I am going to break this post into two parts

Part One

What actual use is there for NGN's apart from charging the end user (us) extra and making a "profit" on calls? As far as I can see there is NO other benefit. Perhaps someone (anyone) can correct me if I am wrong. Wherever I now seem to go all I see is 08 numbers even for so called "local" business which used to have 01/02 numbers. I am sure when only 0845/0870 existed there were fewer companies using them. Anyone's thoughts are greatfully received.

Part Two

How much does it actually cost to call an NGN (excluding BT's special status) ? Is it 5p per minute plus a connection charge? 5.5p/8p/10p or more? As their appears to be NO set cost it is up to the general public (yup that's you and me again) to determine the cost of calling before calling the number!  I know how much it costs to call an 01/02 number, but I don't for the others...

Perhaps it's time the tide turned, we need to educate others, and work on convincing companies that these numbers do NOT benefit their callers, which they seem to want to convince us they do.

Again your thoughts are welcome.

:)

I will try to have a go at Part One quickly.


A non-geographic number removes any association from a particular locality. This can be useful for a national or regional service that does not wish to be associated with a specific town or area.

Non-geographic numbers provide ready access to certain features of the telephone network through what are known as intelligent switches. These features can be applied to geographic numbers, but less readily.

When a 03 number is used, the user of the line pays for whatever services they use; callers are charged at Geographic Rate. The availability of 03 is very important because it enables a distinction to be made between the functional and financial benefits of using non-geographic numbers.


When a 084, 087 (except 0870), 070 or 09 number is used the telephone company that originates the call (known as the OCP) pays an additional sum of money (per minute) to the telephone company that terminates the call (known as the TCP). Part of that money is used to offset the cost of the services provided, the remainder is passed on to the user of the line. Because this revenue is "per call", whereas some of the costs are fixed, there are various arrangements in place to determine exactly how this works. For example, DWP recently switched from paying for the services in full and then receiving a revenue share for each call received to simply paying at a reduced rate - this enabled it to claim that it had given up benefiting from "revenue sharing", whereas this change in the detailed arrangements with its telephone service providers made no difference whatsoever to what callers paid their providers.


Whether or not the user "profits" depends on the cost of the services used. With infrequently called 0845 numbers (on which the additional payment is only at the rate of around 1.7p per minute) it may be that the cost of the service is not fully covered.

One must also remember that handling incoming telephone calls is a cost for a business - in terms of staff etc. My general take is that for 084 and 087 ("Business Rate") numbers users are subsidising their costs, whereas for 09 ("Premium Rate") numbers they are earning money from each call received. Subsidy of costs that would otherwise have to be met does however make a positive contribution to the bottom line.

Ok, that's very helpfull.

The reason for the question was, that I seem to notice an increase in the number of Business' and organisations using 084 numbers, mainly 0844. With the varying "cost" of calling these numbers the "benefit" to the business can sometimes be outweighed, causing complaints and sometimes resulting in compensation to the customers.

The company I work for seems hell bent on using these numbers, even though a subsidary company they own does not use them.

It appears to be somewhat if a minefield.

:(

If I don't find a geographical number on here, I rarely give any company offering an 0843/4 number my business.  

If an 0871/2/3 number is offered, there is almost no chance.

I wonder what % of the population does the same?

Heinz wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2011 at 7:51pm:

If I don't find a geographical number on here, I rarely give any company offering an 0843/4 number my business.   If an 0871/2/3 number is offered, there is almost no chance. I wonder what % of the population does the same?

I always look for a Geo number or if not an alternative method of conact, such as e-mail. If all else fails, I find a way to point out I won't use them for business.

:)

In response to the previous comments - customers are being encouraged to use alternative methods of contact, rather than the telephone. Call centres are expensive to staff, largely because they require an immediate and competent response. This is one reason why subsidy of the costs and redirection of customer enquiries may be deliberately sought.

If Ofcom's proposals for unbundling of charges and mandatory declaration of the "service charge" element (currently out to consultation) come into effect then the percentage who refuse to pay an unreasonable service charge would be expected to increase - AND QUITE RIGHT TOO.

---

Prompted in part by the Part Two question, I have collated and polished some relevant data into this blog posting.

If anyone spots any error that needs correction - PLEASE let me know BY EMAIL. Information on my campaigning blogs may provide a useful source of reference for individual members of this forum, but they are quite separate from this site.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 8:08am:

In response to the previous comments - customers are being encouraged to use alternative methods of contact, rather than the telephone.

