Ofcom has announced an investigation into telcos compliance with the obligation to maintain and comply with a Code of Practice regarding publication of charges for calling 08xx numbers

Links

The investigation is announced here.

The relevant regulations are published here (Conditions 14.2 and 14.3 are on page 29 / 76, Annex 2 starts on page 36 / 76).

Summary

This regulation covers only OCPs - those who one uses to make the call. It does not affect companies who use these numbers - Ofcom has no power over how they advise callers of the cost of calling them, or how much they earn from each call.

Ofcom does have powers over providers of "premium rate services", but it subcontracts those powers for self-regulation by Phonepay Plus. The duties of OCPs in respect of PRS numbers are also covered by these conditions and the investigation. (N.B. 0871 is not yet classified as PRS).

For telcos who comply with the regulations it should be a very simple matter for any customer to find out the cost of calling any NTS number - in the words of Ofcom:


Quote:

The key objective of these Guidelines is to ensure that Originating Communications Providers provide their Domestic and Small Business Customers with readily accessible and accurate information relating to the usage charges for NTS Calls on their networks.

I am sure that Ofcom would be keen to hear of any cases where obtaining this information is not straightforward. Initially it may be of interest to test compliance with General Condition 14.3 which states:


Quote:

The codes of practice referred to in Condition 14.2 shall be drafted in plain English which is easy to understand, and copies of the codes of practice shall be provided on request and free of charge to any Domestic and Small Business Customer.

Contact information

The case leader is:  Michael Love (020 7981 3966 e-mail: michael.love@ofcom.org.uk)

It will be interesting to know if members find any reason to contact Mr Love. It will also be interesting to know of the response.

I had cause to look at the euphony site recently http://www.euphony.co.uk/ and could find no mention of their Nts/Prs charges.

These regulations which require telcos to give information on the costs of calling NTS numbers were brought in following the consultation Providing citizens and consumers with improved information about Number Translation Services and Premium Rate Services. The consultation closed in December 2006 and received over 100 public responses which are discussed here.

Discussion on whether telcos complied with the new rules is here.

Dave wrote on Mar 21^st, 2008 at 8:04am:

Discussion on whether telcos complied with the new rules is here.

A very useful reference back to a thread which I had not spotted.

Unless much has changed, I suspect that Mr Love will be very busy.

An update note to this investigation has been published:

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/bulletins/comp_bull_index/comp_bull_ocases/open_all/cw_980/


Quote:

Update note – 9 April 2008 As a result of its initial analysis Ofcom has extended the scope of this investigation to include compliance with General Condition 10 (10.2 and 10.3), which requires Communications Providers to publish, among other things, clear and up to date information on their applicable prices and tariffs on any relevant website operated or controlled by the Communications Provider, where such a website exists.

It seems as though it isn't really much good tackling the issue of the deliberate hiding of the pence per minute rate by OCPs without also tackling the issue of deliberately describing 0845 and 0870 as Local Rate/Lo-Call and National Call/National Rate on phone bills at the same time.

I have therefore sent the following email to Mr Love at Ofcom:-


Quote:

