I saw this on the Travelex website and thought it was a cracker of an excuse for using 0870 numbers.  Apologies if it has already been posted.

Why do you have 0870 numbers and not a localised numbers?

This in case of an emergency and our offices have to be evacuated all our 0870 numbers can be re-directed to anywhere else in either the UK or overseas.  We believe this would be better for our customers.  We do have localised numbers for those who are outside of the UK.

Anyone else come across any daft excuses why they use these numbers????

kjones wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2006 at 12:24am:

I saw this on the Travelex website and thought it was a cracker of an excuse for using 0870 numbers.  Apologies if it has already been posted. Why do you have 0870 numbers and not a localised numbers? This in case of an emergency and our offices have to be evacuated all our 0870 numbers can be re-directed to anywhere else in either the UK or overseas.  We believe this would be better for our customers.  We do have localised numbers for those who are outside of the UK. Anyone else come across any daft excuses why they use these numbers????

So they will, of course, immediately change to using '03' numbers when they become available in the new year!

Heinz wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2006 at 10:26am:

So they will, of course, immediately change to using '03' numbers when they become available in the new year!

Strange they aren't using a 1p per minute at all times 0844 number now then as this would provide just the same call redirection benefits as 0870. ::)

kjones wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2006 at 12:24am:

... can be re-directed to anywhere else in either the UK or overseas.

Overseas? Surely not?

pw4 wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2006 at 1:33pm:

kjones wrote on Nov 2nd, 2006 at 12:24am: ... can be re-directed to anywhere else in either the UK or overseas. Overseas? Surely not?

Not at all - http://www.ukxpat.com/how_it_works.asp

To say nothing of using normal 01 and 02X numbers, which can be diverted anywhere - even from the exchange if the site is out of action.

Tanllan wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2006 at 7:48pm:

To say nothing of using normal 01 and 02X numbers, which can be diverted anywhere - even from the exchange if the site is out of action.

But unless the reason for needing to redirect the calls on an 01 or 02 PSTN number is an engineering based fault in the equipment the incumbent phone operator is allowed to massively overcharge for call redirection on geographic numbers compared to NGN numbers where the call centre, but not their customers, get the redirection facility free of charge.  Of course Voip 01/02 numbers that a company like Sipgate now offers on every uk phone exchange can be redirected to anywhere they are required.  I assume voip geographic numbers are also available to commercial operators as well as private customers?

NGMsGhost wrote on Nov 2^nd, 2006 at 8:01pm:

But unless the reason for needing to redirect the calls on an 01 or 02 PSTN number is an engineering based fault in the equipment the incumbent phone operator is allowed to massively overcharge for call redirection on geographic numbers compared to NGN numbers where the call centre, but not their customers, get the redirection facility free of charge.

This is why in some cases I can understand the reasons why some companies that do operate different call centres across the UK, etc use an 0845 number.  Those using 087x on the other hand are purely after the money from the number more than any features the number may provide.

As for the excuse they came up with then that's just one of many they use - most of the time they are just trying to deflect from the fact that they earn revenue from the calls.

It is difficult to find CP's that provide 0844 numbers because I'm trying to work out the average revenue they can earn on say a 4p/min or 5p/min 0844 number.

As for the new 03x number, I can imagine that at first most (if not all) CP's will probably charge companies/government depts using them, x amount per minute for calls to the number and if this is the case then there will basically be no incentive to move.

Now if CP's are going to just charge an annual rental type fee, etc then this wont be too bad and I can see some government departments moving.  As for companies, etc then they wont want to move unless enough of their customers complain, etc.

Dear XXXXXX

Thank you for using our website, I apologise for the delay in replying to
your email.

I am sorry to hear that  you feel dissatisfied with the telephone charges
that are in place for Royal Mail and Parcelforce Worldwide customers.

I would like to clarify that it is not our policy to use premium line
numbers. The telephone numbers we use cost a caller using a BT landline the
following maximum price per minute. (The price of calls on non-BT lines
varies, and callers can check the price with their phone company).

