Dave wrote on Aug 15^th, 2010 at 11:35pm:


From that link;-
"The new number will be charged at a local rate. "

Still don't get it do they?

PCTs are to be wholly abolished by 2013 and GPs assuming the commissioning responsibilities they formerly held.

As the doctors surgeries are still using the 0844 numbers for their benefit, I can not see them, the GPs, moving away from them, especially as the are going to be in sole charge.

kasg wrote on Aug 16^th, 2010 at 2:51pm:



But "local rate" has no meaning, and all the authorities,(ASA, TS, Ofcom), tell you NOT to use the term, albeit re 0845 numbers, but it is still misleading under the "Consumer Protection Act 1987 (partIII) Misleading price indications.".

If we are to get pedantic on a "harmless", if potentially technically invalid, use of a commonly understood phrase to make a fair point about what we should regard as a victory for our campaigning efforts, then let us take care to ensure that we really "get it".

I understand the situation to be as follows:

• The ASA and some Trading Standards bodies have ruled against certain specific uses of the term "local rate" to describe the cost of calling particular 0845 numbers. I am not aware of any such ruling being made with regard to geographic or 03 numbers.
• I am not aware of any General Condition imposed by Ofcom to proscribe use of the term "local rate" by telephone service providers. They are required to adhere to the provisions of The National Telephone Numbering Plan, which includes the term "BT’s Standard Local Call Retail Price" in the definition of 0845. Ofcom has no powers over how users describe the cost of calling their numbers, except for those who are providers of "Premium Rate Services" as defined in the Communications Act.
• The current BT "Tariff Guide for Residential Customers" includes 22 references to rates for making "local" calls. Sometimes these are associated with the word "rate" and in most cases the rate is the same as that for making "national" calls. The term "local NTS" remains to describe the rate for calling 0845 numbers, as does "national NTS" for 0870, even though the actual rates for "local NTS" do not necessarily any longer bear any particular relationship to those for calling "local" geographic numbers. Many find this document hard to understand, however I doubt that one would be likely to succeed in bringing a legal action to show that this document was littered with "misleading price indications".
• Most people would give a meaning to the term "local rate". This would be the rate for making a call to a local number on a landline. In this sense the meaning is fairly applied to the cost of calling a 03 number. (The term "local" is defined in the BT document on page number 33 (35 in Acrobat reader.)
• One could take the trouble to explain that "local rate" is only currently distinct from "national rate", in the case of residential customers, for certain obsolescent BT and Talk Talk tariffs (plus any others that I am not aware of). One could encourage general use of the term "UK rate", as proposed by Ofcom, however one must admit that it has not been adopted by providers nor come into general use, and therefore stands as being generally meaningless. I do not believe that Hillingdon PCT is failing in its duty to the patients it serves, nor breaking the law, by not engaging on these points.

I am happy to accept that I do not fully "get it" and will be pleased to read any corrections or extensions to the points I make above, so as to improve my understanding.


I do wince at little at use of the term "local rate". I must however admit that I have nothing better to propose at present for those who are seeking to explain in simple terms that calls to a new 03 number used for a local service will be cheaper for many than the previous 0845 number, because they will be no more expensive than calling a local number.

The problem with 03 could arise if "local" calls are again offered at rates lower than those for "national" calls. The current Ofcom regulation only requires the cost of calling 03 numbers to be no greater than the latter. This was addressed by Talk Talk for the short period during which distinct terms applied to local calls. The present regulations would require similar exceptional measures to be taken should other cases arise. (I would suggest that campaigners pressing for such action focus on the example of the Metropolitan Police, clearly a provider of a local service on a 03 number, as I did with Talk Talk.) It is possible that the distinction between "local" and "national" rates could return to residential tariffs (it remains in place for business tariffs). I do not however see this as being sufficiently likely as to require briefing Hillingdon PCT and Harmoni on the impropriety of using 03 numbers or describing them as being charged at a local rate.

