SAYNOTO0870.COM - Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan

Dave

Global Moderator

Offline

Posts: 9,902
Yorkshire
Gender: male

Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan
Reply #165 - May 24^th, 2006 at 7:41pm

bbb_uk wrote on May 24^th, 2006 at 1:53pm:

Ultimately, I believe it will be passed on to us end users/consumers in some way or another.

Another stealth tax and another small increase in line rental. Cry

Quote:

As for competition? - I also can't see there being any except for businesses that may fight over "gold" type numbers but then they end up using NGN's anyhow!

Ofcom seems to live in a cloud cuckoo land where more providers applying for numbers means more competition for the citizen-consumer. With NTL and Telewest becoming one, I think we are at the stage of competition being extinct within cable providers. All the local cable companies like Yorkshire Cable have now been swallowed up and they have become one. Cry

The only other choice I can see for the general consumer after BT and cable (for those who live in cabled streets) is VoIP.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dave Global Moderator Offline Posts: 9,902 Yorkshire Gender:	Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan Reply #166 - May 25^th, 2006 at 11:12am Just received another of Ofcom's emails about another consultation on the conservation of geographical numbers. It's funny cause this Numbering Review covers that subject. So why not wait for one to end and read the responses first?
Back to top	« Last Edit: May 25^th, 2006 at 11:13am by Dave » IP Logged

Dave

Global Moderator

Offline

Posts: 9,902
Yorkshire
Gender: male

Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan
Reply #167 - May 25^th, 2006 at 2:16pm

Just filling in my response, and still unsure as to what to put. It's a basic fundamental issue:

Assuming that 03 is brought in and is charged at geographical rates, should 0845/0870 be returned to geographical rates also?

It seems to be a catch 22 situation:

Yes, 0845/0870 should be charged at geographical rates; in which case, there won't be much incentive to migrate to 03, unless businesses see that consumers see the 08 numbers as bad, even though they are charged the same as 03.
No, 0845/0870 should be left as is; in which case if businesses want to charge no more than a geographical number, they must migrate. If many don't move or adopt the new 03 numbers, then consumer recognition of 03 will be slim.

The other option is that 0845/0870 providers are told that they must migrate to either another 08 number (to continue revenue sharing) or 03 (to charge the same rate as geographical).

This seems to be the crooks of the matter.

Back to top

IP Logged

bbb_uk

Global Moderator

Offline

Posts: 2,041

Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan
Reply #168 - May 25^th, 2006 at 4:12pm

I've put that if 0845/0870 do lose their revenue sharing and are consequently charged at geogrpahical rates then there is no need to have an 03x range. If this may not happen then 03x is a good idea so long as it is charged at geographical rates & included in any inclusive tariffs.

These numbers shouldn't be charged for as proposed by ofcom as then ultimately it will be passed on to us end users/consumers.

As for reasons to migrate to 03x then this is hard simply because it will cost gov dept/companies to have an 03x number whereas it is probably free for them to have an 0845 number.

I've said that it should be well published to companies/gov dept/teleco's, etc that these numbers are not local/national rate and generally cost more and in some cases upto 40p/min and are not included in any inclusive minutes/tariffs we may have.

Back to top

« Last Edit: May 25^th, 2006 at 4:20pm by bbb_uk »

IP Logged

Dave Global Moderator Offline Posts: 9,902 Yorkshire Gender:	Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan Reply #169 - May 25^th, 2006 at 4:28pm I have put the same thing as you bbb_uk, although I didn't answer the question of how to encourage SPs to move over to 03 numbers.
Back to top	IP Logged

gdh82

Full Member

Offline

Posts: 226

Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan
Reply #170 - May 25^th, 2006 at 5:56pm

Dave wrote on May 25^th, 2006 at 2:16pm:

It's a basic fundamental issue:

Assuming that 03 is brought in and is charged at geographical rates, should 0845/0870 be returned to geographical rates also? The other option is that 0845/0870 providers are told that they must migrate to either another 08 number (to continue revenue sharing) or 03 (to charge the same rate as geographical).

