I know there are some other forum members who are also customers of utility Warehouse (& I know that many others have posted criticising UW, rightly in many ways).  I felt I should alert fellow customers to the fact that UW have reintroduced charges for calls to 0845 numbers (they followed BT in making calls to 0845 inclusive within their packages).  This retrograde change was buried in a very long & complicated revision of charges document.  I have registered a formal complaint.  However, I think it might be wise for customers of other telecos who also followed BT's lead to check with their providers the situation regarding 0845 & whether they remain included before they rack up big bills without realising.

Yes, I believe this was implemented on the 1st November. I note  that the 0870 is still inclusive.

More info here

http://www.utilitywarehouse.co.uk/Home/home_phone/homephone_info.taf

What are the charges for 0845 calls now?

---

It is good to note that UW has decided to continue including 0870 calls in packages. Since 1 August 2009 telephone call retailers no longer incur a surcharge for connecting calls to them.

Clearly, the inclusion of 0845 numbers in packages is an issue which divides us. Whilst inclusion does permit calls to these numbers with no incidental costs, it does mean that customers in general must pay more, which is why I oppose it.

Had UW not made this change, then, all things being equal, it would have had to increase the price of its packages.


Including 0845 calls in packages is also not very helpful in the campaign against these numbers, as users may give it as justification for their use.

Dave wrote on Nov 26^th, 2010 at 7:28pm:

Clearly, the inclusion of 0845 numbers in packages is an issue which divides us. Whilst inclusion does permit calls to these numbers with no incidental costs, it does mean that customers in general must pay more, which is why I oppose it.

Dave, if the 0845 numbers were not included in packages, how much cheaper do you reckon they will be? :-?

In other words, how much cheaper would my BT line rental be?

sherbert wrote on Nov 26^th, 2010 at 7:48pm:

Dave, if the 0845 numbers were not included in packages, how much cheaper do you reckon they will be? :-? In other words, how much cheaper would my BT line rental be?

50p, because around the time BT included 0845/0870 they increased the line rental to take account, (they will deny this but it happened around the same time).

derrick wrote on Nov 27^th, 2010 at 10:25am:

sherbert wrote on Nov 26th, 2010 at 7:48pm: Dave, if the 0845 numbers were not included in packages, how much cheaper do you reckon they will be? :-? In other words, how much cheaper would my BT line rental be? 50p, because around the time BT included 0845/0870 they increased the line rental to take account, (they will deny this but it happened around the same time).

Thanks Derrick :)

sherbert wrote on Nov 26^th, 2010 at 7:48pm:

Dave, if the 0845 numbers were not included in packages, how much cheaper do you reckon they will be? :-?

The extra burden on call providers for connecting a call to a 0845 number versus connecting to a 01/02/03/0870 number is around 1 pence per minute during the daytime.

The "wholesale" cost on call providers to connect 01/02/03/0870 calls is roughly 0.5 pence per minute and 1.5 pence per minute for 0845 calls. So the mark-up is to cover their own costs and make a return on selling calls.



sherbert wrote on Nov 26^th, 2010 at 7:48pm:

In other words, how much cheaper would my BT line rental be?

BT Retail (the bit of BT that offers services to end users) is regulated on the mark-up it can apply to 084x, 0871/2 and 09 calls, but not 01/02/03/0870 ("normal") numbers.

Think of a supermarket selling products and a simple description of the costs involved. For each product, it charges customers a retail price which consists of the amount it cost to stock the product (the wholesale price) plus a mark-up.

The mark-up on cut-price alcohol, for example, will be tiny (I'm making an assumption here, for the benefit of the analogy). Its costs for stocking it are effectively offset on the other products (which yield greater return for the retailer).

To come back to the situation with BT selling 0845 calls, it is only allowed a tiny mark-up on them, and this is by regulation. So broadly speaking, its retail price is the same as its wholesale price and thus it is forced to offset its costs elsewhere, much like supermarkets do (you might say) voluntarily with cut-price alcohol.

Other providers are allowed to price 0845 calls as they wish. Most choose to charge more for 0845 calls than normal calls, just as we would expect any retailer selling a more expensive product to do.

Some mirror BT's forced discounted retail call charges (thus offseting their costs elsewhere) and this is probably due to its market power.


