BT has announced it will be freezing prices until 2013, but it is putting some of them up  first.

Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-2030561/BT-freeze-prices-2011--s-putting-first.html#ixzz1WBn5Vtuo

Pity they could not get the headline right ::)

sherbert wrote on Aug 27^th, 2011 at 6:48am:

Pity they could not get the headline right ::)

They have put it right now!

The headline reads: BT to freeze prices until 2013 – but it’s putting them up first

If there weren't a price increase immediately before a price freeze, then it would all be good news, would it not?

Of course, BT could have announced its price rise now, and then a month or so down the line announced the price freeze, thereby avoiding headlines like the above.

So their wonderful Anytime plan will be going back up to £5 (almost), just a few months after it was reduced to £4.70? Makes you wonder why they bothered doing that... Oh wait, I know. It was to sweeten the pill of the 30p increase in line rental that took place at the same time (30p reduction on one, 30p increase on the other - you do the Maths). BT really do give with one hand while taking away with the other!

And their daytime call costs are getting beyond a joke now. 7.95p per minute, plus a connection charge of 13.1p per call? (13.1p?! Why not just make it a round 13p? Is that .1p of a penny absolutely *essential* for them in order to balance the books??? What penny-pinching cheapskates!). From December, a 30-minute geographic daytime call on BT will cost £2.52 - 12p more than the same call on some mobile operators (Tesco Lite, GiffGaff, etc), which charge 8p per minute with no connection fee. Another incentive for people to ditch their landline! (Come back "local rate", all is forgiven...)

Basic line rental will be £14.60 per month - that's £175.20 per annum. The poor sods who don't like paying by direct debit will have to pay £16.40 per month, because BT whack a penalty charge of £1.80 on it. (Previously £1.50, but it went up to £1.80 in January - thanks to our EU masters forcing them to charge VAT on the "payment processing fee", claims BT, but they could have just told them where to stick it.) Those people will be paying nearly a whopping £200 a year for their landline, with "free" calls only at the weekend.

It's so hard to believe that at the beginning of *last year*, BT line rental was £11.54 per month / £138.48 per annum. When the December prices kick in, it will have gone up by 26.5% in just 18 months.

I suspect the reason they're getting the latest increase in before the end of this year, rather than wait until the Spring as usual, is so they can brag about freezing their prices during the whole of 2012. Hurrah!

Oh well, I guess *someone* has to pay for their much-publicised roll-out of super-fast fibre-optic broadband! It's just unfortunate the most of those bearing the financial burden of it are pensioners, who make too few calls to justify going on the Anytime package, who don't trust direct debits and who *can't* go on 'Line Rental Saver' because they don't have the internet (paper bills are *out* with that option!) - and therefore won't reap the benefits of said broadband anyway.

Trenod wrote on Aug 27^th, 2011 at 11:32pm:

And their daytime call costs are getting beyond a joke now. 7.95p per minute, plus a connection charge of 13.1p per call? (13.1p?! Why not just make it a round 13p? Is that .1p of a penny absolutely *essential* for them in order to balance the books??? What penny-pinching cheapskates!).

The reason is because each call is rounded up to the next whole penny, so with a Call Set-up fee of 13 pence the minimum charge would be 13 + 7.95 = 20.95 pence which is rounded up to 21 pence.

But with a 13.1 Call Set-up fee, the minimum charge is 13.1 + 7.95 = 21.05 pence which is rounded up to 22 pence.



Trenod wrote on Aug 27^th, 2011 at 11:32pm:

From December, a 30-minute geographic daytime call on BT will cost £2.52 - 12p more than the same call on some mobile operators (Tesco Lite, GiffGaff, etc), which charge 8p per minute with no connection fee. Another incentive for people to ditch their landline! (Come back "lo-call", all is forgiven...!)

I have pointed out elsewhere in the forum that the cost of BT fixed to mobile calls went up when they scrapped the separate weekend time period, making daytime and evening rates apply seven days a week. Then the Terminate the Rate campaign came along purporting to be the telephone consumer's friend, aimed at saving landline callers paying the hefty premiums to ring mobiles. The outcome earlier this year was that the cost of calling mobiles from BT lines fell, but they didn't re-instate the separate lower weekend rate.

As you say, take away with one hand and give with the other...

Trenod wrote on Aug 27^th, 2011 at 11:32pm:

From December, a 30-minute geographic daytime call on BT will cost £2.52 - 12p more than the same call on some mobile operators (Tesco Lite, GiffGaff, etc), which charge 8p per minute with no connection fee. Another incentive for people to ditch their landline! (Come back "lo-call", all is forgiven...!)