That may be the intention of companies which use 084/087 numbers but, in reality, they're just losing business!

Heinz wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 8:22am:

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 4th, 2011 at 8:08am: In response to the previous comments - customers are being encouraged to use alternative methods of contact, rather than the telephone. That may be the intention of companies which use 084/087 numbers but, in reality, they're just losing business!

There may be some who would never fly because every airline uses 0871 numbers for some purpose or other, or use the NHS because NHS Direct uses a 0845 number, however it is unlikely that many would take such a principled stand.

Using a "Business Rate" number in a B2C situation as a means of winning business would probably be seen as a rather foolish strategy. This is however done with "booking" services, where the concept of a "booking fee" is not entirely foreign (Ticketmaster is the obvious case). Near-monopoly providers also do it with enquiry services (e.g. TfL) The common complaint however is that the Business Rate and Premium Rate numbers only appear once one is looking for after-sales support.

I would expect that if required to clearly state the service charge (as current proposed by Ofcom) then many would regard the dissatisfaction readily and obviously caused as being worth enough to offset the subsidy gained from using Business Rate numbers. The proposal at least has the merit of ending attempts to hide the premium charge by implying that every Telco other than BT is ripping off their customers.

There are probably also quite a number of cases where users of 0845 numbers genuinely do not realise what they are doing. I am certain that there are many who still believe that a 0845 number enables most callers to make a national call at the (lower) local rate. They may be losing business from some, but there will be other customers who believe this to be true. Indeed, BT callers either pay the same or less to call a 0845 number.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 9:37am:

Indeed, BT callers either pay the same or less to call a 0845 number.

Less.

I have recently made a day time 0845 call and it cost 29 pence for eight minutes and seventeen seconds. A day time call to a geographical number lasting 1 minute 48 seconds cost 26 pence

sherbert wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 9:53am:

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 4th, 2011 at 9:37am: Indeed, BT callers either pay the same or less to call a 0845 number. Less. I have recently made a day time 0845 call and it cost 29 pence for eight minutes and seventeen seconds. A day time call to a geographical number lasting 1 minute 48 seconds cost 26 pence

SCV's statement is correct as those on inclusive packages pay the same (no incidental cost). Those who make a call at a time when it will be chargeable (i.e. not inclusive) will pay more to call geographic numbers.

sherbert wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 9:53am:

I have recently made a day time 0845 call and it cost 29 pence for eight minutes and seventeen seconds. A day time call to a geographical number lasting 1 minute 48 seconds cost 26 pence

These costs tally with the rates from 4 Jan 2011.

This example helps to demonstrate the odd effect of the present regulation on BT. (The figures which follow are rough, rounded to a penny.)

14 pence would have been paid over to the telco terminating the 0845 call. This means that (with VAT removed) BT earned 10p from a 8 minute 17 second call to a 0845 number (the setup fee plus some costs), but 22p from a 1 minute 48 second call to a geographic number. It is fairly meaningless to express this selective example in terms of pence per minute rates, when a significant element is the fixed charge, however people do like to think of telephone charges in this way.

Excluding VAT and the "Service Charge" paid to the call recipient, the BT rates for these calls were 1 penny per minute for the 0845 call and 12 pence per minute for the geo call; less indeed. This ratio does not serve as general rule, it simply shows how a well-chosen real example can highlight the bizarre nature of the present situation. Examples like this can be exploited by our opponents to add to the confusion and misunderstanding of the underlying reality of "Business Rate" numbers.

No business would operate in such a way, unless required to do so by regulation. This is why it is absurd to quote BT rates (when BT originates less than 25% of non-business calls) and say that other providers' charges may vary. It is BT that is the odd case - due to regulation.

---

BT subscribers who regularly make weekday daytime calls - so that the monthly cost of geo rate, 0845 and 0870 calls approaches £5 (£2 if paying for unlimited evenings and weekends) should be subscribing to "Unlimited Anytime". This should be thought of as the standard option, except for those who only rarely or never make weekday daytime calls.

With "daytime" now extended to 7pm and package prices frozen whilst call charges were increased by 9% (not 2.13%) on 4 Jan, those for whom "Unlimited Anytime" is not the standard are fewer in number.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

BT subscribers who regularly make weekday daytime calls - so that the monthly cost of geo rate, 0845 and 0870 calls approaches £5 (£2 if paying for unlimited evenings and weekends) should be subscribing to "Unlimited Anytime". This should be thought of as the standard option, except for those who only rarely or never make weekday daytime calls.

