though such as Lycatel, Telesave and 123Call

I have domain checked each company as it has launched,and the only ones i have come up with so far are the ones we have listed.

The owner of the www.niftylist.co.uk is in touch with them,and i have asked him if he can throw any more light on the set up.I will post the info in due course.

(He has now replied to me.Basically he has no idea either ,personaly he thinks that the way its set up, is part of their marketing strategy.)

wrote on Sep 17^th, 2005 at 8:59am:

I have domain checked each company as it has launched,and the only ones i have come up with so far are the ones we have listed.

Your checks seem to have missed http://www.voipbuster.co.uk and http://www.voipcheap.co.uk?

Also not all of the Finarea domain names are registered to Finarea so there could be one or two of their subsidiaries only registered to a doman name intermediary specialist and not Finarea.

wrote on Sep 17^th, 2005 at 9:16am:

Your checks seem to have missed http://www.voipbuster.co.uk and http://www.voipcheap.co.uk? Also not all of the Finarea domain names are registered to Finarea so there could be one or two of their subsidiaries only registered to a doman name intermediary specialist and not Finarea.

1.No i did not miss them, i said earlier there was a voip domain i could not remember,and in fact their are 2 as you have pointed out.( I was including them in the ones we had listed,as you mentioned them in the previous post to mine.)

2.Yes i expect that could be the case,and i would imagine they already have some new domains listed,ready for new offspring(products).

wrote on Sep 17^th, 2005 at 9:27am:

2.Yes i expect that could be the case,and i would imagine they already have some new domains listed,ready for new offspring(products).

Look at how long they had www.18185.co.uk registered for before they launched the service.

I really can't understand why Finarea don't offer a competitive 5p per minute cost for 0870 on 18866 and 1899 though?  It seems daft one has to call an NGN instead to get this pricing.

NGM, my post answering your question has disappeared again! This is becoming a habit?

With regard to NGM's request to cancel accounts, it so happens that I haven't used them at all,  but kept my account open - what difference will it make to them if I don't use it at all and keep it open, or just go one step further and shut it? ???

Don't forget 1899 doesn't offer Direct Debit so they could in theory charge anything to a Debit/Credit Card and run :-/

wrote on Sep 18^th, 2005 at 1:15pm:

With regard to NGM's request to cancel accounts, it so happens that I haven't used them at all,  but kept my account open - what difference will it make to them Don't forget 1899 doesn't offer Direct Debit so they could in theory charge anything to a Debit/Credit Card and run :-/

The difference it will make is that following their 50% hidden increase in connection charge I am sure they will count the number of 18866 cancellations they get in the ensuing weeks as a result.  Whereas they will be less likely to notice people who merely stop using their account for a while.  Also emails of complaint will get their attention even if they don't reply to them.

One reason for cancelling the account would be that it cancels their authority to make any further debits for 18866 after the final closing account balance.  Whereas to leave an inactive card account with an open card authority would potentially allow them to take payments in the future.

My last credit card bill shows a debit to Finarea which I believe is the first time that they have started taking payments under their reall name rather than 18866 or Bibit etc.  I wonder if they are soon going to come out into the open, consolidate everything and start a CPS or Wholesale Line Rental service as Finarea.  You can't be a collection of 10 2 bit players to do something like that cost effectively.

wrote on Sep 17^th, 2005 at 9:23pm:

NGM, my post answering your question has disappeared again! This is becoming a habit?

As I was away from home last night I never saw your removed post Dorf.

Are you sure that the fault is not perhaps with your computer in transmitting some of your new messages?

Have a look at this Finerea site which appears to be the
equivalent to 1899/18866 in Switzerland.As you will see the page layout is similar to Finerea,s uk sites.

www.10787.ch

Tks BJ. Have just emailed the details to various friends in Geneva (even if the site is in German).

wrote on Sep 18^th, 2005 at 4:35pm:

The difference it will make is that following their 50% hidden increase in connection charge I am sure they will count the number of 18866 cancellations they get in the ensuing weeks as a result.  Whereas they will be less likely to notice people who merely stop using their account for a while.  Also emails of complaint will get their attention even if they don't reply to them. One reason for cancelling the account would be that it cancels their authority to make any further debits for 18866 after the final closing account balance.  Whereas to leave an inactive card account with an open card authority would potentially allow them to take payments in the future. My last credit card bill shows a debit to Finarea which I believe is the first time that they have started taking payments under their reall name rather than 18866 or Bibit etc.  I wonder if they are soon going to come out into the open, consolidate everything and start a CPS or Wholesale Line Rental service as Finarea.  You can't be a collection of 10 2 bit players to do something like that cost effectively.

