Is there a new number, (0843) that has appeared?
The image is showing this "new" number as "local rate" !
I am afraid it is showing a sideways image as I needed to get the whole banner on and it is larger then the scanner bed.

As we all know there is no such thing, but before I make the complaint to the ASA I need to know whether this is a mistake with the number or that there is a new 0843 number, even if there is it will not be "local rate".

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg207/goldaire/0843localrate.jpg

"08430 22" is NOT a local rate call (it's just another extension of 0844/5) and that particular range is charged at 5p per minute.

Yes, 0843 022 is charged at g6 rate (see HERE).

Watch out for 0872 numbers which are already in use (an extension of the 6p to 10p per minute 0871 scheme).  I believe 0873 will follow in the near future too.

They're all jumping off the 0870 band wagon to the more certain revenue of the 0871/2/3 group (which, due to Ofcom's uselessness, looks similar to most average punters).

0843 022 was allocated to Teledesign plc in January 2008.

It is call type "g6", just like the GPs who use Surgery Line.

In no way could this be described as "local rate". "Local rate" does exist for business lines and some special cases, but not as a distinct rate for the overwhelming majority of residential telephone callers.

P.S. The other two replies were posted whilst I was preparing this. What a service we provide!!

jgxenite wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 11:12am:

"08430 22" is NOT a local rate call (it's just another extension of 0844/5) and that particular range is charged at 5p per minute.

0843 numbers are the same type as 0844. 0845 are slightly different in that they are all charged the same.

0844/0843 are charged at various rates up to 5p/min at all times.

derrick,

Interestingly I see that your remedy on this matter is actually listed on the top left of the same newspaper page where there is an advert from the Advertising Standards Authority.

As I'm sure you are no doubt well aware as a longstanding forum member it is against ASA rules to make claims that any 084 or 087 prefixed phone number is "local rate" or "national rate" and doubly so with numbers not starting 0845 or 0871 where there never ever was even a historic link with local rate or national rate.   It is also against local trading standards guidance indicating that claims 084 numbers are local rate constitute a possible offence under Part III of the Consumer Protection Act 1987.

See www.herefordshire.gov.uk/business/trading_standards/detail.aspx?id=180805&classification=Eng;Busi;Adv;FT

0843 is just an extension of 0844 and Ofcom clearly allowed the allocation of these additional codes on numbers that look like 0845 and 0870 (but never ever had any local or national rate connection) to try to make it as easy as possible for their chums in the telcos to continue to peddle the local/national rate lie while pretending that they disapproved of this happening.  If this was not the case then Ofcom would clearly have issued codes in another number range such as 04 where are there are no such historic local /national rate connotations.

You can complain about this advert being in contravention of ASA rules at www.asa.org.uk/asa/how_to_complain/complaints_form/

Presumably 0843 is the extension to 0844, going to lower-numbered prefixes, as 0845 is already taken by a different sort of number. 0871 had to be extended upwards to 0872 as there is already 0870. And we expect the average consumer to understand all this, even without misleading "local rate" descriptions?

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 1:57pm:

derrick, Interestingly I see that your remedy on this matter is actually listed on the top left of the same newspaper page where there is an advert from the Advertising Standards Authority. As I'm sure you are no doubt well aware as a longstanding forum member it is against ASA rules to make claims that any 084 or 087 prefixed phone number is "local rate" or "national rate" and doubly so with numbers not starting 0845 or 0871 where there never ever was even a historic link with local rate or national rate.   It is also against local trading standards guidance indicating that claims 084 numbers are local rate constitute a possible offence under Part III of the Consumer Protection Act 1987. See www.herefordshire.gov.uk/business/trading_standards/detail.aspx?id=180805&classification=Eng;Busi;Adv;FT 0843 is just an extension of 0844 and Ofcom clearly allowed the allocation of these additional codes on numbers that look like 0845 and 0870 (but never ever had any local or national rate connection) to try to make it as easy as possible for their chums in the telcos to continue to peddle the local/national rate lie while pretending that they disapproved of this happening.  If this was not the case then Ofcom would clearly have issued codes in another number range such as 04 where are there are no such historic local /national rate connotations. You can complain about this advert being in contravention of ASA rules at www.asa.org.uk/asa/how_to_complain/complaints_form/