Evenings and week ends option does not seem to be advertised on the BT site. However there is no charge for this 'extra' if you sign up to a 12 month 'rolling contract'.

sherbert wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 7:37pm:

Evenings and week ends option does not seem to be advertised on the BT site. However there is no charge for this 'extra' if you sign up to a 12 month 'rolling contract'.

No they want customers to take the fully inclusive plan. :)

You can find details of the Unlimited UK Evening & Weekend calls at no extra cost plan – 12 month renewable contract deal
here though   http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/consumerProducts/dynamicmodules/pagecontentfooter/pageContentFooterPopup.jsp?pagecontentfooter_popupid=24641

Firstly thanks to everyone who has contributed so far.  :)

From what I can establish so far, to the consumer there is little benefit in calling an 084 number (excluding BT's reduced rates) to contact a company. It benefits them more than us, and in some cases can be hugely expensive.

As an example, IF 0845 calls on BT were charged (ie not part of any call plans) at the same rate as an 0844 call ANY caller to these numbers would pay 6p per minute (rounded up) PLUS a 11.50 pence connection fee! Where as calling a 01/02/03 number outside a call plan is 7p per minute (no rounding needed) plus the same call set up fee! That's the difference of 1 pence per minute... !

Standard Calls
No Geo Calls

As pointed out the largest part of the overal price is the call set up fee!

bigjohn has posted elsewhere that the call set up fee is due to rise as of April - here

Also noted are price rises by other call providers.

Under these circumstances callers wishing to contact companies are being penalised for NOT using calls plans, and obviously for calling 084 numbers!

I think it's time we started to highlight directly to companies and friends and family the EXACT costs of calling these companies! Perhaps the deluge in complaints will force/convince them that the sales tactics of telecom's companies are just sales tactics!

wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 8:00pm:

No they want customers to take the fully inclusive plan.

We are now off the subject of NGCS, although the inclusion of 0845 calls is a major issue of concern as it adds further confusion to an already confused situation.

If, in a competitive market, BT chooses to offer its services with Geographic Rate calls included, applying penalty charges for calls made outside the terms of the chosen Call Plan, then I cannot see a problem with that in principle. All other landline providers now do the same. Moving to the situation where Geographic calls (of up to an hour) are not subject to call charges is a culture change for many of us. This has been led by the Mobile market where call packages have long been the way that things are done.

For myself, I think that this is a positive move, although I understand that those who only make calls rarely (during particular periods) do lose out by this approach. The most positive aspect of this from the point of view of our campaigning efforts is that it isolates "Business Rate" and "Premium Rate" calls as being subject to call charges because a portion of the charge has to be paid on to the recipient. We presently have a mess with 0845 calls and landlines, which is down to the fact that BT can afford to make them inclusive.

The move away from call charges for "regular" calls does create issues and confusion during the transition. There will be more to come once the process of reducing the inflated termination rates for calls to mobiles is complete - we will then see "unlimited" packages including calls to mobiles.

I don't know if this is a relevant follow on but Virgin Media now charge £2 per month to use 0845 numbers, I have started a thread in regard to 0845 numbers being inclusive. I have also been in contact with Virgin Media and they say that plans are in place to include 0845 numbers in call packages.

We will see if this comes to pass, I urge users of this site to campaign Virgin Media to bring this plan into play

bazzerfewi wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 10:28pm:

I don't know if this is a relevant follow on but Virgin Media now charge £2 per month to use 0845 numbers, I have started a thread in regard to 0845 numbers being inclusive. I have also been in contact with Virgin Media and they say that plans are in place to include 0845 numbers in call packages. We will see if this comes to pass, I urge users of this site to campaign Virgin Media to bring this plan into play

Please don't take this the wrong way, but I would have thought the "purpose" of this site was to find ways to avoid calling 08 numbers (unless they are free)... campaigning for the inclusion of 0845 numbers in a paln would therefore go against this ethos?  Or am I wrong?

bazzerfewi wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 10:28pm:

I don't know if this is a relevant follow on but Virgin Media now charge £2 per month to use 0845 numbers, I have started a thread in regard to 0845 numbers being inclusive. I have also been in contact with Virgin Media and they say that plans are in place to include 0845 numbers in call packages. We will see if this comes to pass, I urge users of this site to campaign Virgin Media to bring this plan into play

I totally oppose any call to have 0845 numbers (in their current form) included in packages. Such a move merely gives users of the numbers more reason to justify their use.