But they are still cheaper for a 3p connection fee and no per minute charges, than if I were to use my CPS provider which charges 5p minimum.  Am I missing something?? ??? :-[

[quote author=Smasher link=1125944907/45#52 date=1127074498]

But they are still cheaper for a 3p connection fee and no per minute charges, than if I were to use my CPS provider which charges 5p minimum.  Am I missing something?? ??? :-[/quote]

They are now no cheaper than 1899 for 01/02 calls and more expensive than 1899 for mobile calls.  Also dialaround and various other Finarea NGN 0844 methods are cheaper than BT for 0870 whereas 18866 is not

Tele2 now only charge £7.49 for unlimited 01/02 calls at any time so that's only 250 calls per month with 18866.  Or put another way if you make 9 calls a day or more to 01 and 02 numbers in your household then an unlimited calls plan like Tele2 would be cheaper for you.

Also I think one should cancel one's 18866 account and move to 1899 just to make a point even though ultimately it is owned by the same holding company.

wrote on Sep 18^th, 2005 at 9:21pm:

They are now no cheaper than 1899 for 01/02 calls and more expensive than 1899 for mobile calls.  Also dialaround and various other Finarea NGN 0844 methods are cheaper than BT for 0870 whereas 18866 is not Tele2 now only charge £7.49 for unlimited 01/02 calls at any time so that's only 250 calls per month with 18866.  Or put another way if you make 9 calls a day or more to 01 and 02 numbers in your household then an unlimited calls plan like Tele2 would be cheaper for you. Also I think one should cancel one's 18866 account and move to 1899 just to make a point even though ultimately it is owned by the same holding company.

I'm ready to click the option "Cancel" but I'm a little concerned about giving continuous credit card authority to 1899.   :-/

Presumably one reason that the all uk georaphic calls at any time option gets ever cheaper is because the number of calls most people can make to such numbers, especially in the more valuable weekday daytime period, constantly becomes ever smaller?

Hi Smasher :)

I am on talktalk. could u explain:

"...Onetel wanted our Select service without our permission.  They accepted liability so if they offer more than the standard 3 months..."

I think i missed something interesting :)

regards

Max

wrote on Sep 19^th, 2005 at 9:28am:

I think i missed something interesting :)

Kind of hard for us to tell what we missed when Smasher failed to include it I think?

wrote on Sep 19^th, 2005 at 9:59am:

Kind of hard for us to tell what we missed when Smasher failed to include it I think?

What did I miss out?  ??? :-[

wrote on Sep 19^th, 2005 at 9:28am:

Hi Smasher :) I am on talktalk. could u explain: "...Onetel wanted our Select service without our permission.  They accepted liability so if they offer more than the standard 3 months..." I think i missed something interesting

This is off-topic a bit but Smasher had his outgoing calls (via CPS) changed from TalkTalk to OneTel without receiving a letter from either company which is against OfCOM guidelines.  For more info and to discuss it more see Smashers thread here.

wrote on Sep 19^th, 2005 at 10:06am:

TalkTalk should have sent out a letter saying that we were being transferred and that if we didn't want to go ahead, to give them (TalkTalk) a call. However, this didn't get sent out and the service was transferred and the first I knew about it was when the Onetel Bill came through the door a month later.

TalkTalk never send these letters but always pretend it is a mistake if anyone complains.  Because Ofcom are such a totally useless and spineless regulator abusers like TalkTalk are allowed to get away with serial flouting of the regulations so long as they always pretend what they have done is a mistake when anyone challenges them.

I was with TalkTalk and due to a "misunderstanding" with Tiscali about closing my account with them they initiated a request to transfer my CPS to them from TalkTalk which went through.  But neithe Tiscali or TalkTalk sent the required letters notifying me of the service being moved.  The first I knew was when I got a bill from Tiscali.

So all these telcos ride roughshod over Ofcom and because Ofcom is notorious for never fining or closing down an errant telco they have about as much respect for Ofcom as the average delinquent schoolchild does for a weak teacher.

OK, back to the increased connection charge which still isn't reflected on the large graphic on their website >:( - isn't it still cheaper to use 18866 instead of a CPS carrier such as TalkTalk who will charge 5p min then per minute?

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 8:30am:

isn't it still cheaper to use 18866 instead of a CPS carrier such as TalkTalk who will charge 5p min then per minute?

The answer is Yes it is still cheaper to use 18866 or 1899 for geographic 01/02 calls unless you routinely make more than 250 chargeable calls to these numbers (just over 8 calls a day) in an average month.