7.91p/min Daytime (Mon-Fri 8am-6pm)
3.95p/min Evening and Nighttime (Mon-Fri before 8am & after 6pm)
2p/min Weekends (All day Sat & Sun)

BT has confirmed a customer is charged when they make a selection for
example Press 1 for Account customers.

It is widespread commercial practice to require customers to pay for some
or all of the call costs when making a customer service query, and
Parcelforce Worldwide's approach is in line with our competitors. Our
contract is with our paying customers - the sender - rather than with the
recipient and, as with all commercial contracts, ours reflect a balance
between service levels and cost. We already offer enhanced levels of
customer service to customers who have agreed with us a contract price to
cover this, but none of our customers have so far requested free telephone
access for their own customers (the recipients). The costs of us providing
a free telephone service would have to be borne by our paying customers on
behalf of their own recipients, and we would only be likely to consider
this option if there were a commercial demand for it.

In addition to our phone services, we offer a free tracking service on our
website, allowing customers the option to check the status of their parcel
online. We also provide options for booking a collection and redelivering
your parcel, on the web. We are also developing an SMS (text) alert option,
which for a small charge will allow a customer to receive notification of a
planned delivery in advance, or an actual delivery or delivery attempt as
soon as it has happened.

I would like to thank you for your comments and hope this reply addresses
the issues you raised concerning telephone costs.

Kind Regards

Michael Cameron
Internet Advisor

If it is a widespread practice as he states, I wonder if that means that soon we will have to pay them to answer queries by email or possibly when writing to them also enclose a sheet of paper and a stamped addressed envelope!

they are trying to fool the customers. i know the companies ( travel agents) they use GN to transfer calls to overseas. another silly excuse

It is only a widespread practice because useless Ofcom created a system where for ages callers didn't realise they were paying extra.

We are not asking for a Freephone number but only for one starting 01 or 02.

"but none of our customers have so far requested free telephone
access for their own customers (the recipients). The costs of us providing
a free telephone service would have to be borne by our paying customers on
behalf of their own recipients, and we would only be likely to consider
this option if there were a commercial demand for it. "

But what about a Geo Number. No cost then to Royal Mail.

Keith wrote on Nov 7^th, 2006 at 5:45pm:

But what about a Geo Number. No cost then to Royal Mail.

The cost then is the lost hidden revenue share. ;) ::) :'(

Their argument is like a pop star who says "I know taking cocaine is strictly speaking illegal but as everyone else is doing it that makes it alright for me to do it too".................. :o

Absolutely ;D But that isn't what they imply is it. They are trying to get sympathy by stating it will cost them money to provide a freephone number. If they supply a Geo Number there is no cost, but of course as you say there is the loss of revenue, but it isn't revenue they deserve and which they have obtained by devious means.

NGMsGhost wrote on Nov 7^th, 2006 at 5:45pm:

It is only a widespread practice because useless Ofcom created a system where for ages callers didn't realise they were paying extra.

That's exactly it.

If there are legitimate reasons for having these numbers then that is fine for which we can't do nothing about but what I find is that in general consumers don't know they are in fact ringing a number where the end company is earning money (in most cases) from each minute we are on the phone to them.

Even the 0871 is going to be rebranded without the use of "premium" so it seems just so consumers still have no idea they are ringing a premium rate number and this is all thanks to Ofcom who are constantly putting teleco's (and companies) and the money they make first in front of us joe public.

If Ofcom wanted to be fair about this from both our (consumer) point of view and that of teleco's and companies then at the very least Ofcom should admit and announce that 084x/087x are in fact premium rate albeit lower amount than 09x but yet 09x are regulated to prevent misuse and abuse (in most cases) compared to 084x/087x numbers which aren't.

Imagine if Ofcom did the very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very unusual step of putting us consumers first and did make an announcement that 084x/087x are in fact stealth premium rate numbers, just how many companies would continue to use them?  I can imagine most would be forced to use geographical numbers or the new 03x simply because the amount of customers that would complain.