If you look at my OP you will see that I was asking for clarification as to the number before making my complaint to the ASA, that complaint is already on its way to the ASA with the relevant contraventions and points re Trading Standards, ASA, COI, Ofcom guidelines/rules being broken, and the CPA part III.

It was just that I had not heard of the 0843 number and if it was not in existence it would have appeared a typo error and maybe  was meant to be 0845, even so the same complaint would have been made by me for an 0845 number.

The ASA have had several complaints from me regarding this "newspaper" and I gather they have had other issues with it.

Also your link to the Herefordshire site, whilst being relevant in some points, is out of date as it states; - "Prices checked 15 August 2005 – check supplier for current position." over 3 years ago, so if sent as a link to someone, they could quite rightly dismiss it.

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:29pm:

It was just that I had not heard of the 0843 number and if it was not in existence it would have appeared a typo error and maybe  was meant to be 0845, even so the same complaint would have been made by me for an 0845 number.

Derrick the 0843 number range is definitely in use.

See P.3 of another of Ofcom's cosy forums where they meet up with their telco buddies begind closed doors.  This one is called the Standard Contract Forum - http://www.btwholesale.com/pages/downloads/service_and_support/contractual_information/docs/industry/scf/07_May/scf_notes_May07u.rtf

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:37pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 2:29pm: It was just that I had not heard of the 0843 number and if it was not in existence it would have appeared a typo error and maybe  was meant to be 0845, even so the same complaint would have been made by me for an 0845 number. Derrick the 0843 number range is definitely in use. See P.3 of another of Ofcom's cosy forums where they meet up with their telco buddies begind closed doors.  This one is called the Standard Contract Forum - http://www.btwholesale.com/pages/downloads/service_and_support/contractual_information/docs/industry/scf/07_May/scf_notes_May07u.rtf

Yes I now know, after reading all of the replies to my OP,I have told you my complaint has been sent, I do not need more "yes it exists" comments.

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:37pm:

See P.3 of another of Ofcom's cosy forums where they meet up with their telco buddies begind closed doors.  This one is called the Standard Contract Forum - http://www.btwholesale.com/pages/downloads/service_and_support/contractual_information/docs/industry/scf/07_May/scf_notes_May07u.rtf

When clicking on your link, the page that opens has thick black lines obliterating the bottom quarter of pages 2 & 3, so I cannot see the points about 03 except "Opening of 0872/0873/0843"

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:43pm:

Yes I now know, after reading all of the replies to my OP,I have told you my complaint has been sent, I do not need more "yes it exists" comments.

And a merry xmas to you too Derrick. ;) :P

You seem to have got out of bed the wrong side today.  Is the stress of buying all those xmas presents perhaps starting to get you down. ::)

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:51pm:

When clicking on your link, the page that opens has thick black lines obliterating the bottom quarter of pages 2 & 3, so I cannot see the points about 03 except "Opening of 0872/0873/0843"

No thick black lines here.  I suggest you install the latest version of Adobe Reader perhaps?

See http://get.adobe.com/uk/reader/

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:51pm:

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 2:37pm: See P.3 of another of Ofcom's cosy forums where they meet up with their telco buddies begind closed doors.  This one is called the Standard Contract Forum - http://www.btwholesale.com/pages/downloads/service_and_support/contractual_information/docs/industry/scf/07_May/scf_notes_May07u.rtf When clicking on your link, the page that opens has thick black lines obliterating the bottom quarter of pages 2 & 3, so I cannot see the points about 03 except "Opening of 0872/0873/0843"

What program are you using to view this file?