One should perhaps demand that users describe the cost of calling a 03 number as being no greater than "national" rate. Although technically more correct, this would actually cause many to believe the cost to be greater than that for calling a 0845 number, which was once the same as a local call.

This is a very complex issue. Again, if anyone recognises the extent to which I do not fully "get it" and can help me further, I would be delighted to be brought up to speed.


I am happy to engage in what I see as pedantry, as this is often necessary to deal with spurious points put forward by our opponents.

I would however rather that we applied our campaigning energies to matters of substance, e.g. the continuing use of 0845 numbers for Out of Hours GP services by NHS Direct. (See this press article and the detail at the foot of this page.)

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 17^th, 2010 at 3:11pm:

My thinking  about local rate is, or at least the way that I understand it is, it costs the same to make a call from Lands End to John o' Groats as it would to call your next door neighbour, what ever code you use, so I fail to understand why the term local rate is used, if there is no such thing. Or perhaps I have got it all wrong?

---

Heinz wrote on Aug 17^th, 2010 at 6:50pm:


Thanks, that is what I thought, so why does SCV find it 'accepable' to use this term?

kasg wrote on Aug 17^th, 2010 at 7:14pm:

Those on certain old BT tariffs, some Talk Talk customers and many on business tariffs do not pay the same to call from Ashford in Kent to Ashford in Surrey as to their neighbour. For them there is a distinct "local rate".

I would rather that there were a clearer widely-understood simple term to summarise the benefits enjoyed as a result of switching to a 03 number, but I am prepared to accept what works in the world as it is. I accept that there is no suitable simple precise accurate term to describe the cost of calling 03 numbers. In the case of Hillingdon PCT switching from a 0845 to a 03, I am prepared to accept "local rate" by overlooking those on the old BT tariffs, knowing that Talk Talk treats 03 as local and being aware that NHS services are not available to businesses. As explained above, I fear that the more accurate "national rate" would have created a false and misleading impression, and "UK rate" would have meant little. Alternative suggestions are noticeably absent from this dialogue.

I would not accept use of the term "local rate" to describe the cost of calling a number (e.g. 0845) which is generally more expensive than calling a local number.

I am not prepared to accept the fact that NHS Direct continues to use 0845 numbers for Out of Hours GP services. That, and the proposed abolition of the NHS are of far greater concern to me than the use of technically imprecise language which nevertheless succeeds in getting across the right point about a number change.

There are indeed many who do not "get it". This includes those who believe that "local rate" no longer exists in any sense as well as those who think it is the same as "local NTS rate" and those who think that, with less than 25% of telephone calls originated, BT represents the norm, rather than the exception.

derrick wrote on Aug 18^th, 2010 at 9:15am:

Whilst for the vast majority of residential landline callers and for all payphone and mobile callers there is no distinction between the rates charged, there is no question that the distinction between local and national calls still exists. Talk Talk has demonstrated that it could return to having a relevance to call charges.

Those who wish to be pedantic on points like this must get it right.

In relation to GP Out of Hours services, my programme is focussed on the abuse of the principles of the NHS being practiced by NHS Direct. I am happy to support efforts to introduce 03 numbers. Others may have a quite different programme, as they fail to indicate support for the issues which I see as being the matters of relevance in this forum.

derrick wrote on Aug 18^th, 2010 at 9:15am:

I hope we are using neither. Due weight must always be given to the interests of both majorities and minorities. If we were using "majority rules", then the healthy majority would not be paying for a National Health Service to meet the needs of the sick minority. Furthermore, we should not disregard the good people of Hull just because they are a minority! (Nobody pointed out that this was an issue which I appeared not to "get" in my previous contributions.)

I believe that a majority of people who read the Hillingdon PCT press release will understand that the cost of calling the new 03 number is the same as that of calling a neighbour, whereas the 0845 number was more expensive for many. When considering the choice of language, that is the only point which I see as being of real relevance.

It would perhaps be of interest to know just what is the programme that I am failing to get. :bemused