This example is perfectly fair in isolation, however the important point is that those who regularly make any significant number of weekday daytime calls (through BT or any other provider) will not be paying per-minute call charges.

All providers now offer Call Plans and packages to offer an unlimited number of inclusive calls to "normal" numbers. It is for the customer to decide which plan best fits their pattern of usage and to choose accordingly. Those who rarely make weekday calls before 7 in the evening may well not select the Unlimited Anytime plan, being content to pay a penalty charge of 13.1p plus 7.95p per minute on the rare occasions when they go outside the terms of their chosen plan.

If the call example given was a very rare occurrence for the caller then the cost given would indeed be accurate. If not, then I would hope that the caller would be wise to the fact that it is only in exceptional cases that these type of costs should be incurred.

I push this point for two reasons. Firstly, I am keen that people subscribe to the best arrangements to meet their needs. Secondly, we need to see the cost difference between calls to 084 and Geographic Rate numbers in proper context. The penalty rate of 7.95 ppm may be greater than the premium rate of 5.105 ppm to call a 0844 g6 number from BT. It is however fairer to compare with 0 ppm and no call set up fee.

One other point about this (I have posted something related elsewhere) is how difficult this is for the very elderly or confused.   My father (90 & getting very confused) is on the BT Evening & Weekend package which is obviously not appropriate because, even though he may keep social calls to that, inevitably he has to make numerous daytime calls eg to doctors & hospitals.   I pointed this out to him & he said he recently rang BT & they told him he was on the best package!!   My reply?  Well, they would say that, it is the best package for BT but not for him!  I have written out some telephone use instructions the first being "go on the Anytime package"!  However, the serious point is that people who for whatever reason find it difficult to understand and keep up to date with these things can be suffering real financial hardship & there really ought to be some kind of publicity camapaign as a minimum to alert them and their relatives/carers.

Efforts to campaign on the point raised by Barbara are well worthwhile.

Two issues are however currently holding me back.

Firstly, the comment that Unlimited Anytime is the "most popular" calling plan needs to be understood. One would take this to mean that it has more subscriptions than any of the other 3 alternatives: Unlimited Evenings and Weekends, Unlimited Weekends and BT Basic. The figures released do however leave this open to some doubt.

We are told that "Unlimited Anytime" has "more than 3.5 million customers", however the numbers of customers for each of the alternatives are not released. I have been told that BT has 10.5 million "residential accounts" and BT advises Ofcom that it has 11.8 million "residential exchange lines". Neither of these clearly indicate the total number of residential "customers" or Call Plan subscriptions, as a "customer" may have multiple accounts, lines or indeed Call Plan subscriptions.

A couple of years ago Unlimited Anytime was said to cover only 10% of residential subscribers, whereas it is now assumed to have more than 25%, probably very much more as the proportion of customers who qualify for BT Basic would surely be much smaller. I am not sure if BT customers are less likely to be out at work all day now than they were then, if the shift in the definition of "daytime" has made a significant difference or if those who make calls through other providers are now more often transferring their line rental also.

It could be that the doubling of the penalty charge (the cost of an otherwise inclusive daytime call) over a period of 2 years is finally having what I believe is the intended effect.

The definition of "most popular" should be enough to sustain a claim that the standard cost of a geographic call from a BT landline during the daytime is zero. I would however be much happier if all of the totals were released so that this could be seen more clearly.

The figure we really need is the proportion of BT customers who make anything more than the occasional non-inclusive geographic call during the "daytime". This is not only important to establish a basis for any claim about the "standard" cost of daytime calls, but also to indicate how important it may be to mount the campaign which Barbara proposes.


My second concern is detailed in the next posting.

... Further to the preceding posting, my second concern is over a charging error for customers who still subscribe to the "annually renewed" option for Unlimited Anytime. At some points this was the only (or cheapest) way of subscribing to Unlimited Anytime, although that has now changed.

At least one customer (myself) has been the victim of what have been acknowledged as charging errors under this option, even though the charges billed were as shown in the formal BT Price List!! I describe the two errors below.

For the tariff changes accompanying the change in VAT rate on 4 Jan 2011, BT announced that Unlimited Anytime was going from £4.99 to £5 per month - in the context of an increased VAT rate, this could have been seen as a price reduction. The price list (and my account) actually showed an increase (twice that necessary to accommodate the VAT change) from £4.99 to £5.20 per month, for the annually renewed option.