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:52pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 2:43pm: Yes I now know, after reading all of the replies to my OP,I have told you my complaint has been sent, I do not need more "yes it exists" comments. And a merry xmas to you too Derrick. ;) :P You seem to have got out of bed the wrong side today.  Is the stress of buying all those xmas presents perhaps starting to get you down. ::)

Same side of the bed as every day  ;D

What xmas presents  ;D

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:56pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 2:51pm: When clicking on your link, the page that opens has thick black lines obliterating the bottom quarter of pages 2 & 3, so I cannot see the points about 03 except "Opening of 0872/0873/0843" No thick black lines here.  I suggest you install the latest version of Adobe Reader perhaps? See http://get.adobe.com/uk/reader/

As far as I am aware I have the latest edition, I seem to remember updating it the other week, but I will try your link for the latest.

I'm using Mozilla Firefox 3.0.5 but its academic now as someone at BT Wholesale seems to have removed the page from their website since my original post.  There must have been something else in that document they didn't want us to see.

Damn I wish I had saved a copy of it now. :'(

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:56pm:

No thick black lines here.  I suggest you install the latest version of Adobe Reader perhaps? See http://get.adobe.com/uk/reader/

It's a rich text (rtf) file, not PDF. Does Adobe reader read those? When I clicked it, it opened in OpenOffice. If you have MS Word, it should open it, otherwise download http://www.openoffice.org/

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:11pm:

I'm using Mozilla Firefox 3.0.5 but its academic now as someone at BT Wholesale seems to have removed the page from their website since my original post.  There must have been something else in that document they didn't want us to see. Damn I wish I had saved a copy of it now. :'(

Are you referring to
http://www.btwholesale.com/pages/downloads/service_and_support/contractual_information/docs/industry/scf/07_May/scf_notes_May07u.rtf

Still working fine for me, and just saved a copy anyway just in case!

OK the page is back now.

Its actually an RTF document so you will need Microsoft Word or WordPad or OpenOffice Writer in order to read it.  Your PC ought to call whichever of these programs you have associated with RTF (Rich Text File) extensions when you click on the link.

Open Office is free and lets you read Excel spreadsheets etc too.

You can get it at www.openoffice.org    So no need for pricey Microsoft Office. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Dave wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:02pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 2:51pm: NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 2:37pm: See P.3 of another of Ofcom's cosy forums where they meet up with their telco buddies begind closed doors.  This one is called the Standard Contract Forum - http://www.btwholesale.com/pages/downloads/service_and_support/contractual_information/docs/industry/scf/07_May/scf_notes_May07u.rtf When clicking on your link, the page that opens has thick black lines obliterating the bottom quarter of pages 2 & 3, so I cannot see the points about 03 except "Opening of 0872/0873/0843" What program are you using to view this file?

Hmmmm, don't know?

When clicking on the link it opens a window with OpenOffice 1.1.0 (default), in the drop down box,(only other option is "other"), it then opens the document in Word 2000.

More details on the Standard Contract Forum at www.btwholesale.com/pages/static/Pricing_and_Contracts/Standard_Contract_Forum.html

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:16pm:

Dave wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 3:02pm: derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 2:51pm: NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 2:37pm: See P.3 of another of Ofcom's cosy forums where they meet up with their telco buddies begind closed doors.  This one is called the Standard Contract Forum - http://www.btwholesale.com/pages/downloads/service_and_support/contractual_information/docs/industry/scf/07_May/scf_notes_May07u.rtf When clicking on your link, the page that opens has thick black lines obliterating the bottom quarter of pages 2 & 3, so I cannot see the points about 03 except "Opening of 0872/0873/0843" What program are you using to view this file? Hmmmm, don't know? When clicking on the link it opens a window with OpenOffice 1.1.0 (default), in the drop down box,(only other option is "other"), it then opens the document in Word 2000.

So you're opening it in OpenOffice. I'm not familiar, but I presume that this will open RTF files. If not, then MS Word should do.

