Continued From Above Post................./

2. Charges For calls outside the Billing Period

I also wish to complain about calls that are listed on what is supposed to be a bill for 5th October to 4th January that are dated from 14th July to 1st October.  I would like to know why PostOffice HomePhone is billing me belatedly for calls outside the billing period?  Also I am unhappy about the prices charged for these calls, when I routed them with BT using the 1280 over-ride code, as they have not been charged at the BT rate for 0845 and 0870 numbers but have been charged at the Post Office HomePhone's higher rates for calling these numbers.  Can you explain to me how you are allowed to charge me a higher rate for these 084/7 NTS calls than BT's normal rate when they were actually routed with BT?  When I was a BT customer and I routed calls with other indirect access suppliers using their indirect access codes those calls were always charged at the rates applicable to the supplier I was making the calls with and not BT's rates.  If BT offers a lower price for routing a call than the Post Office (who promises to always beat BT's rates) then why should I not be able to use it.  Also why do you charge substantially higher prices for 084/7 NTS calls than BT when all your other call standard call prices are lower - what is it about NTS calls that means you have to charge a higher price for them per minute than BT?

3. Charge for Caller Display of £5.25 per quarter when it is Free of Charge for BT Privacy Customers

I would like to complain in the strongest possible terms about this charge made by Post Office Homephone for Caller Display when if I was a BT customer and registered for their BT Privacy service, as I previously was, that service has no charge.  This has the net effect of making my total quarterly payment for line rental and caller display service with Post Office Homephone £35.10 compared to only £33 at BT for line rental and Caller Display.  I do not understand how this correlates with repeated claims by Post Office HomePhone to always have "cheaper line rental than BT"?  So far as I am concerned caller display is not a service that should be charged for by either yourselves or by BT when basically all UK mobile phone operators provide the service free of charge and also the System X phone exchange equipment used by BT that provides it is over 25 years old and long since written off in terms of purchased cost.  If Post Office HomePhone had an equivalent of BT Privacy I would register with it but I do not believe you have such a service?  Perhaps you can comment on why you do not have an equivalent of BT Privacy and so the overall cost of line rental and Caller Display (which is the one select service that I and most UK phone customers now regard as indispensable) is more expensive with Post Office HomePhone than with BT?

4. Misdescription of 0845 and 0870 Uncontrolled Premium Rate Calls as "Local Rate Call" and "National Rate Call"

I am very unhappy to see you still misdescribing the cost of calls to non geographic 0845 and 0870 numbers on my phone bill as Local Rate and National Rate when in fact they are an example of what BT has long called Special Rate Services in the BT Phone Book and which Ofcom, in one consultation document on Premium Rate Numbers, called uncontrolled premium rate (that is involving a revenue share but charged at under 10p per minute and not controlled by ICSTIS).  And bearing in mind that your 0845 and 0870 calls are 10% or more higher than BT's prices at most times of day and that they have never been the same for these numbers as the old BT Standard call tariff (now only paid by the small number of BT customers who qualify for the BT Light User Scheme) it seems to me an act of the greatest possible cynicism and deception to call them Local Rate and National Rate when they have no linkage whatsoever with the old Local Rate and National Rate charged on the BT Standard tariff.  I have been involved in a long series of correspondence with Ian Livingston, CEO of BT Retail and John Strutt, General Manager of BT Pricing Section and with Ofcom about BT's repeated misdescription of 0845 and 0870 numbers as Lo-Call and National Rate despite most customers not paying that rate if they are on BT Option 1 (which is in fact BT Basic to all intents and purposes despite its misleading brand name) Option 2 or Option 3.  As a result of this the latest BT phone bills now finally show 0845 rate and 0870 rate on latest bills over two years after BT abolished the old BT Standard Rate to which it was relevant.  Please can you make the same change to your billing to show 0845 Rate and 0870 Rate as I regard this continued misselling of the cost of 0845 and 0870 calls by people in the telecoms industry as utterly deplorable. However if you do not feel able to make this change then I will feel compelled to pursue it as a formal complaint with the ASA and on through to Otelo.

So as you can see I have a large number of issues with the accuracy of my Post Office HomePhone Bill and especially the outrageous £4.20 fee levied for calling a BT landline number that was misrouting if I called it directly. I therefore look forward to hearing further from you about these matters in due course.

Regards,

Heinz wrote on Feb 7^th, 2007 at 5:17pm:


No sorry Heinz the call did route with BT.  That's why it took 3 months extra for the calls to work their way back to the Post Office bill from BT who clearly billed them for the calls.