What this all means (and here is the crunch) is that the additional cost to BT for including 0845 calls is simply the wholesale connection charges (as it's bound by regulation to make only a negligible mark-up). But as others are free to do as they please, and the additional cost to them is therefore their wholesale cost plus the mark-up (i.e. their current retail price).

---

Additionally, it must be born in mind that where 0845 calls are offered for no extra charge, this will be likely to have the tendancy for customers to make more of them. So it will certainly be necessary for call providers that include them in packages to continually assess customers' usage and make changes to retail prices accordingly.

Perhaps this provider has done that and decided that enough is enough and that in order to maintain the prices of its packages (and thus its place in the market), it will have to forgo including 0845 calls in them.

Thanks for all your trouble in replying Dave....greatly appreciated :)

Dave explains a very complex scenario very well.

Whilst revenue sharing (i.e. inflated termination fees) remains on 0845 calls, it is perverse for them to be included in packages.

In my view, BT's move to include both 0845 and 0870 calls in packages in January 2009 was simply in anticipation of revenue sharing being removed from both. The odd nature of the regulation enables this to be done at relatively modest cost with 0845, but with 0870 BT was taking a hit for the 7½ months before the termination fees changed.

Nearly two years later we await even an announcement that revenue sharing will be removed from 0845 - a long lead time (perhaps up to 2 years) would be expected once it is firmly announced. The Ofcom consultation that will be published in the next few weeks will probably (in my view) contain a firm proposal to this end. If it is does not, then BT will end up not only looking very silly, but also requiring some form of action to be taken to stop it exploiting a market advantage that the regulation of its prices encourages.


It is a complex situation. As a BT customer, I obviously have no problem with calling 0845 numbers, however I campaign vigorously against their use in the public sector. We may have a yet more difficult situation to face if the end of revenue sharing is announced. Given new powers that Ofcom will acquire next April, prohibition of premium charges will be much easier than has so far been possible with 0870. I suspect that the proposal will be, at an appropriate time, for both prohibition of revenue sharing and price enforcement similar to that applied to 03.

We will have to see how easy it will be to press for a move to 03, or return to geographic numbers, for those who may be tempted to say that 0845 is OK now, given changes that will still be some way off.

We will also wait to see if any of the telcos (other than those who mirror its prices anyway) join BT in dropping their rates or adding 0845 to packages ahead of the need to do so.

(I do not think it likely that anything so radical will be done with 0844/3.)

Only a couple of weeks to wait now.

sherbert wrote on Nov 27^th, 2010 at 11:06am:

Thanks for all your trouble in replying Dave....greatly appreciated :)

I hope the analogy sets the picture well.

As SCV says, it is a complex issue, as it consists of several dimensions all of which must be appreciated in order to have understanding of the problem.

Have just caught up with all the posts (am busy packing for our move in ten days - oh what a pain it is now to get phone & broadband sorted in a new area! but that's another story).   Just to clarify, when UW started to include 0870 & 0845 I did complain because they increased the inclusive package charges & I made the point that I avoided these numbers and objected to being charged for something I didn't want, they have not reduced package charges so I am now paying more for less.   On principle, I still made every effort to avoid using 0845 even when included because I object to them so strongly & to show solidarity with & support for those who did not have them included in packages, it certainly did not diminish my determination to campaign against them.  As I have said previously my objection to all these numbers is that, whether used by a private or public organisation, I see them, taking Dave's analogy of a supermarket, as akin to the supermarket charging customers an entrance fee.   My problem at the moment is that, with an imminent move, there are occasions when calling one of these numbers becomes unavoidable and, as I may be without broadband for up to two weeks, I can't even use this site!!!

Barbara,

Might I recommend a notepad or little black book, with the names of the major companies you are likely to call along with their Non-Geo and Geo Numbers noted?

That way untill you internet is resumed you can avoid calling the Non-Geo Numbers.

I hope this helps,

Good Luck with you move.

8-)

Also perhaps investing in a i phone? This way you would be able to access the internet through the gps system. ;)

Thanks, CJT-80, have been working on this idea for the past few days, it's just trying to remember all possibilities in a new area!  Thanks for the suggestion about the iphone, sherbert, but they're rather expensive (my daughter has one) & I'm not sure what the mobile reception is like where we're going (can't be much worse than where we are! Hence the suggestion by the Prime Minister about flood alerts by text makes people here - within 50 miles of London! - either weep in despair or laugh hysterically). Also, I thnik iphones are a bit technical, our son-in-law is in IT hence our daughter can cope with hers (which doesn't have reception in our current house!)