This thread is getting drawn into the detail of lots of particular arrangements.


bazzerfewi wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 10:28pm:

I don't know if this is a relevant follow on but Virgin Media now charge £2 per month to use 0845 numbers, I have started a thread in regard to 0845 numbers being inclusive. I have also been in contact with Virgin Media and they say that plans are in place to include 0845 numbers in call packages. We will see if this comes to pass, I urge users of this site to campaign Virgin Media to bring this plan into play

Can we please sort out what these current and planned Virgin Media offers are.

What exactly is this £2 a month deal? Is it actually formally available from Virgin Media?

Are the VM "plans" to include 0845 numbers in call packages the unauthorised musings of a helpline representative, a confused reference to "Talk x00", or a serious plan to change the existing packages or offer more alternatives?

When 0845 numbers are included in packages all subscribers are paying towards the service charge that is paid over when Business Rate 0845 numbers are called. This cost is obviously reflected in the price for the package, or cross subsidised in some other way. I wholly disapprove of this approach and will strongly oppose any campaign for it to be extended.

Whilst there is much to criticise about the way in which Ofcom is dealing with this issue, I wholeheartedly support the "unbundling" proposal in the current consultation. Perhaps those who disagree, and argue for inclusion would care to join the debate in the relevant thread.

I to appose 0845 numbers in their present format but in the same token wouldn't including 0845 numbers be a good move because it wouldn't be any more expensive for the caller to ring them

I am not up to speed with the regulation but why wouldn't it be better if it didn't cost any more to call 0845 than 01 02 or 03 numbers

Also the other issue is that callers do not understand appreciate the difference between the numbers

I appreciate any guidance on this issue

Yes VM does offer 0845 numbers in their Calls Unlimited Package if you pay £2 per month extra "needless to say I am not prepared to pay and additional £2 because I personally do not contact any company displaying an 0845 or 0870 number

I am still totally apposed to these numbers but I do carry out research and I am able to source numbers from other sites but not all callers are this resourceful

I am just interested in assisting callers that are not aware of this site and are not quite as resourceful

bazzerfewi wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 11:10pm:

I to appose 0845 numbers in their present format but in the same token wouldn't including 0845 numbers be a good move because it wouldn't be any more expensive for the caller to ring them

You are arguing for the additional cost incurred by the telco in placing calls to 0845 numbers to be recovered from all those who subscribe to the package, rather than just those who choose to call them.

Ofcom is right to propose that these be treated properly as "Business Rate" numbers. The user should decide to levy a "Service Charge" and declare it when inviting calls. The caller should make a commercial decision to pay the charge on the basis of what they expect to receive in return. Many current users of 0845 numbers could not sustain such a position.

If users of 0845 numbers were able to obtain their subsidy at no cost to their callers, then we would perhaps all want to have 0845 numbers. It may appear to make sense when looked at simply, but it does not take much thought to recognise that it is a step in the wrong direction.

---

bazzerfewi wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 11:20pm:

Yes VM does offer 0845 numbers in their Calls Unlimited Package if you pay £2

The price list refers to two add-ons - "Talk International" and "Talk Mobile", each at £1.50 per month. There is no reference to "Talk 0845" at £2 per month.

Are you quite sure that this is not getting confused with "Talk Anywhere 200 / 400 / 800", which used to include calls to at least some expensive landline numbers (including 0845) as well as calls to mobiles. These are however pre-paid unit packages, rather than "unlimited" and they appear to have been withdrawn from new customers.

Follow on from last evenings conversation

I have just been in contact with Virgin Media and they have two plans for 0845 numbers

300 minutes per month will cost £2
500 minutes per month will cost £5

I do appreciate that say no to 0870 is to campaign and control the use of 0845 numbers and 0870 numbers and I believe the site is going in the right direction in this regard but I do admit I do not fully understand the industry as some members do.

But just as 0870 tarriffs have changed surely the next step is to campaign to change 0845 numbers to.