I realise this is all a bit idealistic but I've responded to these points like this: the re-structured '08' must be tightened up collectively (as opposed to just cutting the cost of 0870). This would mean the '08' range being re-classified as (lower cost) premium rate like its neighbouring '09' range, with the relevant safeguards/protection and include call cost announcements. This is only way of making it transparent and would make everyone aware of their true costs. 0870/0845 should be forced to migrate because it would confuse the new two digit banding structure and it might also help kick-start migration to '03'. To further help migration I've suggested that an '03' number should cost no more (to organisations) than an 0845 or equivalent number and have equivalent features otherwise there's a disincentive to migrate? I can dream, can't I Wink

Back to top

There's more of us that them, stick together and challenge 0870/0845 etc etc

IP Logged

gdh82 Full Member Offline Posts: 226	Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan Reply #171 - Jun 8^th, 2006 at 11:52am Just to add that more responses have been posted by Ofcom (approx 40): http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/numberingreview/responses/ I expect there's more to come because mine isn't there!
Back to top	There's more of us that them, stick together and challenge 0870/0845 etc etc IP Logged

kk

Senior Member

Offline

Posts: 354
Gender: male

Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan
Reply #172 - Jun 9^th, 2006 at 11:58am

I agree that we must have more to come, as my consultation response is not yet posted by Ofcom.

Of the smattering of responses I have looked at, the one below is direct and to the point. The same answer is given to all the questions.

“Response From Dr R.D Feltham

Question 1:What are your views on the strategic principles that Ofcom proposes
to apply to its numbering policy decisions? :

There is no point whatever in any Citizen Consumer sending you a response to this question, nor to any other concerning your continued condoning and assistance of the escalation of abuses to and within the original UK telephone numbering system, since you have demonstrated continuously that you pay no credence whatsoever to the opinion of Citizen Consumers; this is despite the fact that it is your duty under your remit to place the interest of citizen consumers first. That means FIRST which is not second or third or fourth!

Your principal means of parrying the opinion of Citizen Consumers is to procrastinate and have endless successive consultations all in reality about the same issues, but called by a different newly invented name, to avoid facing up to your responsibilties and primary purpose under the Act, so that instead you can foster and assist the commercial interests of telcos instead. In reality you already know the opinion of Citizen Consumers on this issue. They have already expressed it in your previous consulations.”

The above is repeated for all 62 questions.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jun 9^th, 2006 at 12:01pm by kk »

KK

IP Logged

NonGeographicalMan

Ex Member

Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan
Reply #173 - Jun 9^th, 2006 at 12:31pm

One wonders how many more such publicly available heavily critical responses to its consultations from credible people Ofcom can afford to have published on its website.

In view of the rather forthright comments of Hazel Blears in her own response on the failure of Ofcom to ensure free 101/999 access on Voip one wonders if there is in fact more to the recently announced impending departure of Stephen Carter than first meets the eye. Has he perhaps been repeatedly asked by the government to mend his ways in always putting the interests of telcos first ahead of citizen consumers and having failed to mend his ways in any form has now been asked to go before he is pushed? Wink

It will be interesting to see who the government agrees to allow Ofcom to appoint as Mr Carter's successor.

Back to top

IP Logged

Heinz

Supreme Member

Offline

Posts: 1,362
Essex

Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan
Reply #174 - Jun 9^th, 2006 at 2:12pm

I have to admit that, until I read Dr. Feltham's response (thank you kk), I had not bothered with this consultation (probably Ofcom's intention) because of its ridiculous length and convolution. His 'solution' prompted me to follow suit.

Matt Peacock has now received (and acknowledged receipt of):

Quote:

Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan - consultation response

Questions 1 to 61 inclusive.

I take it from the fact that this ‘consultation’ extends to 61 mainly pointless and convoluted questions – many of which repeat themselves or questions asked in previous ‘consultations’ – that you intend to continue ‘consulting’ until either nobody bothers replying or your planted responses outnumber the others so that you can justify introducing the changes you have clearly already decided upon.

I have clearly misunderstand your raison d'etre. I thought it was to be a champion of the public (whom you are supposed to serve) in the telecommunications field (I believe the term ‘consumer citizen’ is used) but it is abundantly obvious from the manner in which you have ignored responses to previous similar consultations that your sole intention is to champion your own positions as unaccountable regulators and to totally ignore your designated remit.

You have not even yet understood the definition of the phrase ‘premium rate’ (it simply means a rate higher than the normal rate charged) and continue to allow the use of premium rate charging in the 084 and 087 range of numbers. In fact, you even intend to perpetuate this anomaly and to continue to allow the deliberate confusion of the public.

I note that your CEO has recently indicated his intention to leave. I take it he has found another highly rewarded position within the UK telecommunications industry as a consequence of having looked after their interests - and not those of the public - during his period at the trough.