I have both Word and OpenOffice on my computer.


Also the latest version of FireFox, that was only updated in the last two weeks.

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:21pm:

I have both Word and OpenOffice on my computer. Also the latest version of FireFox, that was only updated in the last two weeks.

Both Word and Open Office ought to be able to handle Rich Text files.

Have clicked on "other" in the drop down box, and chose Microsoft Word to open it, yet it still has thick black lines blocking bottom of pages 2 & 3.

I would say that I can read about 95 % of the document,.

Try pressing the Start button then My Computer then the Tools menu then Folder Options then the File Types tab and then scroll down and see what you have against the RTF file type.

You should be able to alter the File Type association for RTF from Word to Open Office for instance in this way.

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:27pm:

Have clicked on "other" in the drop down box, and chose Microsoft Word to open it, yet it still has thick black lines blocking bottom of pages 2 & 3.

Perhaps it is because you have Word 2000. Open it in Wordpad.

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:27pm:

Have clicked on "other" in the drop down box, and chose Microsoft Word to open it, yet it still has thick black lines blocking bottom of pages 2 & 3.

It seems your computer is infected with the well known BT "Stop Derrick" software bug. ::) ;D

More seriously you have may have some issue or other with a virus or trojan on the PC or some kind of corruption or other in your video driver.

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:28pm:

Try pressing the Start button then My Computer then the Tools menu then Folder Options then the File Types tab and then scroll down and see what you have against the RTF file type. You should be able to alter the File Type association for RTF from Word to Open Office for instance in this way.

RTF     Rich Text Format

Dave wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:29pm:

Perhaps it is because you have Word 2000. Open it in Wordpad.

Or use OpenOffice by changing your file associations as I suggested above as OpenOffice should be bang up to date.

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:31pm:

RTF     Rich Text Format

And what is listed as "Opens With"?

Note the Change button where you can select a different program to open RTF files.  Select Open Office with that.

Dave wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:29pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 3:27pm: Have clicked on "other" in the drop down box, and chose Microsoft Word to open it, yet it still has thick black lines blocking bottom of pages 2 & 3. Perhaps it is because you have Word 2000. Open it in Wordpad.

Have now used WordPad MFC Application, (the only Wordpad available), and it has opened it and I can read all of it but not in the same format, i.e. no page numbers or separation.

I should not have to do this, I have opened just about every thing else by just clicking links and the default opener.

From the document you had problems with:-


Quote:

Opening of 0872/0873/0843 Sean updated the forum on the new 0872/0873 & 0843 number ranges. Ofcom are already allocating these numbers to CPs. These new number ranges are to be included in the existing Operator schedules 410 & 411. These schedules have been updated to accommodate the new numbers and are available on the website, the BT schedules are also being updated.  Schedule 07, Reciprocal Non-Geographic Number Portability, will also need to be updated to include the new numbers.

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:33pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 3:31pm: RTF     Rich Text Format And what is listed as "Opens With"?   :-? Note the Change button where you can select a different program to open RTF files.  Select Open Office with that.

I don't want to start changing stuff on the computer just to open one page that is giving me problems and risk messing everything else up"

Re your comment about viruses, I have done a scan earlier today with Spy bot S&D, A-Squares,Superanti spyware, Adaware personnel.

AVG and Windows Defender run continuously.

There where only the normal cookies etc found, and I deleted all of those.  

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:45pm:

I don't want to start changing stuff on the computer just to open one page that is giving me problems and risk messing everything else up"

Microsoft Word is vintage 2000 and OpenOffice is vintage 2008.

So why stick with using Microsoft Word? :-? :-/

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:47pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 3:45pm: I don't want to start changing stuff on the computer just to open one page that is giving me problems and risk messing everything else up" Microsoft Word is vintage 2000 and OpenOffice is vintage 2008. So why stick with using Microsoft Word? :-? :-/

Because I don't, and never have liked OpenOffice !