I was told today that the next step for VM was to include 0845 numbers in call packages. "We will have to wait and see"


This is a great site and it appears that the industry is responding to the pressure let us hope that it continues

bazzerfewi wrote on Feb 5^th, 2011 at 1:27pm:

Follow on from last evenings conversation I have just been in contact with Virgin Media and they have two plans for 0845 numbers

Please forgive my incredulity - I have spoken with VM and been offered an alternative version: £2.05 per month for 250 minutes at any time to 0845 and 0870 numbers.

I am told that these are special deals available to retention teams and customer services agents. I understand that the Virgin Media price list is regarded as the start point for negotiations for many customers.

Whether there is any prospect of these deals becoming part of the standard offering is another question. If the Ofcom unbundling proposals come about, then all such deals will be precluded - the "service charge" will have to be shown on bills.

If there are members who favour the inclusive approach, it is important for their arguments to be presented properly and considered seriously.

Contrary to what many of us expected, Ofcom does not propose that 0845 follow the same route as 0870, it proposes what could be thought of as being a more radical approach.

I appreciate your disbelief as I have contact VM on two occasions in the last 24 hours and I have been told two different versions.
They did not mention on any occasion that this was for staff only in fact they want to implement is there and then.

I do not need these numbers to be part of call packages for myself because I never ring 0845 or 0870 numbers but there are thousands of users out there that do not use or are maybe not aware of the Saynoto0870 site.

It is with them in that I mention this proposal

bazzerfewi wrote on Feb 5^th, 2011 at 4:01pm:

I do not need these numbers to be part of call packages for myself because I never ring 0845 or 0870 numbers but there are thousands of users out there that do not use or are maybe not aware of the Saynoto0870 site. It is with them in that I mention this proposal

I am concerned with equity for all.

If a company wishes to obtain a subsidy towards its telephone and call centre costs from customers who use the relevant services, rather than recovering these costs through its general prices, it declares the charge and callers are prepared to pay it, then I do not wish to see this prohibited. I cannot approve of the suggestion that all telephone users should provide this subsidy.

Clear declaration of the charge, as opposed to what happens at present, should cause it to be withdrawn from all situations where it is clearly unacceptable - i.e. in accessing taxation-funded public services and registering complaints. I do not wish to see the situation further obfuscated.

If isolating particular cases, my primary concern is for those unable to use a landline, who presently suffer the greatest premiums when calling 0845 numbers. If the premium can be hidden, by reference to BT tariffs, then public service providers feel less pressure to switch immediately to 03. Some other landline providers already copy BT, simply to compete; if all landline providers were to do so, them the battle for achieve this change would become even harder.

bazzerfewi wrote on Feb 4^th, 2011 at 11:10pm:

I to appose 0845 numbers in their present format but in the same token wouldn't including 0845 numbers be a good move because it wouldn't be any more expensive for the caller to ring them I am not up to speed with the regulation but why wouldn't it be better if it didn't cost any more to call 0845 than 01 02 or 03 numbers Also the other issue is that callers do not understand appreciate the difference between the numbers I appreciate any guidance on this issue

I'm just catching up with recent postings. Having read the comments on what it is that Virgin Media is offering, I don't think it is quite what it first appeared to be which is an inclusive package with 01, 02, 03 and 0845 numbers (I may be wrong). I understand that the 0845 inclusivity is an add-on.


Anyway, to explain the reasoning for my opposition of making 0845 inclusive (in its current form):

Firstly, a telephone call should be considered as being two parties, each served by a different telephone company. So the call passes the boundary (shown below as [X]) between two telephone companies:

Caller ----- <Caller's telco> [X] <Receiver's telco> ----- Receiver

So Caller places a call to the Receiver and in order for the call to be connected, the Caller's telco must pass the call to the Receiver's telco which connects it to its customer (the Receiver). It stands to reason that the call cannot be connected other than with the service of the Receiver's telco.

For the call to pass [X], the Receiver's telco levies a fee on the Caller's telco. It's a bit like a toll for the call to continue on its journey.


The "normal" toll is that incurred for a geographic or 03 call, but the toll for a 0845 number carries a premium.

It stands to reason that as a premium product, 0845 will have a higher retail price (i.e. higher call cost). So bringing it down to the same as a "normal" call (as is the case with a tariff that includes 01/02/03 and 0845 calls), would leave the call providing telco to recoup the premium from its customers in general.

That is, the likely effect is that prices for all its customers will rise. And of course the other effect which SilentCallsVictim touched on (reply #21) is that the more this happened, the more it would be seen as acceptable get a 0845 number because any individual caller wouldn't pay more and so in turn more calls would be made and prices would rise even more. This is why I say that including 0845 numbers in packages should be opposed.


