Let's face it, if Ofcom do nothing about 084/087 problems, then they really are completely useless. We therefore need to lobby MPs, MEPs and so on. We need to list the catalogue of failings of this Office.

Of course the allowance of 18866 to increase its charges with no communication to its customers other than the website (especially when it has emailed them before) should be on that list.

It does beg the question; what else is there that it should be doing [for the citizen consumer] that it is not?

Quote:

True.

Pricing information has never been high on its agenda, let alone clear pricing information. We must include lack of the policing of premium rate numbers, what with rogue diallers and 'prize winning' scams on this list. And the lack of powers that ICSTIS has in making companies pay its 'fines'.

On the subject of premium rate 'services', remember the unsuspecting mobile phone user who is fleeced by reverse-charged premium rate text messages and the poor networks who can do nothing to stop it.

Quote:

Good point. This must be technically possible, I can't think why something like this hasn't been devised.

A bit like Direct Debits from a bank account. If I go to my internet banking, I can see a list of DDs that have come out of my account recently. I can cancel or reinstate them from there.

A similar system could be adopted by mobile phone networks, where you quote the short code and they can electronically stop you receiving any more messages.

Or, as you say, it's done on an opt-in basis for each individual 'service', maybe where the user enters a PIN that has been setup with their provider.

I have now received this more encouraging email from David Stewart, Director of Investigations at Ofcom, in response to  my complaint that the various Finarea telecoms brands (and in particular 18866) do not operate an Alternate Dispute Resolution Scheme.

If Finarea can only offer their service by unacceptably cutting corners then they must face the inevitable consequences.  Also if they don't want people to complain about their lack of an ADR scheme to Ofcom then they shouldn't increase prices without telling us and they shouldn't ignore our emails.


-----Original Message-----
From: David Stewart [mailto:David.Stewart@ofcom.org.uk]
Sent: 22 September 2005 14:51
Cc: Matt Peacock; Ed Richards
Subject: RE: Failure to Take Action Against Finarea Over Non Membership of Otelo or other Alternate Disputes Resolution Procedures


Thank you for your note to Ed Richards about Finarea’s lack of membership of an ADR scheme.

I can report that Ofcom already has an active enforcement program in relation to membership of ADR schemes. On 16 August 2005 Ofcom opened an industry wide investigation into compliance with General Condition 14.4, which requires Communications Providers to implement and comply with an Ofcom-approved independent Dispute Resolution scheme for their domestic and small business customers. Our objective is to reduce the number of companies who are not members of ADR schemes, thereby ensuring that the schemes are available to consumers as widely as possible.

We know that more than 300 communications providers, including many of the largest operators, have already implemented an ADR through being a member of either Otelo or CISAS, meaning ADR is available to consumers in the majority of cases. Our current investigation is monitoring compliance with General Condition 14.4 across the industry and will target those communications providers who are not members of a Scheme.

Companies that don’t comply with the requirement for ADR membership could face serious consequences. Under section 94 of the Communications Act 2003 ("the Act"), Ofcom may issue a notification where it has reasonable grounds for believing there has been a contravention of a General Condition.  If companies do not comply with the requirements of the notification, under Section 96 of the Act, Ofcom may impose a penalty of up to 10 per cent of turnover for failure to comply with such a notification within the time period specified.

In the light of your email, we will include Finarea in the companies being considered. The investigation is on-going so it wouldn’t be appropriate to comment further, although further information can be obtained by looking at the Ofcom website, under the Competition Bulletin: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/bulletins/comp_bull_index/comp_bull_ocases/open_all/cw_8....

I hope this addresses your concern.

Regards,

David Stewart

:: David Stewart
  Director of Investigations
  020 7783 4173

Actually I was a major supporter of Finarea and their telecoms brands but I have found their latest behaviour to be very disappointing and quite unacceptable.  Thus my attitude towards them has changed.

I suspect that people who make repeated calls for 2 hours with Finarea brands just because they can are far more likely to bring down the present Finarea model of charging than my own criticism of the company's hidden price rises.

If these people keep up with their several hour long calls then I expect the connection fee will soon have to be 5p, just so that I and all the other people who normally make short calls can subsidise these abusers.  I would recommend Finarea giving us an initial 20 minutes for 2p connection and then charging a penny a minute thereafter.  This would bring those who suffer from verbal diarrohea to heal.

Quote:


I cancelled my 18866 account because they were the ones who imposed the unnotified price rise and also ignored my customer service emails.

I still have an account with 1899 who have not yet made any of the errors that I found offensive in 18866.  Although they may well be part of the same telecoms group I suspect that different human beings may still be involved in business decisions on each different Finarea sub-brand.

Just a quick message to congratulate you on introducing the concept of the "Ofcom Duck".
Quite cheered me up, before plunging me back into depression that such a concept should even exist. Still, I can digress into maiden overs, own goals and so on - off topic and off screen, I hasten to add.