Well, well, well.....


Quote:

It is widespread commercial practice to require customers to pay for some or all of the call costs when making a customer service query, and Parcelforce Worldwide's approach is in line with our competitors.

So the "Internet Advisor" from a Worldwide company - well, that's what it says in their name - thinks it is '...a widespread practice'. Have I got news for you, mate! I'm far more 'worldwide' than Parcelforce and this idiot can ever imagine in their wildest dreams - and I have NEVER, EVER seen a 'revenue share' customer service number except in tiny Rip-Off Britain.

These jerks with their grossly inflated sense of 'worldwide' practices would make me die laughing if it wasn't so dam'ned pathetic. >:(

mikeinnc wrote on Nov 8^th, 2006 at 1:13am:

So the "Internet Advisor" from a Worldwide company - well, that's what it says in their name - thinks it is '...a widespread practice'. Have I got news for you, mate! I'm far more 'worldwide' than Parcelforce and this idiot can ever imagine in their wildest dreams - and I have NEVER, EVER seen a 'revenue share' customer service number except in tiny Rip-Off Britain. These jerks with their grossly inflated sense of 'worldwide' practices would make me die laughing if it wasn't so dam'ned pathetic. >:(

Parcelforce are total rogues and will stop at almost nothing to make money by any means whether fair or foul.

Never ever buy any goods from the USA that will get shipped in to the UK by Parcelforce International, no matter how trivial in value, as another of Parcelforce International's nice little earners is to draw the attention of customs to all parcels it ships into the UK, even if the VAT to pay is only £2, so that they can then impound your parcel and hold it to ransom demanding payment of not only the VAT due but also a flat rate fee of their own for paying customs duty on your behalf of around a further £12.  Imagine how much they earn each year from that scam charge. :o

Just an update.  Had a parcel from the US last week and Parcelforce charged a £13.50 "clearance fee" on top of the £16 VAT charged by Customs.

lompos wrote on Nov 8^th, 2006 at 10:50am:

Just an update.  Had a parcel from the US last week and Parcelforce charged a £13.50 "clearance fee" on top of the £16 VAT charged by Customs.

It was about £11 when I had to pay their Customs Clearance Fee three years ago.  As will all these scam charges they increase far more than inflation each year.

If you want to avoid VAT and Customs Duty on low value items then make sure the shipper uses FedEx.  Their main priority is to get items to customers on time and as they ship so many high value items for businesses they aren't interested in scamming retails customers on low value ones.

I really think somebody ought to refer Parcelforce Interantional to the Office of Fair Trading over its behaviour on so called Customs Clearance Fees.  The fee should be a percentage of the value of the goods capped off at a maximum and not just a single flat rate charge no matter how small the value of the item.

Check who the company you are using who they will be shipping with and avoid Parcelforce International.

Quote:

[/quote]If you want to avoid VAT and Customs Duty on low value items then make sure the shipper uses FedEx.[quote]

You are right of course about of FedEx v Parcelforce (to whom the US Postal Service pass the parcel) on customs clearance.  On the other hand in most cases the actual postage is considerably dearer using FedEx compared to USPS.

lompos wrote on Nov 8^th, 2006 at 11:26am:

You are right of course about of FedEx v Parcelforce (to whom the US Postal Service pass the parcel) on customs clearance.  On the other hand in most cases the actual postage is considerably dearer using FedEx compared to USPS.

Yes but at least the item arrives in a timely manner in return for paying for a better service and is not held to ransom by the Parcelforce International bandits.

Also when I bought a Worldspace radio last year (that was shipped from Dubai by Fedex) it was Worldspace rather than me who was paying for the shipping and due to the number of units they ship with Fedex they presumably get a very good deal..............

The fact that Parcelforce charge duty on everything not because Customs & Duty require it but so as get a stiff fee out of every customer is I think very poor indeed.  A sort of legalised racketeering.