Source: Mirror

http://www.mirror.co.uk/advice/money/2008/11/18/when-free-calls-cost-20p-a-minut...

When free calls cost 20p a minute

18/11/2008

Dialling so-called "freefone" numbers can cost a ridiculous amount of money.

Mobile networks charge 15p to 20p a minute to call 0800 numbers which are free to landline users, according to comparison firm Moneysupermarket.com.

And they charge the same when you call 0845 numbers, which should be charged at much lower rates.

So that means a 10-minute phone call to your bank, energy or telecoms provider will cost you £1.50 using a "freefone" number - and £1.92 if you are unlucky enough to get through on an 0845 number.

Moneysupermarket.com reckons that mobile phone networks are pocketing £88million a year from this outrageous racket.

It hits the poorest hardest because many pensioners, teenagers and people on benefit are most likely to rely solely on a pay-as-you-go mobile.

You can't get a landline contract if you have a poor credit rating - while anyone can get a pay-as-you-go mobile.

Phones regulator OFCOM should step in and stop this and ensure all freefone numbers are exactly that - free - especially as many of these are for vital helplines.

Meanwhile, if you haven't got a landline, then use a callbox, a friend's landline or keep your call as brief as possible.

We have had a debate about who should pay the excess for calls to mobiles. This seems to be the start of a debate about who should pay for the cost of calls from mobiles.

I am taking it is read that there is extra cost involved in maintaining a mobile network over that of a landline network, although I know that some would dispute this.

If someone (perhaps a friend) calls my landline from a mobile then should I pick up the additional cost of this call? If not, then we must think carefully about other similar cases.

Those who rent 0800 numbers carry the cost of calls from landlines. Should they be left with no option but to carry the cost of calls from mobiles also? The ideal solution would perhaps be two or more classes of "freephone", e.g. landlines only and all phones.

Unless revenue sharing were to be banned altogether, or the ability of phone service providers to set their tariffs with cross-subsidy as they choose were to be withdrawn, the situation of revenue sharing numbers being unduly expensive will remain. The point is that nobody has to use a revenue sharing number any longer. The facilities of non-geographic numbers are available on the 03 range and these are subject to price controls.

It is not the fact that mobile providers are charging high prices for calls to certain numbers that is the issue, it is the fact that people are using these numbers inappropriately.

Members of the Telephone Helplines Association are able to benefit from an arrangement with the mobile companies to allow calls to be made free of charge. The best that others can do at present is to use a 03 number or make their own special arrangements with the mobile companies.

In a free market, the word "should" has little meaning or relevance. A telephone worth several hundred pounds "should" not be given away free of charge, nor "should" it be rented out on a scheme that causes it to be paid for many times over before the end of its working life.

Mobile operators compete for business and will therefore offer the charges for those items most likely to be reviewed by a potential purchaser, featured on a price comparison website or recognised on bills at as cheap a rate as they can. No telecomms call charge truly represents the cost of connecting the call as most of this is tied up in capital, so setting call charge tariffs is a complex business that has little to do with specific costing, other than termination fees.

As the cost of calls to 0800 and 084 / 087 numbers is unlikely to be a major factor affecting a customer's choice of network, there is little competitive pressure to force them down below what customers are prepared to tolerate.

I have no idea about the termination fees for 0800 calls made from mobiles, however they are clearly not great enough in favour of the mobile operators to allow calls to be free. If someone wished to offer free calls from mobiles then they could come to an arrangement with the mobile companies. This already happens for some helplines, although I understand that no money changes hands. If the government or some other body wished to do this, I assume that there would have to be some financial arrangement.

Because 03 calls are tied to the base item on which mobile operators compete - charges for calls to geo numbers - this is the best general option for now. If, or when, calls to geo numbers cease to be the "base point" the 03 regulations will have been be reviewed.

I do not believe that the forums should be used for a dialogue between just two participants; indeed my remarks were addressed generally and in particular at the reported comments from moneysupermarket.com, as well as addressing specific points raised.

Through the forum we can share ideas and encourage action that promotes change. That which I see as being the most effective (now that Ofcom has been persuaded to introduce 03) is to encourage those who we "have" to call to use 03 numbers. I do not believe that anything further will be done to limit the activities of the free market in the supply of telephone services; the price regulations underpinning 03 are as much as we can realistically hope for.