In this case it becomes cheaper to sign up for a cheap All Uk Geographic Calls plan such as the one from www.tele2.co.uk at £7.50 per month.

The point we are making about 18866 is that they are currently relying on deception where many customers think they are paying 2p per call only to end up paying 3p per call.

Since the company has refused to respond to my complaint I assume I would now be entitled to log this with www.otelo.org.uk or with www.ofcom.org.uk

Has anyone yet tried to log a formal complaint with the regulators about 18866s behavioiur.  I think all of us who are customers should now do so.

NGM,

In answer to your earlier question, I am quite sure this problem has nothing whatever to do with my computer. I checked and my message had been posted correctly on the forum. I checked in again some hour or so later - it was still there visible on this forum.

Some hours later when I checked in again the posting had vanished. I would remind you that on your own admission in another topic this has occurred with more than one of your postings.

Dorf

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 10:24am:

Some hours later when I checked in again the posting had vanished. I would remind you that on your own admission in another topic this has occurred with more than one of your postings.

Dorf,

Have you made a post in the Site Related section of the forum about this and/or sent a private message to Daniel the Forum Administrator?

I suppose people could remove the odd one of my posts and I possibly wouldn't notice as I don't check back on them all although I would notice if they had removed a whole very active thread in which I was a participant.

However with over 800 posts in the forum I feel that it is unlikely that many of my posts have been removed.

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 9:04am:

Has anyone yet tried to log a formal complaint with the regulators about 18866s behavioiur.  I think all of us who are customers should now do so.

Neither 18866, Finarea or Connect Telecom are members of the Otelo  (www.otelo.org.uk) ombudsman complaint scheme and thus I have filed a complaint with Ofcom about 18866 not properly notifying their price increase, not answering my email of complaint about this and not belonging to an alternate disputes resolution scheem such as Otelo.

I would suggest that any other 18866 customer reading this thread should also call Ofcom on 020 7981 3040 to make a complaint about 18866's behaviour and their failure to belong to either the Otelo or any other complaints scheme.

I have just had a very unsatisfactory call back from a lady at the Ofcom Contact Centre on this issue as a result of which I have sent this email to Ofcom's Chief Operating Officer, Ed Richards.

-----Original Message-----
From: NonGeographicalMan
To: ed.richards@ofcom.org.uk
Cc: stephen.carter@ofcom.org.uk;  matt.peacock@ofcom.org.uk;jackie.caspary@ofcom.org.uk
Subject: Failure to Take Action Against Finarea Over Non Membership of Otelo or other Alternate Disputes Resolution Procedures

Dear Mr Richards,

Complaint 2530078 - Against www.18866.co.uk/www.finarea.ch for Lack of Alternate Disputes Resolution Procedure over Unannounced Call Price Increase

I have today tried to lodge a complaint with the Ofcom Contact Centre regarding the behaviour of a telecoms company called Finarea (www.finarea.ch) that provides indirect call access routing on my phone line via their www.call18866.co.uk and www.1899.com telecoms brands.  The company also operates a raft of other telecoms brands selling service to customers on uk phone lines including www.18185.co.uk, www.dialaround.co.uk, www.dialwise.co.uk, www.telesavers.co.uk, www.voipbuster.co.uk and www.voipcheap.co.uk

My complaint is that Finarea increased the connection charge on their 18866 service on 5th September without sending an email to me or any other customers to inform us and without making clear in their so called call price announcement before each call (which states that the call cost is 0p per minute but does not notify the 3p connection charge) that this change had taken place.  Also my understanding is that although after 5th September they showed the new connection fee in one part of their website they did not show it in their main call price list.  Furthermore 18866 have always previously been in the habit of emailing customers immediately to notify them of any reductions in their calling prices.

I have tried to complain to the company itself via its online web complaints form but so far it has chosen not to reply and there is no telephone number one can call to complain to either here or in Switzerland, where the parent company, Finarea, is based.

I lodged this as complaint number 2530078 in your contact centre this morning and the lady concerned said she would call me back once she had investigated the matter.

She then called back a few minutes later to say that Ofcom is aware that 18866 is not a member of an alternate disputes resolution procedure and has been trying to pursue this with the company for some time, but also fairly clearly from what she said these attempts had thus far been unsuccessful.  She then went on to say that my only course of resolution over the matter was therefore to enter into litigation with the company under the terms of the contract.  To say that the manner of the lady in the contact centre was fairly offhand and unsympathetic is to put it mildly but she was no better or worse than the generally appalling call crunching skills deployed by most of your so called contact centre staff.

