I'm not sure why it is taking the poor old Home Office so long to look up a
telephone number or two, but here is its response to my FOI request of Feb
1. Hopefully it will be as forthcoming as the DVLA.

>>

I am writing regarding your information request dated 1 February 2005 in
which you ask several questions about the Home Office's use of 0870
telephone numbers.

I regret that we have been unable to comply with your request within 20
working days, as required by the Freedom of Information Act (the 20 day
period having expired on 1 March). I would like to offer my sincere
apologies for this delay and for any inconvenience that this may cause. I am
also sorry that we had not acknowledged receipt of your request before now.
However I would like to assure you that we are dealing with your request as
a matter of urgency, and that we will send you a full reply as soon as
possible. I anticipate that we will be able to do so before the end of next
week.

If you have any queries about the handling of your information request in
the meantime then please do not hesitate to contact me without delay.

Quote:


This is just brilliant IDB.

Although I quite clearly also have a real bee in my bonnet over this issue even I have not yet got round to pursuing the FOI angle.  If you do get these geographic numbers, in addition to the DVLA ones, I would put out a press release to all the now interested journalists saying what you did and why and what the geographic phone numbers for these place are.  Yes even a private citizen can put out a press release if the news is something that journalists will want to print - and I am sure they will in this case.

I am sure that this has been delayed awaiting an important policy level meeting with none other than Mr Charles Clarke , Secretary of State.  No doubt his slimey telecoms manager will try to think of reasons not to do it but since the geographic number can be published in addition to the continuation of 0870 I don't see how they can raise any objectons on operational grounds.  Unless of course they try to maintain that these numbers are redirected by VoiP and that the final switch is not a geographic number.  If so I would ask for them to publish their VoiP address.

Since David Blunkett is the guilty man here I am sure Mr Clarke can agree to axe the 0870s without getting any egg on his face.

Have you thought of an FOI request for the geographic phone number to the Labour Party's HQ.  Or are they not covered by the FOI.  I had better go and read a synopsis of the legislation.

I am sure it is actually a secret high level new labour policy to switch to 0870 to increase indirect taxation revenues.

Quote:

So far as New Labour are concerned I should have thought that it was covered by the FOI so long as you became a member of the Labour party first?  Then as a Member you would have the same need to access a geographic number as for a body providing services to all of the general public.  Or are political parties specifically excluded from the FOI requirements?

BAA are a very worthy target of your attentions.  They are one of the biggest exploiters of these numbers and yet effectively are a monopoly supplier of many aspects of vital public service type airport information (putting out an announcement for a lost relative etc).  In fact their head office in Wilton Rd does of course have a geographic number but they seem unwilling to put one through to the car park charges line, the tannoy announcement line etc, etc.

But since you are so committed to the FOI road the people that you must ask the question to next are the BBC regarding both BBC Information and BBC Reception Advice (aka Capita Moneygrubbers Inc of BELFAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSST.)

Since the BBC is basically a public sector body owned by the license payers (aka the taxpayers) they must surely be totally covered by the FOI.  Also the two main 0870 numbers, published in every uk phone directory in a big half page spread must surely receive thousands of calls per week.  And it is a number with which both Dave and DaveM seem to have had no joy at all , either because the staff regime is reminiscent of a concentration camp or because the average member of their call centre staff has such a low IQ that they are unable to comprehend the difference between a geographic and an NGN number and thus unable to feel any outrages about the matter.  My own experiences of their staff would lead me to believe that Capita in fact only employing unquestioning human robots.  Anyone else is sacked in less than about 1 hour.

BBC Information really makes me mad as when you ring them with a burning issue on some program or other the staff will listen to you and then just say WELLLLLLLL THAAAAAANKKYAAAAAAAAAAAA VERYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY MACHHHHHHHHH FOR THATTT and not even then ask for your name and postcode or your address.  Only if pressed that you actually want a response to your complaint do they take your name and address but I have never received any response yet from a member of BT editorial or management staff in response to a complaint.

Its a pure call taking factory that has no interest in soothing irate viewers and just treats them like cannon fodder simply counting one against each call as a certain complaint type.   The complaints are almost never investigated or resolved.

These guys are so unhlepful that the very least we deserve is surely to suffer with them for only 1p rather than say for 100p!

Quote:


Who was that for?

Quote:

Hi kk,

Don't these bodies have the right to charge you for any of this information though, especially with regard to their own staff time in compiling it?

I saw something regarding the London Mayor and the Greater London Assembly, suggesting that you could ask FOI questions but that they reserved the right to charge for their staff time in fulfilling them.  It seemed to me to be a minimum of £500 a time?

Presumably you haven't had a suggestion you will be billed in relation to the requests you have made though?

Another response received from the IND today. This must really be a complex issue for them as it is taking so long to address!

>>>

I am writing to you to apologise for the continued delay in responding to
your request for information, which is taking longer to process than we had
hoped. I would like to assure you that we are working on your request and
will respond to it, as soon as we are able.

IND Information Access Team

Quote:


They appear to be playing for time so that they do not have to respond until after the new Ofcom policy on this issue is announced.

Why not make a complaint about their response time to the Information Commissioner?

Quote:


The Office of the Information Commissioner seem a pretty useless bunch.  I have complained about them not following up on a complaint I filed with the TPS about a call violating TPS fules but now the Information Commissioner claims that the TPS does not provide them with any information on individual complaints.  However a senior manager at TPS maintains that this is a total lie and that the IC has everything they need to follow up an individual complaint that has been passed on  to them by the TPS.  What is lacking at the IC is seemingly the will to do so.

Can I suggest you complain to the Comptroller and Auditor General of the NAO to whom the Information Commissioner reports:-

john.bourn@nao.gsi.gov.uk

Alse email the Information Commissioner himself:-

richard.thomas@ico.gsi.gov.uk