To remove the posts themselves would remove the logical flow of the thread unless Simmond001 was to agree to also remove all their posts as well in response.

jgxenite wrote on Aug 13^th, 2007 at 12:23pm:


These 084 and 087 call thru numbers are about the only legitimate example of value added 084 and 087 services to the consumer that I can think of.  Also all the companies that operate them clearly state the pence per minute for calling, unlike the plethora of other ripoff merchants who operate 084 and 087 numbers and who frequently still try to pretend the numbers are charged at local rate or national rate.  Or they have inconveniently failed to educated their call centre staff out of this misapprehension which is inherent in the deliberately double dealing way Ofcom have allowed the cost of calling these numbers in comparison to other UK numbers to change without any efforts at publicising the fact on their part.

It now has 3,642 signatures and is in position 2 on the second page ordered by size of live 10 Downing Street petitions.  That's position 52 overall as there are 50 petitions per page.

It is about to move on to Page 1 where it will start to pick up a lot more signatures from people who visit to sign other popular petitions in the top 50 and come across this one.

I would be interested to know if most of the signatures have been generated just by traffic visiting this website and seeing the link on the home page?  Perhaps Daniel can reveal how many unique visitors a day this website now typically receives?

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 18^th, 2007 at 10:39am:


That'll go down well with people looking for privacy whilst visiting a doctor.

Still amazed that you (in you mind) appear to associate a single company with this practice against all of the advice you have been given. Do you have a petty grievance with NEG or is it ignorance?

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 18^th, 2007 at 11:13am:
but yet NEG would have their customers (surgeries, etc) and ultimately us patients believe that 0844 is local rate and costs from mobiles aren't that much different (I think I remember NEG mentioning that in a case study or something)!!!

NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 18^th, 2007 at 11:13am:


As i have stated (many many times) I do not approve of all aspects of the telecoms industry. It is abhorant that Bt charge a minimum 40pence charge for using a public payphone, especially when the callmay go to an automated nswer. I am not talking a surgery line here, but a general observance that call charges from payphones are far too high. BT will state that the cost of maintaining payphones has increases exponentially over the last 15 years, and the revenue collected from each payphone doesnot cover the cost. BT stated long ag that they would prefer to remove payphone from the majority of the UK, but are unable to under Government regulation.

Whether the individual surgeries can justify the use of 084's is not for debate here as we are not offering them to right to respond. It is surely up to them to decide whether it will negatively or positively affect their business. Patients do have the option to move doctors if they wish, and as GP's incomes are based partly on the number of patients they have this would be an effective way for patients to show their dissatisfaction.

I again believe however that if there is a benefit to using the system (on phone appointment booking, checking in at surgery, auto divert to out of hours servics/surgeries etc..) that the cost of a phone call is a very small price to pay. The aspect of not being able to call internationally could be very easily solved by offering a central geo number that transfers the call or takes  message for the individual surgeries and passes this on within a short timeframe (2 minutes  by email would be simple to set up). The individual surgery could then respond directly to the hospital / doctor that is requesting information. This could also be easily set up to via a telephone translation service that would remove the issue of language.

Of course, this all has to be paid for, but as with everything, quality service costs.

simond001,

I enjoy your intelligent posts such as your last one more than your rather patronising or belittling ones.  Clearly you know your subject, even though I am pretty sure we are still not on the same side.

Taking your point about paying for the service so who pays for the uneducated urchin from the council estate or the gypsy child that needs a heart transplant.  The NHS pays for all of it does it not.  They are not thought to be too unvaluable to the economy to be worth saving compared to a company director such as perhaps yourself are they. Even though goes against normal market economics.

With this being so and taking in particular your shared dislike of BT's obscene costs for calling NGNs from Payphones, compared to their resonable costs for calling GNs (provided the call lasts around 10 minutes and so covers the 40p connection charge) then how can you justify using 0844 for the doctor when this may mean the crippled 80 year old with a sick wife on the councill estate and who has had their BT line cut off (due to their poverty) having to go round the corner to the phone box on a freezing December night to find they do not have the £1.70 in change that may be needed for a 10 minute call to 0844.

Shouldn't the same principle of the poorest members of the community not being denied access to their doctor due to their income apply?  This is done for prescriptions but the charge is not waived for pensioners who need to call 0844 numbers.

You seem to want it have both ways in clearly earning a living that in part depends on the NGN calls system without then being prepared to accept that problems such as the ones I have highlighted above then become inevitable.

I would respectfully suggest that if those earning over £50k per annum pay 50% income tax that this would be a more acceptable way to fund enhanced phone technology at the dotor, without ending the use of 01/02 geographic numbers and normal calling rates.

It now has 4,009 signatures and is in Position 45 by size.

Hopefully it should pick up even more signatures once people are back from summer holidays in a couple of weeks.

We really need to get coverage for the petition in a newsletter aimed at doctors and nurses.