Let me be clear. The continued inclusion of chargeable numbers within the 08 range is an anomaly which needs to be rectified, not proliferated. Hence, the below should be the revised numbering plan:

01 and 02 - Geographical numbers

03 – Countrywide numbers charged at Geographical rates and included in call plans

04 and 05 – For future use

06 – Personal numbers

07 – Mobile numbers

08 – Freephone numbers

09 – Premium Rate numbers of all sorts (099 reserved for ‘adult lines’)

Regards.

Member of the general public

Later, I thought that, perhaps, I should have inserted that response in each of the 61 spaces on the response document instead. So I did!

And copy it to my MP. So I did.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jun 10^th, 2006 at 1:34pm by Heinz »

After years of ignoring govt. guidelines & RIPPING OFF Council Tax payers using 0845 numbers, Essex County Council changed to 0345 numbers on 2 November 2015

IP Logged

kk Senior Member Offline Posts: 354 Gender:	Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan Reply #175 - Jun 9^th, 2006 at 8:22pm Congratulations on an excellent response, Heinz; this is much more to the point than “playing the Ofcom game”.
Back to top	KK IP Logged

gdh82 Full Member Offline Posts: 226	Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan Reply #176 - Jun 16^th, 2006 at 9:29pm Even more posts now - I've just totted up 148... http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/numberingreview/responses/
Back to top	There's more of us that them, stick together and challenge 0870/0845 etc etc IP Logged

Heinz Supreme Member Offline Posts: 1,362 Essex	Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan Reply #177 - Jun 17^th, 2006 at 7:31pm gdh82 wrote on Jun 16^th, 2006 at 9:29pm: Even more posts now - I've just totted up 148... http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/numberingreview/responses/ And mine's still not there even though its receipt was acknowledged over a week ago.
Back to top	After years of ignoring govt. guidelines & RIPPING OFF Council Tax payers using 0845 numbers, Essex County Council changed to 0345 numbers on 2 November 2015 IP Logged

Dave

Global Moderator

Offline

Posts: 9,902
Yorkshire
Gender: male

Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan
Reply #178 - Jun 17^th, 2006 at 7:38pm

Heinz wrote on Jun 17^th, 2006 at 7:31pm:

And mine's still not there even though its receipt was acknowledged over a week ago.

Same here, although I didn't receive an acknowledgement and sent it in a few hours after the 'deadline', but that hasn't stopped Ofcom publishing others sent in 'late'.

Still, it's good to so many responses, and to hear that there are more to come.

Back to top

IP Logged

Dave

Global Moderator

Offline

Posts: 9,902
Yorkshire
Gender: male

Re: Ofcom review of UK Telephone Numbering Plan
Reply #179 - Jun 18^th, 2006 at 5:29pm

There are alot of responses from individuals. BT's and other big telcos have yet to be posted there. I also notice that throughout these consultations, service providers such as insurance companies and banks that operate large call centres have kept silent. As far as I am concerned, this is much like not voting and then having cause to complain about the way public services are operated.

The Telephone Helplines Association (THA) has responded to these consultations. In its response to this consultation (here) it says:
Quote:

Question 8: Do you agree with Ofcom?s proposal to open a new ?03? number range for non-geographic, non-revenue sharing services? : THA supports the introduction of a new 03- range where revenue share is not permitted and call costs are linked to that of the geographic 01- and 02- numbers. However, confusion may arise during any transition period between one system and another, so it may be useful to consider systems that minimise disruption, such as in Option 3a (e.g. converting existing 0845 numbers to 0345 numbers for services that wish to migrate).

Question 9:How should the ?03? range be structured, in terms of tariffs and services ?: Much of the current confusion about 084- and 087- numbers arises because the local and national cost distinctions do not apply to mobile networks and have almost disappeared for the majority of landline users whilst the associated terminology carried on in relation to non-geographic numbers.

In the longer term, it would seem sensible to abolish any distinctions between 'local' and 'national' call rates and to encourage providers to set their own standard rate for all numbers in the 01, 02 and 03 ranges. Whilst the 03 range may accommodate both 034- and 037- services migrated from their existing 084- or 087- numbers (Option 3a), these need not be charged differently (Option 3b).

It will be interesting to see what Telewest says. Remember that it has already started advising businesses that they might want to reconsider moving from 0870 to 0844 or 0871 here. The thread discussing this can be found here. This is despite Ofcom saying that they are purely proposals. So Telewest has an ulterior motive as it has already advised its customers on the best cause of action.

Back to top

IP Logged