Aside from wishing to indicate my continuing discontent at the manner in which calls from members of the public are handled by the Ofcom Contact Centre (where in essence the stock answer is that Ofcom cannot deal with almost any consumer's problem and that they should go away to Otelo, the telecommunications company concerned, to lawyers or to anywhere else that will save Ofcom having to do any work) I would like to know specifically what powers you have under the various Telecommunications acts to take action against an operator like Finarea and its many sub-brands to force them to join an alternate disputes resolution procedure?  Also what powers do you have to take action against them if they refuse to respond to emailed customer complaints about billing and pricing and do not have a telephone number for customers to call?

I find it totally unacceptable that a regulator who has the primary mission of working on behalf of the citizen and consumer in terms of its statutory remit always chooses to hide behind its so called "light touch" methods of operation to do almost nothing that ever shows any form of action in the public interest.

I would therefore appreciate your comments on this specific matter before I take it up with my member of parliament as an example of Ofcom's general failure to make satisfactory use of its powers.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards,

NGM

I just discovered this rather interesting article on the Daily Telegraph web site which sheds new light on the issue of Finarea/18866/1899 not having an Alternate Disputes Resolution Procedure.

It seems strange that no one here has mentioned this article before.  By the way what has happened to idb lately?  Has he either gone off on a world tour or found himself a job I wonder as he was the man we could previously rely on to come up with interesting articles in the press:-

http://money.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2005/05/18/cmphone18.xml

The irony is that I would of course be perfectly be happy for Finarea not to have such a procedure provided they had not suddenly decided to rip us off by pushing through a hidden price.  This after for so long seeming that they were the telecoms consumer's friend.

Given their lack of membership of any Alternate Disputes Resolution Procedure and the fact that they have our credit card numbers can we actually trust Finarea at all now?  Also given the level of our payments to them I do not believe we even have the normal right to protection guaranteed when more expensive goods are purchased by credit card?

I agree that Call18866 and their sister companies should have warned us about any price increase (a week at least) and I can't say I'm not surprised that they haven't registered in any ADR scheme but has anyone thought about the what will happen when (if) they do register with an ADR scheme such as Otelo?  It will have to increase its call charges from the 3p per call to something higher because I can almost guarantee that registering with an ADR scheme will cost a lot of money and probably not even a one-off fee but an annual fee.

A normal telecoms company can easily take it out of their profits but we all know that any profits Call18866/1899, etc make can't be that high at all.

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 2:55pm:

A normal telecoms company can easily take it out of their profits but we all know that any profits Call18866/1899, etc make can't be that high at all.

If they hadn't decided to suddenly try and rip us off then they wouldn't have caused me and other customers to ask Ofcom why there is no ADR process in place.

If you are going to make do without a customer call centre and don't want the regulators to ask these awkward questions as they already should have done (they only seem to have ducked it up to now because the overall Finarea operation is small and because no one seemed unhappy with them in the past) then you shouldn't do things designed to make the customers make complaints (as this latest unscrupulous unnotified change in charges obviously was).

I understand why 1p and possibly even 2p a call might not have been sustainable but they should have sent a polite email giving advance notice, explaining their reasons and saying they hoped we would still stay with them because for those only making modest numbers of calls they still offered the best value (albeit less good value than before).

Instead of which they do this on the sly and refuse to answer any complaints forms filled out on the subject on their website.

I agree with you and you are right if they would have bothered to email us, and respond to your email (or other emails) about this then you wouldn't have needed to complain to OfCOM about them and especially about not having an ADR scheme.

Basically what I'm saying is when they sign-up to an ADR scheme then don't be surprised if call charges are increased again to pay for it.  This will also apply to Call1899 and the other sister companies as well because it is extremely unlikely they could do this out of their profits (if any).

Remember that because of the way the termination payments work then Call18866/1899, etc all have to pay BT (or whichever landline company the call terminates at) so much per minute and hence the reason why all other telephone providers charge x amount per minute. This ensures they don't lose too much money.

I have often wondered how they could survive on just charging a connection fee and having no specific maximum call length before a ppm charge applies.

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 3:29pm:

I have often wondered how they could survive on just charging a connection fee and having no specific maximum call length before a ppm charge applies.

I think you will find that in the wholesale calls market for calls to geographic numbers there is only an originating and terminating call fee made of around a penny or so in total.

It is only NGNs that charge on a per minute basis to support the per minute revenue share arrangement.  Also 18866 and 1899 are routing their calls over voip to a lot of destinations, where I believe termination charges made are once again lower.

There are only two possible motivations for running an outfit like Finarea and one is to build up a massive list of customers so as to sell the company on and the other is to make a profit on all the calls currently routed.