Free market theory suggests that if there is sufficient demand for a service then someone will come forward to meet it, if it can be provided at a price that consumers are prepared to pay. In the case of calling 080 numbers at geographic rates from mobiles it appears that these "dial through" numbers are the market's response to this demand.

I regret however that I do not understand how these "dial through" numbers work, as I cannot see how the facility is paid for - perhaps someone could explain. I am interested to know what would happen if, for example, the Daily Mirror were invited to publish one of these as being available for use by all those who wish to call the "freephone" 0800 DWP numbers from mobiles? I see no reason why the DWP itself could not publish them, assuming that all is above board. Or is there a catch?

Presumably when a landline operator offers free 080 calls, they are receiving some revenue out of the charge made to the person receiving the call. The 020 dial-through providers must receive some of this to pay for the service. When dialled directly, mobile operators are receiving this money and the premium charge to their subscriber and the subscriber's line rental which would pay for inclusive minutes to geographical numbers.

The danger with these numbers being published in a national newspaper is that the mobile operators will then block them. Even if new dial-through numbers are then provided, they won't have been publicised and we're back to square one.

I do intend to write an article on freephone from mobiles on my blog, which will at least help a few people who actually think to Google how to avoid being ripped off for 080 calls (in the same way some people Google to find how not to pay up to £5.50 extra for train tickets from TheTrainline...)

Thinking about it, there is plenty of choice. I choose not to use a mobile except in exceptional circumstances as all mobile calls are a rip-off when compared to a landline (and I have to have the latter anyway otherwise I couldn't have an internet connection!) I'm perfectly happy with companies using free contact numbers - in fact, all else being equal, I'd choose a company that offered one as to me it shows a commitment to good customer service (if they are paying, they are less likely to hold you in a queue for 45 minutes). Having said that, I'm rarely going to be calling anyone from home during daytime hours, so geographical numbers are effectively free for me too.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Nov 20^th, 2008 at 5:24pm:

So once again SCV you are revealed to actually be a card carrying apologist for the telecoms industry racketeers on the nonsensical premise that you claim there is a free market involved and people have a free choice about making 084/7 calls.

Absolute rubbish there is no free choice because there is a cartel involved and all the mobile companies have secretly agreed to charge punitive extra costs to 08 numbers that are above their real extra costs of carrying the calls as a way of artifcially cross subsidising a low headline call cost number to 01/02/03 lines.  BT is doing the same thing in its Payphone boxes.  The reason they do it is because it is a loophole in terms of ASA regulations on price disclosure in advertising.  And most of the telecoms industry lack any scruples and base a large part of their selling strategy on deliberate price misdescription.

It is a public outrage that Ofcom does nothing to clamp down on the 080, 084, 087 price abuse cartel by the mobile phone companies as the market is not competitive but subject to deliberately misleading publicity by the mobile phone companies.  But it seems that SCV is once again revealed as a closet apologist for these anti competitive racketeers.

I recognise sad realities without seeking to defend, or apologise for, anyone. I do not accept the premise that one can separate the world into good guys and bad guys. In the context of a battle of ideas, one only achieves results by understanding and engaging with those who hold differing views. I plead guilty to the charge of pursuing attainable objectives and encouraging others to take a similar approach in deploying such campaigning energies as they have available in the way most likely to achieve a beneficial result.

Recognising that fact that there are differences of view amongst those who post here, I have invariably done all I can to prevent myself from being presented as a representative of anyone when commenting to the media. When opportunities arise to comment publicly as a member of this forum, I always endeavour to make points that I hope all would share. I must apologise if I fail, but that is my intent.

Since joining the forum I have aimed to assist members in getting their message across as effectively as is possible. I cannot however be held responsible for the fact that we have not achieved as much media coverage as we would wish. I have never sought, nor agreed, to take on the responsibility of being Mr SayNoto0870.

We must remember that many different campaigning techniques can be effective. I am happy to applaud achievements that have resulted from methods with which I would probably profoundly disagree. I see that as a strength of the (lack of) structure that we enjoy. I even expect this point to be disputed!

I hope this is helpful, although I feel we would be better engaged in gaining an understanding of those who may be able to help the campaign by making decisions to drop use of revenue sharing numbers.