From 28 April 2011, the charge for Unlimited Anytime was said to be reduced from £5 to £4.70. Those paying the standard rate for line rental should not have seen any overall difference, as this was increased by 30p per month on the same date (from £13.60 to £13.90). The total charge for the annually renewed version of Unlimited Anytime (including line rental) was however increased by 30p in the Price List - reflecting the line rental increase but not the compensating reduction in the Call Plan Fee!

The charge for the annually renewed Unlimited Anytime option therefore remained at £5.20, rather than enjoying a reduction.


To summarise - I was paying £5.20 per month (rather than £5.00) from January to April and £5.20 (rather than £4.70) from May onwards.

My account has been adjusted to reflect this historic over-billing, even though I have been billed in accordance with the published BT price list! I have been told that I will be billed correctly in future, even though I am still on the Annually Renewed option. I await a change to the BT Price List (!) and look forward with interest to my next account. We have no idea what will happen to the charges for this item on 3 December.


I have all the relevant Price List update references if anyone would like to go through them. These are not easy to follow as the basic charge for the Unlimited Anytime annually renewed option is shown there before the discount of £1 which historically applied to this particular option. With the older examples the rate is given with line rental included.

The current terms which apply to those committed to these contracts are shown in the BT price list at subparts 1 and 3 of Section 55; Part 3:Calling Plans - Unlimited Anytime Plan. Subpart 2 gives the current option. Subpart 4 is another old tariff which does not reflect current charges. The titles suggest that everyone who signed up for Unlimited Anytime before July 2009, and has not switched to another Unlimited Anytime plan in the meantime, is affected by this overcharge.

I am prepared to accept that on entering a commitment the terms may be frozen, so as to deny one the benefit of better terms that may subsequently become available. The terms cannot however be adjusted other than in line with announced changes, and if adjusted upwards there must be the option to alter the arrangements without penalty. Before 4 January 2011 there was no disadvantage associated with being on the old terms (other than being committed for a period of 12 months).

The terms for this option have been varied with complete disregard for BT's announced price revisions. Subscribers to this particular arrangement have not been notified of a price increase (in January) and they have been excluded from an announced decrease (in April).

Recent statements about the current charges are made without the necessary qualification to cover existing customers tied into different terms.


It would be interesting to know if any other forum members are on the same deal, and whether they too are being billed in accordance with the Price List, rather than the generally published rates.

I am told that there is nobody in BT who deals with discrepancies between published information and the formal price list in general. I am quite sure that many other BT customers will have been billed in accordance with the formal price list and may have had difficulty in getting someone to address the discrepancy with the published general price information. I have secured an adjustment to my account, however adjustments of this scale (totalling less than £10) are very easily achieved.

With a battle going on with Virgin Media at present over its compliance with the Standard Conditions (see this thread), I see it being properly even-handed to treat BT in the same way. I have therefore drawn BT's attention to the fact that I propose to take this matter to Ofcom also, once it has had a chance to address it properly.


Returning to Barbara's point - I would find it very difficult to actively promote a service, when it is known that it may be wrongly billed and the costs misrepresented.

I'm going to throw a spanner in the works.

Not everyone who has Anytime Calls is on the Anytime Calling Plan. I am on the Evening & Weekend Calling Plan with Anytime Calls.

Apparantly it's not possible to select voice and broadband options independently of one another. The combination I required wasn't available to order online (the Broadband packages only has certain combinations), so I had to speak to an agent about it.

All I wanted to do, I thought, would be simple; change broadband option whilst leaving the Anytime Calling Plan as it was. Of course, the solution of the Evening & Weekend Calling Plan with Anytime Calls achieves the same result, but why make it so complicated?  ::)

Following this, I was concerned that I was on the Evening & Weekend Calling Plan as that was what it says when I log in to My Account.

I was directed to the PDF booklet that gives all the residential charges:
http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/consumer/assets/downloads/BT_PhoneTariff_Residential.pdf

If you go to page 32 (page 34 of the PDF), you will see a table giving the perminations of voice and broadband options, along with the Add-Ons in the bottom left. For example, there is an "Unlimited Anytime Add-on when selected with a Package containing Unlimited Evening & Weekend Plan".

---

On the subject of the billing error, the fact that even the providers can't get their heads around the prices speaks volumes!  ::)

So in practice what happens when there is a billing error is that it is only put right when noticed by someone who understands like SCV. Do all other customers who have been affected get an appropriate refund? As a matter of principle I say that they should.