It strikes me that the scale of Finarea's operation (no advertising etc) is not enough to be based on the build the big customer base and flog it model so I feel they have been making a profit in general.  Of course it may well be that the specialist deals they had in place for routing their calls no longer exist.

Also my other original theory was that Finarea's various companies were using up surplus call capacity on existing business telecoms networks.  And given how much Finarea has grown it may be that this spare capacity no longer exists so they have to charge the market price for acquiring fresh calling capacity to handle the extra customers.  I think that probably lies behind these recent price rises.

But perhaps we should ask Mr Darren Thomas of Call18866 for a statement? ;) ;D

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 3:45pm:

I think you will find that in the wholesale calls market for calls to geographic numbers there is only an originating and terminating call fee made of around a penny or so in total. It is only NGNs that charge on a per minute basis to support the per minute revenue share arrangement.....

I had an interesting conversation with MSE forum member Bunking_off who appears to work in the telecoms industry and he said that BT still charge a per minute termination fee even to geographical calls.

I mentioned this in this post earlier on (post #12) and it includes a link to the relevant MSE forum page where we discussed this.

I've no idea on termination fees payable for VoIP calls.

In my opinion then no matter which carrier you use BT always seem to gain!

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 3:57pm:

In my opinion then no matter which carrier you use BT always seem to gain!

If you route your call overseas BT is cut out completely and if you route your call to NTL, Telewest or Cable & Wireless customers BT is cut out completely.  Also BT don't get the originating call fee on any BT line for a call routed via the prefix code.  They only get a terminating fee if the geographic number you call is on a BT line.

BT Wholesale may still charge per minute, which is why BT Retail Option 3 is so expensive.  But certainly their rival competitor networks do not charge per minute.  Also if BT actually charged per minute surely they would lose a fortune with self employed salesmen working at home and using BT Option 3?  As I understand it there is no upper call value limit in a quarter on Option 3, although I suppose they may expect to recoup such cost from most Option 3 lines from the high percentage of calls that normal uninformed people will have to make to 0870 numbers. ;)

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 4:08pm:

If you route your call overseas BT is cut out completely and if you route your call to NTL, Telewest or Cable & Wireless customers BT is cut out completely

I agree but majority of calls unfortunately end on BT due to their monopoly.

Quote:

BT Wholesale may still charge per minute, which is why BT Retail Option 3 is so expensive.  But certainly their rival competitor networks do not charge per minute.  Also if BT actually charged per minute surely they would lose a fortune with self employed salesmen working at home and using BT Option 3? As I understand it there is no upper call value limit in a quarter on Option 3

I understand that Telewest, etc do charge a termination fee just like BT.  It doesn't really matter how much the termination fee is - what matters is that Call18866/1899, etc could be losing money on that individual call depending on its length.

There is an hour limit on calls for those stupid enough to go on BT option 3, or TalkTalk 3 packages.

I think the per minute termination fee is possibly reason why OneTel are in debt (due everyone making use of the free evening&weekend unlimited minutes) and possibly reason why TalkTalk have a pathetic limit of 70minutes for their so-called free calls. That way for those that forget about the 70min then TalkTalk haven't lost as much money on that call.

What is weird is that TalkTalk to TalkTalk calls have about 3 hours (or something similar) before call becomes chargable which probably means that part of the deal of TalkTalk using CPS (and paying the extorniate CPS fees) is that possibly calls terminating to a customer who uses TalkTalk as their CPS provider means that BT may not get there per minute termination fee but just possibly a connection fee or something otherwise why else would TalkTalk have a much higher limit call length on TalkTalk-2-TalkTalk calls but not on ordinary geographical calls, not even on their Talk3 package?

Were these telecom companies may lose money on a certain call they hope to gain it on other calls like the expensive NGN, etc or going over your time-limit (in the case of BT and TalkTalk).

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 5:14pm:

Were these telecom companies may lose money on a certain call they hope to gain it on other calls like the expensive NGN, etc or going over your time-limit (in the case of BT and TalkTalk).

Perhaps 18866 thought they would recoup more money than they have done on their disgraceful 9p a minute charge to 0870 numbers.  Its strange they need to charge that when dialaround and another Finaria NGN brand carry calls to 0870 for 5p per minute.

I expect they have found most 18866 customers actually revert to using BT or dialaround for their 0870 calls though.

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 5:22pm:

Perhaps 18866 thought they would recoup more money than they have done on their disgraceful 9p a minute charge to 0870 numbers.  Its strange they need to charge that when dialaround and another Finaria NGN brand carry calls to 0870 for 5p per minute

That along with those people that just make quick minute or so calls to geographical numbers.