It is the Post Office HomePhone's choice not to block 1280.  Given that they don't I naturally assume they are providing a choice to make calls at BT rates where I prefer and where BT is cheaper (i.e 084/7 NTS which the Post Office describe as Local Rate Call and National Rate Call on their bils whilst not even charging old BT Standard Rates).  You won't find other indirect access providers you don't have a billing arrangement with letting you make calls through their indirect access code.

My position is that BT's rivals on WLR should offer the same service as BT.  That is they should be able to make a profit just from selling you the very expensive £30+ per quarter line rental and they should have to give you access to other networks to give them every incentive to keep all their call charges low to keep you calling with them.  Allowing them to block access to other providers encourages them to have a ripoff call class like 084/7 where they charge more than BT prices.

I see you have no comment though on a £4.20 charge for calling the Operator about a number with a routing fault.  Surely that charge is outrageous when its far more than any 09 flat rate charge and you don't get a voice announcement about it or have to press 1 on your kepad to assent to it.

Surely it is quite wrong that a monstrous charge like £4.20 can be levied for calling the operator and not even included in any of their publised price tariffs?

Heinz wrote on Feb 7^th, 2007 at 5:33pm:


By letting me have an online account with them the same way as www.18185.co.uk or whoever else.

Surely its the height of complacency for BT to think they have so many legacy customers that they don't also need to shop around for the calls business of customers who take their line rental from another company.

I actually expected the calls to appear on the Post Office Home Phone bill but charged at the Bt tariff since that is the call routing path they took to reach their destination.

If I call 150 on my Post Office HomePhone line the service is blocked and I have to call the PO Homephone's 0800 number to reach them.  So as they have this capability if they don't want me to route calls with BT then it would be natural to assume the 1280 code would not operate.  But as it happens P O Homephone (who use Cable & Wireles for call routing) block a large number of 0871 and 0844 dial thru call numbers so you have to dial 1280 to access those services on a P O Homephone line.

You still haven't commented on the more signficant element of my original post - namely the rip off fee for calling the operator.

NGMsGhost wrote on Feb 7^th, 2007 at 5:30pm:

They should, but this is Ofcom we're talking about and the UK telecoms industry. Hence why advice from bbb_uk and Heinz is to keep your line rental with BT.

NGMsGhost wrote on Feb 7^th, 2007 at 5:30pm:

And at the heart of what Ofcom does is choice and competition. This is choice. Not a good one, but it's still choice.

At the end of the day, I can't see that you have a leg to stand on with regards using the 1280 prefix as you don't have a contract with BT. Evidently BT don't bar the 1280 prefix if you don't have an account with them, and instead bill the WLR telco.

NGMsGhost wrote on Feb 7^th, 2007 at 11:11pm:

And when you do, keep a wary eye on THIS PAGE - which I try to keep up-to-date with regard to best routes for any unavoidable 0845/0870 dialling.

NGM'sG,

Much as we all hate BT and would dearly love to get out of their clutches completely I still do not believe any of the other options for line rental yet offer real overall advantages, principally because BT still have a virtual monopoly and have Ofcom's ear. I suspect you may have to go back to BT ultimately until there is a real change in the options, particularly when The Post Office pull tricks like this.

Heinz wrote on Feb 7^th, 2007 at 8:54pm:


Yes I got the £25 off each of my second and third phone bills with them automatically on the bill (so not like a mobile phone deal where you have to remember to send in the coupons) and I also got £15 Cashback from Greasy Palm as well.  So £65 minus £4.50 over the six months in extra Caller Display cost (Post Office line rental is £1 per month cheaper but then you have to pay £1.75 per month for Caller Display that is free with BT Privacy) is a pretty good deal.  Especially as they do not stop use of indirect access services like 18185 - or at least not so far, although I fear my email may rather have put the cat among the pigeons on that score.

I was going to move back to BT in October straight away after I had got the full cash back and the only reason I didn't was because BT bought in their horrid connection charge con and per minute charging and even had the audacity to apply the connection fee to 0845 and 0870 numbers.  Whereas the Post Office still have no connection fee and per second billing.  And their customer service people are UK based, on an 0800 number and quite pleasant.

The Operator connection fee charge is an outrage though, both because of the high level of the fee which you are not told about in advance when you are going to be connected and so cannot choose to avoid, and because I know that BT do not impose it on their own customers wishing to have a call that is misrouting to its destination on a UK landline connected by the Operator.  This is clearly BT manipulating the letter of the charging regulations to give customers who choose its competitors WLR product a negative experience with them.  And since the Operator service is still provide by BT they are in a brilliant position to be able to do this.

A sign of the complete and utter uselessness of Ofcom and its overpaid senior executives is that I have not even had an email back from Steve Unger, their head of telecoms based products, who I copied in on the correspondence to tell me whether or not it was a matter that he and Ofcom might take any interest in.  A Read Receipt does however show that he received my email.