Despite the claims, it is nowhere near as good as Word.

Although it is on  my computer and therefore should be capable of opening the files, but in this case it would not despite being the default !!

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 2:51pm:

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 2:37pm: See P.3 of another of Ofcom's cosy forums where they meet up with their telco buddies begind closed doors.  This one is called the Standard Contract Forum - http://www.btwholesale.com/pages/downloads/service_and_support/contractual_information/docs/industry/scf/07_May/scf_notes_May07u.rtf When clicking on your link, the page that opens has thick black lines obliterating the bottom quarter of pages 2 & 3, so I cannot see the points about 03 except "Opening of 0872/0873/0843"

The document opens OK in OpenOffice Writer. What are you using to open it? This isn't an Adobe Acrobat file, so updating your Reader won't make much difference.

jgxenite wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 4:23pm:

The document opens OK in OpenOffice Writer. What are you using to open it?

No it doesn't. See my posts #20/23/25.

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 3:16pm:

When clicking on the link it opens a window with OpenOffice 1.1.0 (default), in the drop down box,(only other option is "other"), it then opens the document in Word 2000.

OpenOffice 1.1.0 is rather old now. I'm using OpenOffice 2.3 and the file looked fine.

Microsoft also change the specs and capabilities of Word with each release, to force people to upgrade. So Word 2000 may not open files created using older versions.

I did notice that BT's servers send this document with the MIME type of a Word document. I don't know if that's correct, it may affect the way it's handled. Try saving it an opening it from there.

Sorry, I should have mentioned I'm using OpenOffice 2.4/3 (can't remember which it opened in).

jrawle wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 5:01pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 3:16pm: When clicking on the link it opens a window with OpenOffice 1.1.0 (default), in the drop down box,(only other option is "other"), it then opens the document in Word 2000. OpenOffice 1.1.0 is rather old now. I'm using OpenOffice 2.3 and the file looked fine. Microsoft also change the specs and capabilities of Word with each release, to force people to upgrade. So Word 2000 may not open files created using older versions. I did notice that BT's servers send this document with the MIME type of a Word document. I don't know if that's correct, it may affect the way it's handled. Try saving it an opening it from there.

Yes but I do not use OpenOffice, so I don't really care which it is.

Thanks for all the input, but as it has nothing to do with the OP, I think we should drop it  ;)

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 4:01pm:

Because I don't, and never have liked OpenOffice ! Despite the claims, it is nowhere near as good as Word.

But since when did a product not being as good a quality ever get in the way of you using it if it is much cheaper Derrick?  For instance it doesn't seem to ever stop you using that terrible trial Voip phone service to call me, even though it means you get cut off every five minutes and parts of every other word in the call drop out.  I thought that as long as a thing was free you were prepared to use it no matter how much worse its quality might be than the paying version of the same service. ;) :P ;D

Also let us not forget you taking the hugely less comfortable overnight coach down to London for the Information Tribunal and so losing a night's sleep in the process purely because it was again much cheaper than getting the high speed 6am train. :D

Surely you are not now going to tell me that you usually shop at Waitrose or Marks & Spencer for your food because you cannot tolerate the cheap old rubbish they sell down at Asda or Tesco? :-/

I think you must have had an earlier bad experience with OpenOffice (as I did with the original Mozilla web browser before it became Firefox) but if you try it now I think you will be amazed by how little different it is from Microsoft Office and how well made the whole software package now is.

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 6:37pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 4:01pm: Because I don't, and never have liked OpenOffice ! Despite the claims, it is nowhere near as good as Word. But since when did a product not being as good a quality ever get in the way of you using it if it is much cheaper Derrick?  ...

I too am puzzled. Derrick, you say you have OpenOffice version 1.something. I've never used OpenOffice, but as they're now on version 3, I would assume that it is much better than the earliest versions. So how can you say you don't like something when you've never tried it??!!

