The following is from Ofcom's site:


Quote:

Ofcom's approach to consumer information Ofcom does not consider it has a primary role in improving information flows between suppliers and consumers – this is best left to the market. However, we recognise that in some cases the market may not deliver to consumers the information they want. Where the evidence suggests that this has resulted in consumer harm, or is likely to do so in the future, there may be a case for regulatory intervention. In these cases, Ofcom will first consider the scope for a self-regulatory or co-regulatory initiative, or for an initiative that would involve the provision of information by a third party. Only in exceptional cases will Ofcom itself provide information about suppliers or their products and services. Full document here

I think that this says it all really. The recent Ofcom Consumer Policy review mentioned about Ofcom thinking that it's not responsible for providing information on services and pricing.

That's like letting supermarkets decide how they want to inform customers of the pricing of their products. Of course, it's not in their interest. It gives the perception of a regulator that is corrupt to the core.

The "evidence based" approach it mentions must be where it does something after the event. Premium rate scams and slamming, all things that should have been considered before they were put in to place.

How does Ofcom decide whether consumers are being harmed? Is it if they complain? So if they don't notice, it's alright then?

Ofcom's main priority seems to be to avoid any and all kind of regulation.

In a perfect world, teleco's would inform us of the cost of calls and not go out their way to avoid us knowing the cost as is the case now and in this perfect world us consumers don't get robbed so then regulation isn't needed.

But back to reality...  We're not in a perfect world but yet Ofcom's main policy is to avoid any regulation and therefore continue with us consumers being robbed/mislead, etc

What's the point in Ofcom having all those powers but decide not to use them in case they upset the teleco's?  Regardless to the fact that we are being robbed/mislead and yet Ofcom's statutory duties:-

Quote:

3 (1) It shall be the principal duty of Ofcom, in carrying out their functions; (a) to further the interests of citizens in relation to communications matters; and (b) to further the interests of consumers in relevant markets, where appropriate by promoting competition

seem to be ignored.

Quote:

What's the point in Ofcom having all those powers but decide not to use them in case they upset the teleco's?  Regardless to the fact that we are being robbed/mislead and yet Ofcom's statutory duties:- 3 (1) It shall be the principal duty of Ofcom, in carrying out their functions; (a) to further the interests of citizens in relation to communications matters; and (b) to further the interests of consumers in relevant markets, where appropriate by promoting competition seem to be ignored.

I very much agree with you both, bbb_uk and Dave, and feel increasingly dispondent about Ofcom's inaction.  I could be completely wrong about this but looking more closely at the definition of their function maybe we are expecting too much of Ofcom !   It states that  their means of furthering the interests of consumers is by promoting competition.  The phrase 'by promoting competition' sounds pretty toothless to me, and maybe having an '03' range to compete with revenue sharing '08s' could illustrate this ?  Its certainly different to furthering the interests of consumers by applying fines and taking direct action against those that scam the general public.

Having said that,  I'm feeling even more depressed, and am very probably talking about matters I know  very little about !  :-/   So treat this a desperate question from a despondent SayNo member !