-------- Original Message -------- Subject:      Investigation In To Information on 084/7 Calling Costs - Call Type Description on Phone Bills Date:      Wed, 09 Apr 2008 15:35:11 +0100 To:      michael.love@xxxxxx.org.uk Dear Mr Love, Second own-initiative enforcement programme: compliance with General Condition 14.2 (“GC 14.2”) - www.ofcom.org.uk/bulletins/comp_bull_index/comp_bull_ocases/open_all/cw_980/ Information on 084/7 Calling Costs (as part of compliance with general requirements for pricing information on NTS numbers) I understand that Ofcom is currently conducting an investigation in to this matter and would be happy to provide you with copies of correspondence from www.yourcalls.net (my current domestic telecoms provider) suggesting that it would be far too complicated for them to publish their tariffs for calling all possible 084/7 numbers on their website.  I can also email you scanned copies of bills showing that they describe calls to 0845 numbers as Local Rate, even though they appear on a phone bill where all my Local Calls (up to 60 minutes) to numbers starting 01 and 02 are free of charge. A matter that concerns me very greatly in respect of the behaviour of OCPs, in respect of the cost of calling these numbers, is their persistent misdescription of 0845 and 0870 numbers as respectively Lo-Call/Local Call/Local Rate Call and National Call/National Rate.  This was even true until not long ago of BT, who only belatedly began to refer to these calls on their phone bills as 0845 rate and 0870 rate (previously their senior management had always given me the excuse that technical problems with their phone billing system prevented them from describing the calls as anything other than Lo-Call/Local Rate or National Rate). Do you think there is any possibility that the scope of your investigation may therefore also be further extended to encompass the call type description given to calls to 0845 and 0870 numbers on phone bills and in other promotional material by OCPs so that there is no possibility that Post Office Homephone for instance will go on calling 0845 Local Rate on phone bills purely on the basis that this is still what most of their competitors are doing!  I can also provide documentary proof that this is the Post Office's stated position following a recent high level complaint about their description of 0845 call costs on my phone bill with them.  As you may be aware unlike Ofcom the Advertising Standards Authority has no regulatory remit whatsoever over the content of phone bills as they are not deemed to constitute advertising material.  Also the ASA seems to think that their remit does not encompass most material published on the internet and yet most phone companies are now trying to compel their customers to access their phone bills online by charging them extra for continuing to receive paper based bills! I look forward to your comments regarding this matter and especially whether you do feel the scope of this investigation could be extended by Ofcom to encompass the descriptive names given by retail telecoms providers to customers on their phone bills.  It seems to me that if this investigation by Ofcom is to achieve anything at all it must also consider the aspect of the descriptive names given to calls to various different types of 084/7 numbers by OCPs on phone bills.  Indeed to my mind Ofcom should mandate the description that can be used for various different types of 084/7 phone calls on domestic phone bills by OCPs.  If that does not happen the OCPs have consistently proven that they cannot be trusted to behave ethically, morally or truthfully in the way they describe the cost of these calls. I believe that without tackling the widespread and quite deliberate continued misdescription of 0845 and 0870 as Local and National Rate by numerous domestic telecoms call providers that most of your other work in this area will have very little productive outcome.  It is the continued inculcation of the idea in the minds of the general public that 0845 and 0870 numbers are normal priced numbers is far more damaging to consumer misperceptions of the cost of calling these numbers than any actual failure to list the per minute prices of calling them on websites or in company brochures etc.  Of course for Pay As You Go mobile phone users a different approach again is needed since Ofcom currently thinks it is perfectly reasonable (quite wrongly in my view) for Pay As You Go mobile phone customers not to have any access whatsoever to any form of itemised billing (either on paper or online) detailing the cost of the calls that a customer has made. I look forward to your comments. Yours sincerely,

NGMsGhost wrote on Apr 9^th, 2008 at 2:40pm:

It seems as though it isn't really much good tackling the issue of the deliberate hiding of the pence per minute rate by OCPs without also tackling the issue of deliberately describing 0845 and 0870 as Local Rate/Lo-Call and National Call/National Rate on phone bills at the same time.

It is not just OCPs. TCPs do the same.

Dave wrote on Apr 9^th, 2008 at 4:16pm:

It is not just OCPs. TCPs do the same.

Yes but Ofcom maintain they have no jurisdiction over TCPs and more of TCPs activities are caught by ASA rules in any case.

Whereas with OCPs neither their price lists or their phone bills seem to be governed by the ASA.  That leaves only Ofcom, who have a far more stringent duty to control the activities of the OCPs.  Also this investigation is only about the activities of the OCPs.

Well as always Ofcom is allowing OCPs to get away with not displaying NTS call charges in an easy-to-find and prominent location on their website for another 3 months.

General Condition 14.2 has been in existence for more than 2 years and because OCPs dont really want their customers to know how much calls to NTS numbers are a few either don't display them or hide them on their website which is opposite of what GC14.2 was created for.

See Ofcom's further announcement here.

Quote:

A number of OCPs have sought additional time to make the necessary changes to their advertising and promotional material. Ofcom has therefore decided to extend this own-initiative investigation by a further 3 months to assess industry compliance with GC14.2 and GC.10.