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 6:37pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 4:01pm: Because I don't, and never have liked OpenOffice ! Despite the claims, it is nowhere near as good as Word. But since when did a product not being as good a quality ever get in the way of you using it if it is much cheaper Derrick?  For instance it doesn't seem to ever stop you using that terrible trial Voip phone service to call me, even though it means you get cut off every five minutes and parts of every other word in the call drop out.  I thought that as long as a thing was free you were prepared to use it no matter how much worse its quality might be than the paying version of the same service. ;) :P ;D Also let us not forget you taking the hugely less comfortable overnight coach down to London for the Information Tribunal and so losing a night's sleep in the process purely because it was again much cheaper than getting the high speed 6am train. :D Surely you are not now going to tell me that you usually shop at Waitrose or Marks & Spencer for your food because you cannot tolerate the cheap old rubbish they sell down at Asda or Tesco? :-/ I think you must have had an earlier bad experience with OpenOffice (as I did with the original Mozilla web browser before it became Firefox) but if you try it now I think you will be amazed by how little different it is from Microsoft Office and how well made the whole software package now is.

My copy of Word cost me nothing!

I use the free voip when, hopefully my calls are not going to last long, if I think they are then I will use one of the Finera brand.

It was my choice to use the coach, yes it was cheaper by a mile, (remember I did not even want to attend!), and the lack of sleep was not an issue!

I tend to use Morrisons as it is just across the road from me, but also use Asda,Lidl and Aldi.

I am happy with Word for what I need it for and have no reason to go onto Office.

What is your problem? you have gone way off topic for this thread, is there some reason you want to have a go, or is it just your time of the month?

Why don't you just  :-X

Dave wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 6:41pm:

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 6:37pm: derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 4:01pm: Because I don't, and never have liked OpenOffice ! Despite the claims, it is nowhere near as good as Word. But since when did a product not being as good a quality ever get in the way of you using it if it is much cheaper Derrick?  ... I too am puzzled. Derrick, you say you have OpenOffice version 1.something. I've never used OpenOffice, but as they're now on version 3, I would assume that it is much better than the earliest versions. So how can you say you don't like something when you've never tried it??!!

I used OpenOffice when I first got the computer,(supplied,probably because it was free), did not know any different, then was given, (FREE NGMsG) A copy of Word, have used it ever since and am happy with it.

Dave wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 6:41pm:

So how can you say you don't like something when you've never tried it??!!

But I bet Derrick reckons that he knows he doesn't like snails or frogslegs or sheeps brains too though, even though he has never actually tried them. :D

However many people I know won't use www.saynoto0870.com at all because they wrongly imagine that there is something illegal about circumventing the official number and/or because they think that something that is cheaper will give them a worse service.  So I find it odd to hear that Derrick is now simply going with the herd here in assuming that the product of one of the world's most monopolistic and greedy companies will be far superior to its rivals.

To be fair I do use Word 2002 (XP) rather than its OpenOffice counterpart but only because it was bundled with this HP Notebook in their software package for no extra charge when I bought it nearly four years ago.  And Word 2002 can open this document.

Personally I suspect that a corrupted registry entry on Derrick's PC is the most likely cause of this problem, although I wonder if he has shut down and rebooted it to see if the problem persists?

derrick wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 6:54pm:

My copy of Word cost me nothing!

Is that why it is a copy of Word 2000.  I wonder if the boys at www.fast.org.uk would be ok with the source of your current copy of Word? ;)


Quote:

I use the free voip when, hopefully my calls are not going to last long, if I think they are then I will use one of the Finera brand.

I have never known one of your calls to me to not last long. ;)


Quote:

It was my choice to use the coach, yes it was cheaper by a mile, (remember I did not even want to attend!), and the lack of sleep was not an issue!

Are you sure.  I seem to remember that you were in fact subjected to a very difficult and lengthy cross examination.


Quote:

I tend to use Morrisons as it is just across the road from me, but also use Asda,Lidl and Aldi.