As for dialaround cheap NGN cost is off-set by the penny charge to geographical calls whereas Call18866/1899 only charge 3p per call.

I don't believe there to be just one company that is cheapest on everything because they probably couldn't stay in business.  That's why we have to use several companies depending on type of call and time of day, etc and why I love the Orchid dialler which once programmed does it all for us.

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 1:00pm:

By the way what has happened to idb lately?  Has he either gone off on a world tour or found himself a job I wonder as he was the man we could previously rely on to come up with interesting articles in the press:-

As well as doing a little paid work, I've been sampling the delights of Montana, Wyoming and Idaho for a few days. To emphasize the contrast between the UK and the US - I rented a car from Avis in Montana. When I got home and checked the bill on-line, it was incorrect. One call to a toll-free number, answered within one ring and no queuing, resulted in the correction being made without any difficulty. Problem solved. When I was last in the UK in April, again the rental invoice was wrong. Trying to deal with Avis UK from over here was a nightmare, and whilst the bill was eventually rectified, it was not straightforward and required multiple emails and calls (after I had found the non scam number). The United States is far from perfect, however it knows how to do customer service. Every hotel we stayed in had a toll-free number. Every tourist office and other useful service on our travels used either toll-free, local, or often both numbers. I really feel sorry for tourists visiting the UK and the unexpected charges for calling simple services and travel-related providers. As I sit here and type this, the outer bands of hurricane Rita are passing by. As with Katrina the other week, which also made a mess here in south Florida before devastating LA, MS and AL, state, local and federal officials as well as commercial entities such as banks, airlines and hotels generally provided toll-free numbers. I can just imagine what would happen in the UK should it ever experience a natural disaster - call 0870 this, 0870 that and 09 whatever just to communicate with essential city, county and country authorities. Anyway I'm starting another round of FOI requests and will continue to post media exposure of the NGN scandal and Ofcom's support of such scammers.

wrote on Sep 20^th, 2005 at 6:35pm:

Anyway I'm starting another round of FOI requests and will continue to post media exposure of the NGN scandal and Ofcom's support of such scammers.

Its good to hear that you have been travelling for a little while.

So far as Ofcom goes I don't think they are even compliant with new ASA guidelines yet in terms of the maximum pence per minute cost of their 0845 phone number on a BT phone line.  Of course they have tried to do the right thing by saying 0845 is mainly more expensive, except for those on the BT Light User Scheme, but they are still not compliant with ASA guidance on the matter.

I think the continued delay in any pronouncement by Ofcom on this issue is highly significant.  I suspect there is an almighty row going on between those who don't want to upset the cosy deals of their telecoms industry chums and those who realise that they will be laughed out of court over their current proposal to make 0845 numbers more expensive than most 0870 numbers.

Just seen this recent post on the Nifty List complaining about another Finerea service .Their  Customer Service seems to be getting worse.

http://niftylist.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=171.new#new

NGM,

I do not understand your point about "0845 is mainly more expensive, except for those on the BT Light User Scheme,....". Are you sure this is correct?

wrote on Sep 21^st, 2005 at 8:44am:

I do not understand your point about "0845 is mainly more expensive, except for those on the BT Light User Scheme,....". Are you sure this is correct?

BT charge two sets of prices for their customers.  Those on BT Together Option 1 or above pay a lower rate for 0845 calls and geographical calls local or national cost 3ppm.  Those on BT Light User Scheme pay more for 0845 and national geographical calls cost nearly 8ppm therefore for those on BT Light User Scheme who are not in the same 'local' area as the company/government dept they are calling then they will pay upto 8ppm to call the geographical number whereas it would be cheaper on an 0845 number.

For example OfCOM are based in London so anyone outside of London on the BT Light User Scheme will pay nearly 8ppm to call OfCOM geographical number and about 4ppm to call their 0845 number.  Those based in London calling OfCOM are better ringing the geographical number.  Obviously those on BT Option 1 or higher it is always cheaper to call a geographical regardless of where they are based and who they are calling.

OK, thanks bbb_uk,

I understand now what was meant. It was ambiguous. It meant that a 0845 call is more expensive for most people than a normal geographic call, except for those on the Light User Scheme who pay less for an 0845 call than they would pay for a National Call?

wrote on Sep 21^st, 2005 at 5:43pm:

OK, thanks bbb_uk, I understand now what was meant. It was ambiguous.