And what would happen if I asked the Police for another 3 months to respond to one of their Notices of Intended Prosecution for Speeding.  Would they just give it to me in order to be nice to me?  No of course they wouldn't.  Instead they would prosecute me for failing to identify the driver.  This is an offence that carries double the number of penalty points.

But Ofcom just doesn't seem to understand about severe penalties being an effective way to encourage their old mates in the telcos to actually get on and do things!

How can OfcoN still claim to be independent when they allow OCPs to get away with this for more than 2 years?

If I had the money I'd challenge just how "independent" OfcoN are.  What can take so long it requires more than 2 years?

OCPs were warned in April 2006 about this and were given until 19th August 2006 to comply.  Now over 2 years later are we any closer?  Has OfcoN threatened to fine any OCPs still not complying?  Probably not - instead just say something like yea, no prob take as long as you need.  Is three extra months long enough?  If not, we'll just extend the deadline again and again.  Don't worry we're on your side!   ;)  :D

bbb_uk wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 10:25am:

How can OfcoN still claim to be independent when they allow OCPs to get away with this for more than 2 years? If I had the money I'd challenge just how "independent" OfcoN are.  What can take so long it requires more than 2 years? OCPs were warned in April 2006 about this and were given until 19th August 2006 to comply.  Now over 2 years later are we any closer?  Has OfcoN threatened to fine any OCPs still not complying?  Probably not - instead just say something like yea, no prob take as long as you need.  Is three extra months long enough?  If not, we'll just extend the deadline again and again.  Don't worry we're on your side!   ;)  :D

bbb,

Congratulations on your excellent and concise summary on precisely how Ofcom operates in these matters.

I just telephoned and spoke to Michael Love to suggest that this further extension was quite outrageous and that they should be fining these companies and increasing the fine for every single week they do not comply instead of just granting them further extensions as a reward for their deliberate procrastination.

Which telcos does Ofcom consider have not complied with General Condition 14.2? Why doesn't it name them? In any other investigation it would publish the telcos' names.

Dave wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 1:56pm:

In any other investigation it would publish the telcos' names.

Yes but here there is far more money at stake and the companies involved are some of the largest in the industry and so are able to exert the most unethical behind the scenes influence with their board level contacts at Ofcom. ;)

If I thought it would make a difference then I'd go through the most common OCPs websites and highlight which ones don't comply fully but I dont believe for one minute Ofcom care or would do anything because lets face it if they really wanted to do something then they would have enforced this earlier instead of letting it drag to well over 2 years since OCPs were first warned.

I have seriously lost all hope in Ofcom

Does anyone know if Oftel were as bad as Ofcom are now?

bbb_uk wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 3:29pm:

Does anyone know if Oftel were as bad as Ofcom are now?

Yes I do and no they were not.

Agreed Tanllan, Oftel were bad enough, but they were nothing like as deceitful and devious as Ofcom!

bbb_uk wrote on Sep 18^th, 2008 at 9:48am:

Well as always Ofcom is allowing OCPs to get away with not displaying NTS call charges in an easy-to-find and prominent location on their website for another 3 months....

Well it's been three months now.

What are the chances that all OCP's now fully comply with GC14.2?

As OCPs have been aware of GC14.2 since April 2006 will OfcoN now finally start actually offically enforcing GC14.2, for those that may not fully comply, instead of letting them get away with it for as long as they have?

Answers on a post card to: OfcoN, not-so-independent-as-it-claims regulator, Riverside House...., or alternatively, ring them on local-rate 090 number lol   ;)

The open-case (but as yet not updated) can be found here.  Originally discussed in this thread.

bbb_uk wrote on Dec 19^th, 2008 at 2:23am:

The open-case (but as yet not updated) can be found here.

Mr Love needs a reminder to extend the duration of the extension - just a bit of admin!

The barely effective Silent Calls investigation was extended for another six months last Tuesday - for the fifth time!

With very few working days left we should now be getting very excited about the fact that "Ofcom aims to publish a further statement on implementing any changes to 0870 policy by the end of the year" as reported here. This could have been the fiscal "year". Alternatively as the reference was to "any" changes, rather than a modified version of those which have been in the course of happening for a long time now, it could be that no announcement will mean that there will be no changes after all.