I would fully expect you to shop only at Morrisons, Asda and Lidl.  That is why your support for overpriced Microsoft software came as such a surprise.  And having access to a pirate copy of Microsoft software doesn't count as an economic justification as they are illegal. :o


Quote:

I am happy with Word for what I need it for and have no reason to go onto Office.

Apart from when you need to open documents on the BT Wholesale website it would appear. ::)

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 6:59pm:

To be fair I do use Word 2002 (XP) rather than its OpenOffice counterpart but only because it was bundled with this HP Notebook in their software package for no extra charge when I bought it nearly four years ago.  And Word 2002 can open this document.   HYPOCRITE! Personally I suspect that a corrupted registry entry on Derrick's PC is the most likely cause of this problem, although I wonder if he has shut down and rebooted it to see if the problem persists?

From my post #34; - "Re your comment about viruses, I have done a scan earlier today with Spy bot S&D, A-Squares,Superanti spyware, Adaware personnel.

AVG and Windows Defender run continuously.

There where only the normal cookies etc found, and I deleted all of those. "


Read the posts if you want to comment!  I also did shut down and reboot as one of the programmes required it!

NGMsGhost wrote on Dec 20^th, 2008 at 7:54pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 20th, 2008 at 6:54pm: My copy of Word cost me nothing! Is that why it is a copy of Word 2000.  I wonder if the boys at www.fast.org.uk would be ok with the source of your current copy of Word? ;) Quote: I use the free voip when, hopefully my calls are not going to last long, if I think they are then I will use one of the Finera brand. I have never known one of your calls to me to not last long. ;) [quote]It was my choice to use the coach, yes it was cheaper by a mile, (remember I did not even want to attend!), and the lack of sleep was not an issue!

Are you sure.  I seem to remember that you were in fact subjected to a very difficult and lengthy cross examination.


Quote:

I tend to use Morrisons as it is just across the road from me, but also use Asda,Lidl and Aldi.

I would fully expect you to shop only at Morrisons, Asda and Lidl.  That is why your support for overpriced Microsoft software came as such a surprise.  And having access to a pirate copy of Microsoft software doesn't count as an economic justification as they are illegal. :o


Quote:

I am happy with Word for what I need it for and have no reason to go onto Office.

Apart from when you need to open documents on the BT Wholesale website it would appear. ::)[/quote]

My copy of Word is a legitimate disc, given to me by a friend who has his own business and received the Word disc with an updated/new computer, I cannot remember the reason why now, but he did not want this Word disc so gave it to me, it is registered in my name! so stop making,(wrong), assumptions and calling me a pirate!

The very odd calls I have made to you,(I could count them on one hand), are made using that vehicle as usually it is an answerphone I receive so the call cost nothing, your refernce to the call I made last week, was actually a complete new Beta I was trying and I told you the calls cut out after a maximum of 10 minutes, if I had known you where to talk about everything under the sun,(again), I would have  used 18185 for a call of unlimited duration for the total cost of 5p.

"very difficult and lengthy cross examination." ? I don't think so, I was in the "box" for no more than 10 minutes,(at least that is what it felt like), and I cannot see how you would know how it affected me, I do and it didn't!

I am not actually supporting Microsoft, but the, legitimate, copy of Word I have suits me for what I need it for and am quite happy to continue to use it.

Whats is wrong with shopping at those supermarkets? Millions shop there every week,(are you a closet snob?), Morrisons is the 5th largest supermarket in the country, and as I have said, they are across the road, why not use them? Lidli and Aldi are within 2 miles of me, whilst my nearest Tesco and Asda are over 8 miles away, you do the maths.

Funny that, but it appears to be the only document that I have not been able to open!

FWIW,  the currently available version of the file was created with Microsoft Word 11.0.6359 (aka Word 2003, but not a fully updated version of same.)