I wonder in practice, how common these sorts of errors are. Also, what about the number that do and don't get noticed?

Dave wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2011 at 1:48pm:

I'm going to throw a spanner in the works.

A sizeable spanner - I note that Unlimited Evenings and Weekends is cheaper that Unlimited Weekends, however the add-on charge for Unlimited Anytime is £5, not £4.70 as currently declared and advised to customers as a price change due to occur on 28 April.


Dave wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2011 at 1:48pm:

I wonder in practice, how common these sorts of errors are. Also, what about the number that do and don't get noticed?

BT can charge whatever it likes - this is not actually a billing error as the bills have been in accordance with the published Price List. The General Conditions exist to protect all consumers from improper action by imposing a requirement for all price declarations for standard arrangements to be clear and up to date. I am waiting for BT to provide me with its justification of how it has declared the relevant prices to me and others before referring an alleged breach of General Conditions to Ofcom.

The price given for the 12 month renewable contract for Unlimited Anytime on p2 of the pdf tariff booklet is not the same as that given on the BT Price List. A quarterly charge of £55.80 including line rental is given, but this works out at £4.70 per month for the option. This is correct for the standard ("non-renewable"!) option shown at Subpart 2 of Section 55; Part 3:Calling Plans - Unlimited Anytime Plan.

The 12-month renewable option is covered by subparts 1 and 3  - giving the option fee as £6.20 per month + line rental, with a £1 per month discount = £5.20.

BT may point out that although this booklet is presented to existing customers, it is only for the purposes of general guidance, as it relates to terms made available to new customers - "Getting a Residential Phone Line". This is however rather odd as the Price List indicates that the 12-month renewable option is "not available for new supply"!

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2011 at 4:49pm:

BT can charge whatever it likes...

It can and does and thanks to Ofcom for removing BTs restrictions do we now get price increase after price increase and it's now becoming common place to have several increases in a short space of time (like a year).

Although there are other companies providing line-rental services, the major ones just copy of BT so really there isn't much competition happening.

TalkTalk have already announced their price increases so it wont be long before others follow.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 3^rd, 2011 at 4:49pm:

Dave wrote on Sep 2nd, 2011 at 1:48pm: I wonder in practice, how common these sorts of errors are. Also, what about the number that do and don't get noticed? BT can charge whatever it likes - this is not actually a billing error as the bills have been in accordance with the published Price List. The General Conditions exist to protect all consumers from improper action by imposing a requirement for all price declarations for standard arrangements to be clear and up to date. I am waiting for BT to provide me with its justification of how it has declared the relevant prices to me and others before referring an alleged breach of General Conditions to Ofcom.

If bills have been in accordance with the published price list, then what is the issue? Is it that customers have not been notified, e.g. by letter or in BT Update?  :-?

Dave wrote on Sep 4^th, 2011 at 7:40pm:

If bills have been in accordance with the published price list, then what is the issue? Is it that customers have not been notified, e.g. by letter or in BT Update?  :-?

The BT Price List is but one of the means by which BT communicates its prices to customers. Specific price change announcements through bt.com and by email (and BT update for those who pay for the privilege of receiving it) would be expected to provide the clearest guidance as they are the most direct. The published "Tariff Guide" is also presented as being a reliable source of information.

Where a service is provided under many different terms there is a problem in that the customer cannot readily verify which of the various terms applies to themselves, as there is no consistent form of referencing used (e.g. a product code). If one sees an unqualified reference to the "Unlimited Anytime Plan" and the associated price, there can be no reason to believe that this may not relate to one's own subscription to this plan.

In this case, those committed to Unlimited Anytime on a 12 month renewing contract were paying the same price (£4.99 per month) as other subscribers to the Option. On 4 January 2011, they suffered an unannounced price increase (in excess of that necessary to accommodate the change in VAT rate) whilst others enjoyed a decrease in the VAT-exclusive price. The bizarre and exceptional nature of such an adjustment - increasing a price during a period of commitment, whilst the standard price decreased - surely demanded not only a declaration, but some explanation.

I believe it is fair to assume that customers will be guided more clearly by major announcements, emails and the "Tariff Guide" than by revisions to the (close to incomprehensible) Price List. That is the basis for my contention that GC 10 has been breached.