Moving from Chelmpsford to where Barbara?

Oh we're not Chelmsford, Heinz, we're in a village near Saffron Walden (hence poor mobile signal, poor radion reception, no gas, poor tv signal without a mast for the aerial etc, over 4 miles to nearest pint of milk) & after 21 years, we're moving to Gloucestershire, the Cotswolds near Cheltenham, a place with SHOPS!

Sorry, I don't know where I got Chelmsford from.

I only know one place in Cheltenham - but that was in a former life and it's not a place I'd recommend visiting without an invitation anyway!

Nevertheless, good luck with the move.  I'll look after the old county for you.

Barbara wrote on Nov 28^th, 2010 at 10:54am:

… Just to clarify, when UW started to include 0870 & 0845 I did complain because they increased the inclusive package charges & I made the point that I avoided these numbers and objected to being charged for something I didn't want, they have not reduced package charges so I am now paying more for less.   On principle, I still made every effort to avoid using 0845 even when included because I object to them so strongly & to show solidarity with & support for those who did not have them included in packages, it certainly did not diminish my determination to campaign against them.  As I have said previously my objection to all these numbers is that, whether used by a private or public organisation, I see them, taking Dave's analogy of a supermarket, as akin to the supermarket charging customers an entrance fee. …

This is quite astounding! We have heard GPs and other users of 084x numbers blame originating providers for charging more than a geographic call and calling on them to include calls in packages, but now we have a stalwart of the campaign coming out in agreement with them!  :o :o :o

The analogy of the supermarket can be used to describe various parts of the transaction during such a call. In my previous post, the supermarket represented BT as a call provider.

In Barbara's subsequent posting, a supermarket analogy is made, but in order for it to work, the previous one must be forgotten. This supermarket is equivalent to the party being called (such as one's water or electricity provider or one's bank or insurance company). It levies a fee to enter, via its telephone provider. I repeat, in the following paragraphs, forget the supermarket analogy I posted above.

Tickets to enter the supermarket are available from third party ticket outlets (call providers). Barbara's chosen ticket outlet provider charges her the fee which it passes on to the supermarket.

A few years ago, it took the decision to allow free tickets to the supermarket, despite the fact that it incurred a charge (imposed by the supermarket) for every ticket it sells. To counter this, it decided to increase the price of other tickets it had for sale.

As an avid theatre goer, Barbara was livid about this. She lodged a complaint with the ticket outlet about this increase.

Recently, the ticket outlet decided to revert back to charging for tickets into the said supermarket. This also got Barbara riled because she believes that there should be no cost to enter the supermarket, a supermarket she has no choice but to visit.


I quite agree with her that the supermarket should be free to access, but I most certainly do not agree that this is the fault of the ticket outlet.

If we are not careful here we are going to get ourselves very confused between the points of principle and the practical realities, we may also lose the "ogy" from "analogy" and end up losing ourselves.

Calling 0845 numbers is a course for concern, whether or not they are included in packages. There are grounds for complaint when they are added or removed, even though these may be different.

Getting a free ticket, when there is normally a charge, cannot be a bad thing for a consumer, and having this withdrawn must be a detriment.

In a free market, there cannot be anything wrong in a supermarket openly charging an admission price to keep prices down. By offering discounts to customers who register for loyalty cards this is effectively what supermarkets do at present, as prices are thereby inflated for irregular customers. Many supermarkets levy a charge for car parking, which is waived for those who spend over a certain amount - what is that, if not an entrance fee. For this reason, I dissent from the view that the supermarket must be free to access.

As supporters of a free market, our complaint can only be against the hidden nature of charges. Any business exists purely to produce a return for its shareholders, which relies on it attracting customers who spend money. I have no concern about how it structures its prices, so long as it trades fairly and openly. I treat taxpayer-funded public bodies differently, as they have quite different objectives, which is why I wholly oppose their use of 084 numbers. They are not supermarkets and they must not levy access charges on users.


We will have plenty to get our teeth into when Ofcom publishes its proposals in the next few weeks. This must be the point at which this all comes out into the open for full and considered debate.