Personally, I still use Word 2000 and it loaded it fine.  RTF is supposed to be a more portable document format than .doc, so as to stop issues between using files on different versions of the software.  I've got a recentt openoffice but had terrible trouble getting tables to behave when I last tried doing a doc in it a few weeks ago.  And it then crashed.  

Incidentally, and purely as an aside, just because a person has an original disc for an app, doesn't mean they have a licence to use it - Many apps bundled with computers are licenced for that machine only.  The disc is immaterial, it's the licence that's important.  Indeed, you used to be able to buy "media only" from MS for almost nothing (as long as you had also purchased, separately, licences for each proposed user.)

Is this site looking to merge with the wholly worthwhile, but slightly different website, SayNotoMicrosoft.com; or perhaps, SayNotoFreeware.com, SayNotoRubbishSupermarkets.com, SayNotoOverpricedSupermarkets.com or even SayNotoFellowCampaigners.com?

Returning to the OP. Has anyone considered approaching the advertiser to see if perhaps they are genuinely unaware that what they were told by their telephone service provider is untrue.

I do not subscribe to the widespread belief that one can determine someone's moral standing simply from their choice of telephone number. I cannot see why a car dealer with a 0800 number is likely to be any different from one using 0843. If anything, the former is likely to be more expensive that the latter because of the need to cover higher marketing costs.

If one believes that everybody else in the world is crooked, exclusively seeking personal gain and out to do down everyone else, then that is not only sad, but also it makes campaigning with the intention of achieving any kind of success a complete waste of time.

irrelevant wrote on Dec 21^st, 2008 at 11:51am:

Incidentally, and purely as an aside, just because a person has an original disc for an app, doesn't mean they have a licence to use it - Many apps bundled with computers are licenced for that machine only.  The disc is immaterial, it's the licence that's important.  Indeed, you used to be able to buy "media only" from MS for almost nothing (as long as you had also purchased, separately, licences for each proposed user.)

The licence and registration is in my name with my I D as registered owner!

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Dec 21^st, 2008 at 11:57am:

Returning to the OP. Has anyone considered approaching the advertiser to see if perhaps they are genuinely unaware that what they were told by their telephone service provider is untrue.

This publication is known to the ASA, via me and others complaining about various things, I have personally complained at least 4 times over the last 12 months re different advertisers and 0845 described as "local rate", the ASA have had words with them so they are totally aware.

derrick wrote on Dec 21^st, 2008 at 12:08pm:

This publication is known to the ASA

Is it the publisher who is responsible for the copy provided by advertisers, rather than the advertisers themselves?

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Dec 21^st, 2008 at 12:17pm:

derrick wrote on Dec 21st, 2008 at 12:08pm: This publication is known to the ASA Is it the publisher who is responsible for the copy provided by advertisers, rather than the advertisers themselves?

When I spoke to someone at the ASA late last year or early this year, I got the impression that they where saying the publisher is responsible for the copy that goes into the paper and that they where to have words with them, obviously the words are not good enough, but irrespective of who is at fault, it is up to the ASA to solve the problem in this case, as I have previously said, the ASA have had problems with the advertising in this "newspaper".

Quite why this thread has gone off topic I do not know, I think it is time to draw a line and leave it with me to pursue the ASA, my OP was to clarify the 0843 number, and that has been done!

derrick wrote on Dec 21^st, 2008 at 12:35pm:

... pursue the ASA ...

There is some merit in getting misrepresentations removed, so this is worthwhile. The ASA is however some way from requiring all those who promote revenue sharing numbers to own up to the fact that they are used as a way of obtaining subsidy for costs (or earning money, if one prefers to put it in that way).

Whilst some think that there could be cases where such subsidy from callers is proper (if clearly declared), our shared campaigning purpose is primarily to see such activity ceased. I would urge members not to dismiss the possibililty that increasing awareness of how revenue sharing works and the costs that are actually incurred may cause some to stop doing it without the need for regulatory intervention. I see no reason why this could not apply to small businesses just as much as government departments.