Dave wrote on Aug 28^th, 2011 at 12:38am:

Trenod wrote on Aug 27th, 2011 at 11:32pm: And their daytime call costs are getting beyond a joke now. 7.95p per minute, plus a connection charge of 13.1p per call? (13.1p?! Why not just make it a round 13p? Is that .1p of a penny absolutely *essential* for them in order to balance the books??? What penny-pinching cheapskates!). The reason is because each call is rounded up to the next whole penny, so with a Call Set-up fee of 13 pence the minimum charge would be 13 + 7.95 = 20.95 pence which is rounded up to 21 pence. But with a 13.1 Call Set-up fee, the minimum charge is 13.1 + 7.95 = 21.05 pence which is rounded up to 22 pence. Trenod wrote on Aug 27th, 2011 at 11:32pm: From December, a 30-minute geographic daytime call on BT will cost £2.52 - 12p more than the same call on some mobile operators

I'll still be paying a maximum of 5p for my weekday daytime 01/02/03 calls from my BT line.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2011 at 11:18am:

... the comment that Unlimited Anytime is the "most popular" calling plan needs to be understood. One would take this to mean that it has more subscriptions than any of the other 3 alternatives: Unlimited Evenings and Weekends, Unlimited Weekends and BT Basic. The figures released do however leave this open to some doubt. We are told that "Unlimited Anytime" has "more than 3.5 million customers", however the numbers of customers for each of the alternatives are not released.

I have been asked to explain the highlighted comments above.

They were included in the BT media release which gave rise to the many articles published on 27 August. Although I could not give a link at the time, it is now published  - BT announces price updates – then freezes key prices until 2013.


Quote:

[The Unlimited Anytime Calls Plan] is now BT’s most popular calls plan with more than 3.5 million customers.

If this is the most popular calls plan overall, its terms must surely represent the norm for those who make calls during the weekday daytime. The penalty charge incurred in the exceptional circumstances when a subscriber to another plan makes a weekday daytime call to an otherwise inclusive geographic rate number cannot be used as a fair point for comparison with the premium charge incurred when calling a 0844 number.

Similarly, calls to 0845 numbers cannot be said to be generally cheaper than calls to geographic rate numbers.

I remain disappointed that BT will not endorse this point, nor offer a stronger base of evidence for my assertion.

---

My battle with BT over the misrepresentation of the cost of the Anytime package for some customers continues.

My mum has just received an email of these prices increases.

This BT page provides more information on the price increases from 3rd December 2011 onwards.

What I couldn't find on their website but is mentioned in the email is that they are removing the paper-free discount as well.

I know why they can say they aren't increasing some prices until 2013 after this price increase and that's because there have been so many price increases recently.

Naturally, thanks to what OfcoN calls competition within the landline market, the major (then eventually the remainder) will announce price increases as well now.

bbb_uk wrote on Nov 8^th, 2011 at 7:21pm:

My mum has just received an email of these prices increases. This BT page provides more information on the price increases from 3rd December 2011 onwards. What I couldn't find on their website but is mentioned in the email is that they are removing the paper-free discount as well. I know why they can say they aren't increasing some prices until 2013 after this price increase and that's because there have been so many price increases recently. Naturally, thanks to what OfcoN calls competition within the landline market, the major (then eventually the remainder) will announce price increases as well now.

So, from that do I deduce that we can go back to having bills in the post again?  I might ask for them but  guess I will get two finger salute. ;)


It is rather like the solar panels.


Get you hooked and then take away the carrot.


In BT's case the paperless bills

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 2^nd, 2011 at 11:19am:

... Further to the preceding posting, my second concern is over a charging error for customers who still subscribe to the "annually renewed" option for Unlimited Anytime. At some points this was the only (or cheapest) way of subscribing to Unlimited Anytime, although that has now changed. At least one customer (myself) has been the victim of what have been acknowledged as charging errors under this option, even though the charges billed were as shown in the formal BT Price List!! I describe the two errors below.... and ... We have no idea what will happen to the charges for this item on 3 December. and ... I have therefore drawn BT's attention to the fact that I propose to take this matter to Ofcom also, once it has had a chance to address it properly.

Hello

As you suspected, you are not the only one affected by this. Until I found this thread the other week, I thought I was going astray somewhere with my calculations. I would be very interested in hearing how you resolved the matter, as even with an escalated complaint ongoing, the issue is not being 'understood' by those handling same........I also have experience, now, of what happened to rolling-contracts that would have been due (had they not been abolished) after 3rd Dec 2011.......this too has caused issues which I am sure you would like to hear further about.

