I have emailed them about this as well. Will feedback any response.

To: mail@ico.gsi.gov.uk

Quote:

Remember that for most of the time companies and gov departments aren't aware of the difference or that it's misleading, etc.  Why should they when most teleco's selling these numbers are still allowed to say that they're either local or national rate?  This is due to Ofcom and their lack of wanting to do anything.

bbb_uk wrote on Jan 11^th, 2007 at 10:48pm:


Sorry bbb but there is absolutely no excuse for the

Information Commissioner's Office

of all places to get this kind of thing wrong.  The Information Commissioner's Office is all about companies disclosing correct information so what hope if it can't do it for itself!

The strange thing is that I have been to the ICO's website quite a lot over the last 18 months and up to now they have always only ever quoted a geographic 01 number and no other number.  And I had always thought this was because they realised the public perception harm of using anything other than a geographic number for their office.

So it is extremely hard to believe that at this point in time they should be conned into signing up for a new 0845 number. But has some numpty new website manager there come across the old number that was long ago deleted and had it relisted?

Sorry bbb but the ICO getting this wrong is only one away from Ofcom getting it wrong as one of the ICO's main jobs is to control illegal selling activities by making phone calls to people who are TPS registered etc.

Oh and the main people to write to are:-

richard.thomas@ico.gsi.gov.uk  -  Information Commissioner
susan.fox@ico.gsi.gov.uk          -  Comms & External Relations
simon.entwisle@ico.gsi.gov.uk   -  Chief Operating Officer

You might also like to quote to them all these references including the one from the CEO of BT Retail, Ian Livingston, showing why 084/7 numbers are not Local/National rate and are a scam that in his view discredit telecoms companies.

The view of a county council trading standards department

Para 1.3 Page 1 of www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/oftel_0845/responses/leicester_cc.pdf

and

the view of the CEO of BT Retail, Ian Livingston

http://business.scotsman.com/banking.cfm?id=764772005

and

two recent guidances from the Advertising Standards Authority

www.asa.org.uk/cap/news_events/news/2005/Hanging+on+the+telephone+on+and+on+and+ on.htm

www.asa.org.uk/cap/news_events/news/2005/Stop+the+call+confusion.htm

and

the Parliamentary Early Day motion deploring the use of 0870 telephone numbers by government departments

http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=28872%09%09%09%09%09%09%09&...; amp;SESSION=875

and

Another guidance from the Committee of Advertising Practice of the Advertising Standards Authority

www.cap.org.uk/cap/news_events/news/2005/CAP+rings+the+changes+for+telecoms+prov...

and Pages 5 and 6 of the below minutes from my own district council where we agreed policy to stop the future use of 0845 and 0870 numbers.

www.molevalley.gov.uk/media/pdf/1/s/Council_Minutes_190705.pdf

And the most recent ASA guidance saying that Inclusive call packages must not fail to disclose that 084/7 calls are excluded from them.

www.cap.org.uk/cap/news_events/news/2006/Ringing+the+Changes.htm

derrick wrote on Jan 15^th, 2007 at 1:57pm:


Actually its her job as the no doubt highly overpaid director of Communications to monitor and correct the crass error made by her customer service manager or website manager.  Still perhaps she was too busy whizzing off to a nice lunch of conference to have time to deal with the issue.

I think a few more emails from other forum members with cc to ed.carter@ofcom.org.uk, sean.williams@ofcom.org.uk and matt.peacock@ofcom.org.uk are required to make Ms Fox realise there is a problem here.

Derrick you might also care to email Ms Fox the link to this discussion thread with cc to Mr Thomas and Mr Entwisle.

derrick wrote on Jan 15^th, 2007 at 2:18pm:


But like ministers she is the one who ought to resign if they screw up because she hasn't been keeping tabs on what they are up to.

derrick wrote on Jan 15^th, 2007 at 2:27pm:


Emails to the directors of organisations usually cause these matters to receive the attention they deserve in my experience.  Whereas emails to customer service departments usually cause them to be ignored as most customer service employees seem incapable of understanding significant policy issues.

If you want to find another regulator doing the wrong thing on phone numbers try none other than the telecoms ombudsman www.otelo.org.uk/content.php?pageID=99&PHPSESSID=992c6e7b40091aec003ef7c2237bb2f... where you find their 0845 number described as "Our phone number" and their geographic 01 phone number as "our regional phone number".  But what exactly is a regional phone number as BT abolished regional phone call rate at least 10 years ago.

In Otelo's case I have tried raising this several times with them but their IT manager responsible for their website is a moron (I know because I have tried discussing this with him on the phone and ended up hanging up in fury at his ignorance, arrogance and stupidity) and absolutely refuses to accept that this is incorrect.  With the ICO on the other hand I had always been pleased that they only ever displayed a geographic phone number on their website for at least the last two years so where the 0845 phone number described as being local rate has suddenly come from heaven only knows.