Thanks.

Actually the credit is due to SCC really. After all consider all the letters/emails we write to little effect and therefore get no acknowledgement for any success. I spent ages on National Rail Enquiries and many others and my stuff is clearly only a very, very small subset of others efforts when you compare the amount of posts here.

PS The 'I'm sure' was agreeing with the point that others did a lot.

Keith wrote on Apr 28^th, 2008 at 1:54pm:


I had several previous conversations with their heads of customer services in previous years and was repeatedly lied to that a geographic number alternative would be along shortly to replace the 0845.

I suspect the CEO of Surrey CC is aware of recent Ofcom correspondence about 03 numbers and the revised COI gudiance and that this has suddenly prompted them to have to concede they are wrong.  I think they were already working towards an 03 number anyway and that this is an old web page written for them by their call centre partner that they were unaware still existed.  Thus with what I believe are steps they have in hand to eventually bring in 03 the email you sent alerted them to the embarassment of this web page that they were therefore, at this stage, happy to rapidly correct.

However note that they only shut down the geographic alternative number listed on this website (their old main switchboard number) within the last 3 to 4 months, which suggests that other parties at Surrey CC or their contact centre partners were still trying to force us to use the 0845 number.

Just rec'd an email from Nicolas Skellett:

Dear xxxxxx,

Can I thank you for your email and for drawing to my attention inaccuracies on the Surrey County Council?s website with regard to the use of our 0845 telephone number. Please be assured that the page in question has been updated with our latest understanding of the situation.

The page in question now reads as follows:

Again, well done to Keith.

Quote:


Simon,

I'm sorry but these are just the same old time worn excuses that hardened NTS 084/7 number users have persistently always used to justify the retention of their 084/7 numbers and to claim they are easier to use because they will never have to change them etc, etc.  But now we find all of the more hardened 0870 number abusers like Sky are finding it perfectly easy to move to 0844 numbers from 0870 in order to retain their revenue share if and when Ofcom ever force 0870 numbers to be charged at 01/02 prices (Ofcom having already delayed this from 1st Feb 2008 for ridiculous reasons they were actually aware of all along).  As I hope you will know Ofcom has no plans to change 0845 to geographic call rate.

As to changing numbers its easy.  All you do is bring in the new 03 number and put in on your website and in new brochures as and when they are printed put a message on the 0845 number telling callers to redial your new 03 number that you have introduced to ensure the lowest possible calling costs to all your customers/council tax payers.

Also I have recently had long discussions with one of the BBC's most senior Customer Service managers about the costs of moving to 03 from 084/7 prior to his writing a recent Board paper recommending in favour of the BBC switching to all 03 numbers and he told me there was only a very minor extra cost in terms of operating their call centre but it was absolutely trivial in comparison to the overall call centre operation bill.

03 numbers were introduced in August 2007.  Ofcom has such an 03 contact centre number and two UK Police forces (one of these is Essex) that were using 0845 have switched to using them.  So why hasn't Surrey County Council? You can't say its down to contracts as your authority has been aware of the issue for over three years and so could have renegotiated any contract and changed telephony supplier by now if Surrey CC had the political will to do so.  Unfortunately Surrey County Council has the kind of culture where you tend to believe your own nonsensical spin (such as the rubbish that was on your own website about your use of 0845 numbers) rather than keeping focused on the best interests of your residents rather than your own internal operational convenience.

I would note that the local authority on which I was previously a councillor unanimously passed a resolution in July 2005 deciding that it would not use 084 or 087 prefixed numbers for any contact lines used by the public.  Can you explain to me why in the intervening period of nearly three years your authority has still not taken a cue from Mole Valley's excellent example.  Especially when I have raised the matter several times previously with your predecessors at Surrey County Council and have been given undertakings you would be switching to using a geographic phone number in the near future.

See Minute 141 (Motion 2/2005) at www.molevalley.gov.uk/media/pdf/1/s/Council_Minutes_190705.pdf where this decision to not use 084/7 numbers was taken by the Council's July 19th 2005 meeting.

Finally with regards to the decision about any move to 03 numbers being taken by your Councillors surely as you have abolished the Committee system at Surrey CC it will only be those 10 of your 81 Councillors on your Cabinbet (Executive) who have the opportunity to make such a decision.  Also can you tell me by whom at Surrey County Council the original decision to change from your 020 numbers to a single 0845 contact centre number was taken?  I wonder if that decision was actually taken by any Councillors?

Also although the other 71 County Councillors are not on your Executive quite a number of them (including many members of the Lib Dem opposition) are on your Scrutiny committees and so surely could easily have brought forth a motion for discussion on this issue at any time?

I look forward to your further comments on this matter.

Quote:

Simon_From_Surrey wrote on Apr 29^th, 2008 at 1:18pm:

Don't you think as Head of Customer Services you should be directly aware of such matters.  It sounds to me like Cable & Wirless closed the number down when they became aware of it without informing you because it was costing them money in lost revenue share.  Of course I know you don't get the revenue share.  What you get instead is a cheaper contract price with Cable & Wireless and/or cheaper outgoing call prices than if you did not use an 0845 number.  This is certainly their setup with the BBC, even though the BBC claims to get no direct revenue share.

Quote:


Rubbish.

Ofcom introduced 03 numbers and adopted one itself in August 2007.  Two UK Police forces (one of these is Essex) have replaced their 0845 numbers with 03 numbers that are live now.  Why have you missed Sir David Varney's recommended introduction date for 03 number of November 2007.  Ofcom's position is that this change is not up to them and that it is up to your organisation to make the change.  They merely facilitated it by introducing the new 03 number range which is directly equivalent to your 0845 number with no changes in your call centre handling equipment being necessary.  Don't blame Ofcom for your delays and for Surrey CC deliberately igoring Sir David Varney's deadline.

Quote:


I would tolerate poorer sound quality for a cheaper call price.  In fact I have done by calling your hidden 020 number and do not notice any reduction in sound quality.  I suspect this is just another lie invented by Cable & Wireless to try to justify yet further delays in bringing in an 03 number as this will cost them a lot of lost revenue share.

Quote:


So why didn't you bring it in during November 2007 as Sir David Varney recommended.

Quote:


Your Cabinet or Councillors will do whatever they are told on an issue of this kind by your senior officers if the business case and Sir David Varney's and the COI's guidance on this matter is properly explained to them.

I highly doubt your county councillors have ever had the adverse implications of going on using 0845 for the Contact Centre properly explained to them by the Council's Directors and Chief Executive.  The adverse effects of continuing to use 0845 is in reality a hidden secret mainly under the control of your senior Director staff.  Having been a councillor I know that these people in fact usually have far more real power and ability to control decisions than most of the councillors.  They are also of course much better paid than any of the councillors including its Executive members!   So perhaps that is why to your well paid Directors and Chief Executive the extra cost of making an 0845 call only seems to them like only a small drop in the ocean?  In other words they are totally out of touch with the financial situation of the real average Council Tax payer