jgxenite wrote on Jan 13^th, 2008 at 12:33pm:

I am a customer of Virginmedia, Orange and Vodaphone (as well as BT). All three had doubt about 03, which was resolved with some difficulty. One would not necessarily expect the smaller operators to be more "on the ball" with a relatively new development.

I have today contacted four others mentioned recently in the thread. One gave the correct answer after lengthy investigation and then confirmed that the published information was indeed incorrect. Another was able to give me the answer on the spot as he had dealt with other similar enquiries today (I wonder where these came from !); he also confirmed that the published information was incorrect.

I am told that doubt in respect of the other two is currently being investigated, although as I can only make a vague sales enquiry I cannot be confident of a speedy (if any) response.

Please forgive my earlier over-strong reaction, Baz. In the terms which apply (although we may wish it were different) this is early days for 03. We are right to be cautious and perhaps cynical, but let us try to make 03 work - if this is what we want and believe to be possible. It is much harder to make things better than to rightly criticise the way they are. This is especially true as one has to sometimes live with serious wrongs that one cannot hope to change, in order to address less important issues that one can.

David

I was informed by VM on more than one occassion that 03 numbers were inclusive and I have rang them a number of times in this regard and had the same response

WHAT A SHAM

RESPONCE FROM VIRGIN

Dear Derrick,

Thanks for your email.

I would like to inform you that we keep on reviewing our packages and always try to add something more good and interesting features to our packages but as of now we have not included 03 numbers free in the package.

Many Thanks

Shakir

RESULT!   I have received an email from the Communications Director at Telecomplus/Utility Warehouse stating that they were contacted by OFCOM (following my email to OFCOM) and 03 numbers will now be treated as standard geographical numbers and "included in our free UK call offers from our next bills".   I think this is a success, I am encouraged that OFCOM did take this seriously and this is an example to other telecos that 03 SHOULD be treated as OFCOM require.  This also supports Silent Calls Victim's comments about supporting 03 numbers and the telecos will act.   (OK, someone will probably say what about any calls made by customers of UW to 03 nos up to now, will they be refunded? but I do not feel inclined to pursue that.)

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 12^th, 2008 at 5:48pm:


Sorry SCV but I don't regard the current failure to carry calls to all 03 numbers as primarily Finarea's fault but as Ofcom's fault for not making clear to all the intermediate telecoms carriers that Finarea deal with that the call should be carried at 01/02 rates.

Finarea have removed the bar from connecting calls through to 03 that used to exist and calls are only failing because the intermediate middle men they they are using to connect the calls have not removed the bar.  This is because Ofcom in turn have failed to adequately communicate the situation.

Finarea are based in Switzerland and offer low cost call brands in many countries and their itemised billing is 100% accurate.  My only ever previous complaint was about price rises that I did not always get email notification of.

But it is not Finarea's job to ensure that everyone involved in routing UK calls understands 03 calls are the same as 01/02 for consumer charges. It is Ofcom's job to ensure this as it is its regulatory rule.  And it is Ofcom's incompetence that is causing the current failure to universally implement the rule.  It is also Ofcom's pathetic lack of direct regulatory enforcement and fines that has caused its pronouncements not to be regarded as unbreakable rules by those in the telecoms industry.

As to Finarea's non membership of an ADR at the end of day I regard it as Ofcom's fault for not universally enforcing its rules and only acting after hundreds of consumer complaints are made.  If Ofcom's rules are in effect largely voluntary for small telecoms providers and Switzerland is a long way from Ofcom's regulatory arm you can hardly blame Finarea from not incurring additional costs which appear to be largely voluntary.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 15^th, 2008 at 3:19pm:


Yes well I certainly can because I proposed the idea to Ofcom at the November 2005 meeting they held for stakeholders representing consumer interest groups.  At the meeting Ofcom were saying oh but what is the alternative to using 084 and 087 numbers to which this was my response - that an 03 code code charged to callers at geographic rates and where the company who is called paid for their extra convenience in NTS call routing was the answer.

It is a pity they did not also pick up my other suggestion that if moving all non Freephone 084/7 numbers to 09 was politically unpalatable (as it probably was in spite of being the purist solution favoured by most members of this group) they should move them on to the unused 06 prefix code instead where they would at least be clearly differentiated from numbers charged at geographic rates and from Freephone numbers.  Of course we all know why that didn't happen.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 15^th, 2008 at 6:27pm:

Hmmm I see you have no problem with advanced uses of the English Language requiring at least A level English Literature, even though you do not seem to approve of the use of Latin quotes.

To be honest I would much rather have learnt Spanish instead of Latin (in addition to my more useful French 'O' level) as I then may have become fluent in it due to the number of holidays I have spent in the country.  However having wasted 5 years or so on Latin learning I like to still get some use out of it.

No doubt if this government is in office long enough they will also ban the use of Latin shorthand in official government publications or indeed may even make it illegal in the national newspapers too.  Obviously it goes without saying that commerical companies would still be allowed to use their discretion over Latin use in the interests of not interfering unduly in the commercial marketplace.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 16^th, 2008 at 8:55am:


I would suspect that "rogering" is now an antique slang phrase more familiar to the Famous Five or even the Bulldog Drummond generation and is an expression perhaps most frequently used by much the same people as would be at home using the words "tally ho" whilst seed (as in "demon seed") as a proxy for a 5 letter word that might well be censored by the American forum software has distinctly biblical conotations.  The current teen generation would probably know about planting lettuce seeds in the ground (although I wouldn't even rely on them knowning about that either as it might mean leaving the HDTV or the Ipod on one side).

I suspect that fecundity is also a word that many 18 year olds may no longer be aware of and is again most likely only regularly to be come across by students of English Literature and especially of Chaucer or Shakespeare.  Finally "in season" has very specific animal fertility associations and again I do not seem to have heard the phrase quoted very much in recent years.

I fear you may be being dated by your generation in your use of English SCV without even realising it.  Its also interesting to hear that you were a student of Latin.  My bet though would be that this was probably at the local grammar school though rather than at a Public School.