On the other hand, if this is an add-on, say £2 per month for lots of 0845 calls, then that is not the same.

I totally see your point Dave and yes I appreciate that callers will foot the bill and it is also a valid point that an additional tariff should be charged for the service when explained in this way.

Although BT do not charge for this service it is now clear to me that 0845 numbers should not be included in call packages

VM appear to have the correct approach but I think that uncanny callers will take up one of the 0845 options offered by VM because the culture is that if a standard monthly fee is paid for a service it is hassle free

“How many of us actually check out utility bill when paying by Direct Debit, very few I fear.

As I stated earlier I had no intention of paying the additional £2 but I bet thousands do as VM telesales will be programmed to offer this product to customers.

So nothing has changed we must still campaign for the abolition of 0845 numbers in favour of 03 numbers.

bazzerfewi wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:51am:

VM appear to have the correct approach but I think that uncanny callers will take up one of the 0845 options offered by VM because the culture is that if a standard monthly fee is paid for a service it is hassle free

As I explain in my latest posting in the "Virgin Media 0845 Addition Charge Package" thread it is canny callers, who regularly call 0845 or other 08 numbers, who may be well advised to take up one of the Talk 08 add-on Talk Plans, if they qualify. This is however under the current regime.

The fault is with the present structure. BT is not allowed to make money on 084 calls, whereas it is on 01/02/03. There is no transparency of the "Service Charge" levied by receivers, as distinct from the Access Charge levied by the caller's telco. The fact that both providers and callers benefit from "hassle free" packages, makes it impossible to criticise them for offering and accepting fixed monthly charges.

The proposed unbundled structure presents a proper way forward. Receivers will be exposed as levying a Service Charge on everything from 0845 to 09 calls. Telcos will present a simple NGCS Access Charge. I see it as highly likely that some telcos will offer bundled Access Charges, possibly even as part of their standard "Unlimited" packages. So long as nobody forgets about the Service Charges that will be added, I see no problem in that.

bazzerfewi wrote on Feb 7^th, 2011 at 3:51am:

I totally see your point Dave and yes I appreciate that callers will foot the bill and it is also a valid point that an additional tariff should be charged for the service when explained in this way. Although BT do not charge for this service it is now clear to me that 0845 numbers should not be included in call packages

For a telephone call, consider the links in the chain, as it were, in the form of my simple diagram:

Caller ----- <Caller's telco> [X] <Receiver's telco> ----- Receiver

In this context, the Caller's telco is the retailer (on behalf of the caller).

What is referred to as the "Service Charge" is the toll to get the call past point [X] (or to term it another way, it's the "wholesale" cost of connecting the call).

The "Access Charge" is the mark-up added by the retailer (Caller's telco). It's basically the charge for starting the call up to point [X].

In the case of BT, its Access Charge is regulated to a tiny tiny amount. So when it decided to put 0845 calls in inclusive packages, it only cost it the Service Charge, whereas for many other providers it would cost the Access Charge plus Service Charge.


I hope that this simple explanation helps readers to picture what's going on. If there are any questions, fire away.

Does anyone know the year that 0870 numbers came into existence?

david005500 wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2011 at 1:30pm:

Does anyone know the year that 0870 numbers came into existence?

Why do you ask?

Prior to 0870, so-called "national rate" numbers were 0990 (operated by BT) and 0541 (operated by Mercury Communications, now Cable & Wireless).

As part of Phoneday in April 1995 when 1s were inserted after the national trunk dialling prefix for STD codes, these non-geographic prefixes were moved into the 0870 block.

0990 became 0870 5 and 0541 became 0870 1.

See:

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/oftel/publications/1999/consumer/qanum999.htm

I was trying to date a document that had an 0870 number on the front to see if it could have been 1998, which I guess it could.

david005500 wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2011 at 1:56pm:

I was trying to date a document that had an 0870 number on the front to see if it could have been 1998, which I guess it could.

Yes it could.  :)

I'll hang-up my anorak again.

Thanks!!

It's rather ironic that the OLD pre Number change codes such as 0345 have almost come back with the introduction of the "03" Geographic rate numbers.

As an example if National Rail Enquiries changed it's current 0845 number to 0345 it would be - 03457 48 49 50 just 1 digit (7) different from it's pre amended number, as it used to be 0345 48 49 50