This is what Ofcom now say on their website:-

Phone:
020 7981 3040 (this number will be the cheapest option for most callers)
or
0845 456 3000 (this number may be cheaper for callers on the BT Light User Scheme calling from outside the London area)

As shown here:- http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/contact/tel_issues/

I think you will find that the real authors of any ambiguity on the cost of 0845 versus geographic calls for different classes of BT phone package subscriber is in fact Brtish Telecom rather than my good self ;)

My recent conversations with John Strutt, General Manager of BT Retail Pricing, Policy & Design have revealed there are in fact over 1 million BT phone lines on the Light User Scheme but I very much doubt that these account for more than 1% of all phone calls on the network (because their owners do not use them very much).

Yes NGM. I was not blaming you. It is as always Ofcom that shroud everything in bamboozle and ambiguity. They are so use to doing this to conceal their real intent that it has become a habit methinks!

wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2005 at 7:48am:

Yes NGM. I was not blaming you. It is as always Ofcom that shroud everything in bamboozle and ambiguity. They are so use to doing this to conceal their real intent that it has become a habit methinks!

I saw an advert in The Times this week for the position of non executive Director with the Advertising Standards Authority.

Now interestingly a pre-requisite for applying for this post is that one must not now and indeed must never ever have worked in the advertising or direct marketing industries.

So how is it that when one regulator is set up on a basis that specifically avoids the likely conflict of interest caused by employing industry experts that another regulator is almost totally stacked from stem to stern with such people when they are clearly genetically incapable of seeing what are the interests of citizens and consumers as compared to the selfish business interests of the large uk telecoms companies?

To try and sweeten this thread about the price rise, I've just been listening to MSE Martin's Money Mutterings (it's at 7:24 minutes through the sound file if you want to listen to it - see below for link) where he says that he may have found a way to undercut providers such as 18866 and 1899 to give even cheaper calls...:o :D ;D

The article is due to be published in around 10 days, so I assume we can rely on idb to let us know when this is made public, if I don't beat him to it ;)

Money Mutterings Broadband (Streamed)
Money Mutterings Dial-up (Streamed)

Money Mutterings Broadband (Download to listen)
Money Mutterints Dial-up (Download to listen)

wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2005 at 11:07pm:

I've just been listening to MSE Martin's Money Mutterings (it's at 7:24 minutes through the sound file if you want to listen to it - see below for link) where he says that he may have found a way to undercut providers such as 18866 and 1899 to give even cheaper calls...:o :D ;D

Smasher,

This only tells us the same thing that you have written in  your post as a sound file.

What's the betting that his new announcement will be about http://www.voipcheap.co.uk and http://www.voipbuster.co.uk?

I must say that after making a post in the MSE forum I find myself not at all comfortable with the groupie type aspects of that place where no criticism of Martin Lewis is allowed, where people write posts sycophantically so as to get "Thanks" from other posters and where Martin Lewis constantly locks any thread that he doesn't like the discussion in.

If this announcement is about VoIP then it would only apply to those who have broadband, I presently do not and therefore can't benefit from it :-[.  If someone doesn't have broadband, it wouldn't be cheaper to get it and then get free calls, or would it? ???

wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2005 at 10:01am:

If this announcement is about VoIP then it would only apply to those who have broadband, I presently do not and therefore can't benefit from it :-[.  If someone doesn't have broadband, it wouldn't be cheaper to get it and then get free calls, or would it? ???

You can get 2MB broadband for £15 per months with quite a few providers these days so I suppose it depends how much you use the internet at home.

Quite  a few regulars on this site seem to have their broadband connection only in their offices from what I have observed from the times of day when they are most likely to make a post. ;)

I work in a home office so have to have a home broadband connection.

wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2005 at 5:53am:

I must say that after making a post in the MSE forum I find myself not at all comfortable with the groupie type aspects of that place where no criticism of Martin Lewis is allowed, where people write posts sycophantically so as to get "Thanks" from other posters and where Martin Lewis constantly locks any thread that he doesn't like the discussion in.

For the benefit of people that have not studied your words of wisdom there ..........


Quote:

I note these various unreasoned requests to claim 18866 are still the good guys. But given the unhealthily close business relationship between Martin Lewis, who runs this forum, and Finarea I would suspect that all of these posts are from people with a business connection with Finarea. I note there have been no such posts defending Finarea over in the SayNoto0870 discussion forum.

These were two early replies ...