I am probably putting this in the wrong place, so apoloies in advance if I have ;)

I was talking to someone last night who has the 'anytime plan' with BT. He was telling me that when he dials a 0845 number that is followed by seven numbers instead of six, he gets charged.

I could not believe what I was hearing and assured me for this particular call (I have no idea who it was for) he got charged 44 pence.

Is this correct? I can't find anything about this type of call on the BT web site, which does not mean it is not hidden away somwhere.

Anyone ever come accross this before?

Thanks

sherbert wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 8:04am:

I am probably putting this in the wrong place, so apoloies in advance if I have ;) I was talking to someone last night who has the 'anytime plan' with BT. He was telling me that when he dials a 0845 number that is followed by seven numbers instead of six, he gets charged. I could not believe what I was hearing and assured me for this particular call (I have no idea who it was for) he got charged 44 pence. Is this correct? I can't find anything about this type of call on the BT web site, which does not mean it is not hidden away somwhere. Anyone ever come accross this before? Thanks

BT do charge for certain 0845 numbers regardless of which plan you are on or he went over the 60 minutes duration, or exceeded the monthly allowance of 150 calls, or 1000 minutes to these numbers :-

From HERE, (http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/consumerProducts/displayTopic.do?topicId=25512#legals) then click on "The legal stuff"

Inclusive calls to 0845 and 0870 numbers. Inclusive 0845 and 0870 calls of up to 60 minutes duration (excluding indirect access numbers and dial-up internet access) available dependent on your Calling Plan: weekends only (with the Unlimited Weekend Plan), evening & weekends (with the Unlimited Evening & Weekend Plan), or any time (with the Unlimited Anytime Plan). Fair use policy applies – max. 1,000 mins or 150 calls a month. If either of these limits on free calls is exceeded, BT will charge for these calls until further notice See Terms & Conditions for full details.

.

sherbert wrote on May 13^th, 2012 at 8:04am:

I am probably putting this in the wrong place, so apoloies in advance if I have ;) I was talking to someone last night who has the 'anytime plan' with BT. He was telling me that when he dials a 0845 number that is followed by seven numbers instead of six, he gets charged.

There are no 0845 numbers with six digits (following the 0845 prefix). All are 0845 + 7-digits (except for NHS Direct which is an unusually short number, 0845 4647).

Some 0845 numbers are chargeable, such as those being identified as being used for dial-up. This is the same with geographic numbers.

Thanks for that guys :)

Quote:

I was talking to someone last night who has the 'anytime plan' with BT. He was telling me that when he dials a 0845 number that is followed by seven numbers instead of six, he gets charged.

The only 08 numbers that are shorter than usual (where 'usual' is a 0 followed by 10 digits) are some 0800 numbers (which have a 0 followed by 9 digits) and the two special numbers 0800 11 11 and 0845 46 47 (both of which have a 0 followed by 7 digits).

All other 08 numbers (0808, 084x and 087x) have a 0 followed by 10 digits.

Additionally, all 0500 numbers are shorter than usual (for 0500 numbers the 0 is always followed by 9 digits).

Thanks for all the replies.

However, how do you recognise a 0845 number that is going to be charged outside the calling plan before you make the call?

Thanks :)

sherbert wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 7:37am:

Thanks for all the replies. However, how do you recognise a 0845 number that is going to be charged outside the calling plan before you make the call? Thanks :)

Unfortunately, in the same way that you know which network a mobile number is connected to (as this could make a significant difference to the cost call treatment) :(

You rely on what you know about the person you are calling, or what they have told you.

In the case of a 0845 number being used for indirect access or internet dial-up you are likely to know why you are calling the number.

In the context of "simplifying non-geographic numbers", these anomalies (which have presumably been exceptionally allowed to remain) need to be cleared up.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on May 15^th, 2012 at 8:45am:

sherbert wrote on May 15th, 2012 at 7:37am: Thanks for all the replies. However, how do you recognise a 0845 number that is going to be charged outside the calling plan before you make the call? Thanks :) Unfortunately, in the same way that you know which network a mobile number is connected to (as this could make a significant difference to the cost call treatment) :( You rely on what you know about the person you are calling, or what they have told you. In the case of a 0845 number being used for indirect access or internet dial-up you are likely to know why you are calling the number. In the context of "simplifying non-geographic numbers", these anomalies (which have presumably been exceptionally allowed to remain) need to be cleared up.

Thanks :)