Quote:

This assertion is both ludicrous and potentially libellous. What evidence do you have that Martin Lewis has shares or other interests in a Dutch/Swiss company? Or anybody else here?

and, followed  by Martin Lewis himself
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.html?p=911375&postcount=27


Quote:

Dear NonGeographicalman let me make something absolutely plain. There is no relationship between me and Fineria neither financial or in any other way. In fact i can get paid links to all major providers, the way the comparison services do, yet i choose to link to the cheapest provider as thats what this site is about and thats my ethical stance. By doing this i forgo the tens if not hundreds of thousands of pounds that the comparison sites make annually. There is absolutely no linkage in any way and i find the assertion offensive. You can read thousands of posts on this forum with happy 18866 users. Though in fact i now plump for 1899 ahead. If it were about anyone else i would have the post deleted for libel. However I will have it here to ensure no one thinks any different. However may i warn you before posting on my forum such untruths about anyone else - libel is an offence, you may be sued, as may i if you post such, so please be incredibly careful again.

You then made a series of further allegations that anybody that replied was connected to these companies, added veiled allegations of corruption at Ofcom, and other contentious matters.

Naturally, people reacted against your assertion that 18866 behaviour was a "scam", which you reinforced with "attempt to deceive", "Next time why not accidentally make a charge of £50 on my credit card and see if I notice?" "a secret price rise for 18866".

The company is not acting fraudulently. You may deplore the fact that the company did not send you an email, but it was published on their website. Futhermore, you are lying on MSE when you say you did not know for 12 days - you read it here sooner than that.

You are the person that first made focused personal attacks on anybody opposed to the degree of your rants. Some defended themselves and pointed out they had no connection, except as customer, with the Finarea companies.

I would imagine that Martin closed the matter as he did not wish to see the flame war continue that you sparked, or take the risk of you making further hyperbolic and untrue allegations.

People here that think I am exaggerating, or being too robust, should read your comments for themselves and form their own opinions.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=93386


I differed with Martin myself on mobile roaming to some extent - he thought the double callback arrangement I described a bit too complicated for anybody except phone nerds, even though it costs only 7p per minute.

People more aware of certain recent events at MSE might feel that there are good personal reasons for me to fail to show here any of the unreasoned sycophancy that you have alleged against people there.

But as far as upholding the right of people to read fair, balanced and independent discussion of various products without fear of personal attack on people whose point of view differs, I must say that I agree with Martin Lewis and not with you.


I must apologise to other readers here that it is inevitable that this post reads like a personal attack. I am merely pointing out exactly what NGM did on MSE, including an entirely unfounded allegation that Martin Lewis (who also sponsors this site, don't forget) is corrupt.

wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2005 at 11:05am:

The company is not acting fraudulently. You may deplore the fact that the company did not send you an email, but it was published on their website. Futhermore, you are lying on MSE when you say you did not know for 12 days - you read it here sooner than that.

I rarely visit the Cheap Call Providers section of this forum therefore it was several days before I knew of the 18866 price change.  I almost never visit the 18866 website in the normal course of events.

* * Inapropriate comments deleted -  DaveM * *

and another locked thread NGM started

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=94209


Quote:

It would appear that this forum contains a number of members who enjoy slamming the opinions of other members when those opinions do not exactly correspond with their own perception of the universe?

edit - as the thread has now been deleted, it is worth pointing out that the Board Guide suggested that decisions on what is and is not permissible are within the site owners rights, and that MSE members do not slam each other.

wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2005 at 11:27am:

I rarely visit the Cheap Call Providers section of this forum therefore it was several days before I knew of the 18866 price change.  I almost never visit the 18866 website in the normal course of events.

This thread was started by bigjohn on 5th September, foreshadowing the increase the following day, as he had read on MSE. The increase did indeed take place on the 6th. NGM joined the subject on the 14th, and told us he was no longer a customer. 8 days

On MSE ...

Quote:

I only found out about the 18866 price rise 12 days after the event but as I rarely visit the 18866 website it could have been two months later when I got a bill.

err, ok, a fault in arithmetic then

The T&C state that changes will be published on the website or by other means, and tariffs are updated every day as far as I'm aware, so somebody already upset about one increase might have taken just a bit of time to check website, account statement, or forums discussing such subjects.

NGM was requested to modify his posts or have them deleted. He was first warned privately & this was then made public because of his inappropriate comments that followed.

Private ravings should be kept out of these forums.

I have had confirmation from Ofcom that Finarea's failure to offer an Alternate Disputes Resolution procedure is a breach of the regulations and they have added them to their list of companies supplying telecoms services in the uk to be investigated.

Please don't try to bamboozle me with the argument that it is only a few pence involved when it is a very large percentage change and thousands of customers are involved.

Also the failure to notify the change by email is not accidental but a quite deliberate strategy to try to earn extra profits from those not yet aware of the price change.

* * Inflamatory Post removed * *

If the inapropriate portions of this thread are not modified by you, they will be removed - DaveM