Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
SAYNOTO0870.COM

<---- Back to main website

 
Home Help Search Login Register

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print
Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service (Read 57,561 times)
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,494
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #45 - Aug 11th, 2009 at 3:54pm
 
NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 11th, 2009 at 3:11pm:
... your idea has already been done on a national basis ...

See also:

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 5th, 2009 at 7:00pm:
... I note that the established norm includes directory enquiries services that are free to landline users ...

Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #46 - Aug 11th, 2009 at 5:02pm
 
SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 11th, 2009 at 3:54pm:
NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 11th, 2009 at 3:11pm:
... your idea has already been done on a national basis ...

See also:

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 5th, 2009 at 7:00pm:
... I note that the established norm includes directory enquiries services that are free to landline users ...


I fail to see the point of your out of context juxtapposition of these two different quotes.
Back to top
 

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,494
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #47 - Aug 11th, 2009 at 7:06pm
 
NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 11th, 2009 at 5:02pm:
I fail to see the point of your out of context juxtapposition of these two different quotes.

Just to point out that there are other "free" DQ services. My attempt to avoid repeating myself was perhaps too oblique. Sorry!
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
bazzerfewi
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


Baz

Posts: 580
Barnsley
Gender: male
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #48 - Aug 15th, 2009 at 7:30am
 
Alternative LO-Call 118 service
If my information is correct I think I have found a truly alternative Lo-Call 118 service, I just need clarification as I don’t think Ofcom information is always correct because I have had different answers to the same question, it depends who you talk to.
Does the following call pattern contravene any telecom legislation, at present the RingLocal plan will go something like this
Call comes in on 0345 X118 118 (Lo-Call at this stage) FROM A MOBILE 07 NUMBER
Live operator sources number from local Trade database (0345 1234567)
Call Divert comes into play the RingLocal operator diverts caller to (0345 12344567) Trades mans number

If my information is correct because there hasn’t been a break in the call and “Call divert” has been used the call charge should be the same Lo-Call tariff for the duration of the call.

Example – Caller dials from Mobile phone 07 Number or any 01/02 number
Number dialled 0345 X 118 118
Live operator picks up the call – Caller requires trades person
Operator sources the trades persons number 0345 56445463 (Example)
Operator uses call divert and diverts the call to 0345 56445463 (Example Number)
Trades person picks up the phone and answers the call – Customer and trades person are connected

If this is doable it could provide a lo-call 118 alternative

Baz
Back to top
 
WWW bazzerfewi aom@blueyonder.co.uk  
IP Logged
 
derrick
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,124
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #49 - Aug 15th, 2009 at 10:32am
 
bazzerfewi wrote on Aug 15th, 2009 at 7:30am:
Alternative LO-Call 118 service
If my information is correct I think I have found a truly alternative Lo-Call 118 service, I just need clarification as I don’t think Ofcom information is always correct because I have had different answers to the same question, it depends who you talk to.
Does the following call pattern contravene any telecom legislation, at present the RingLocal plan will go something like this
Call comes in on 0345 X118 118 (Lo-Call at this stage) FROM A MOBILE 07 NUMBER
Live operator sources number from local Trade database (0345 1234567)
Call Divert comes into play the RingLocal operator diverts caller to (0345 12344567) Trades mans number

If my information is correct because there hasn’t been a break in the call and “Call divert” has been used the call charge should be the same Lo-Call tariff for the duration of the call.

Example – Caller dials from Mobile phone 07 Number or any 01/02 number
Number dialled 0345 X 118 118
Live operator picks up the call – Caller requires trades person
Operator sources the trades persons number 0345 56445463 (Example)
Operator uses call divert and diverts the call to 0345 56445463 (Example Number)
Trades person picks up the phone and answers the call – Customer and trades person are connected

If this is doable it could provide a lo-call 118 alternative

Baz



For gods sake, STOP calling them LO-CALL, or anything similar! It is meaningless, irrelevant and misleading under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 (partIII), Misleading Price Indications.

From East Sussex County Council, (as an example); -
http://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/735C4641-4E0A-48DA-BA19-8A5007CE0AB6/0...
I use Special Services contact numbers for my business. How should I describe them in adverts?
You should not use terms ‘local rate’ or ‘national rate’, or any reference to local or national rates. You also should not use words which could imply a local or national rate (eg. ‘lo-call’, ‘low rate’).

Law and penalties http://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/business/tradingstandards/detail.aspx?ref=180805&da...

Under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, it is an offence to give misleading price indications to consumers and to omit details about prices if they also mislead. A £5,000 fine imposed at the magistrate's court or an unlimited fine and/or a sentence of up to two years in prison can be imposed at the crown court.


Whilst the above relate to 084/087 numbers the relevance to the term "lo-call' still applies, 0345 numbers are NOT 'LO-CALL' they cost the same as an 01/02 number dependent upon the callers telco!

If I see any advertisements for your company describing them as 'LO-Call' or similar I will report you to the relevant authorities! For penalties re breaking the Act, see above

Why are you continuing to mislead people?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Dave
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 9,902
Yorkshire
Gender: male
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #50 - Aug 15th, 2009 at 2:03pm
 
bazzerfewi wrote on Aug 15th, 2009 at 7:30am:
If my information is correct because there hasn’t been a break in the call and “Call divert” has been used the call charge should be the same Lo-Call tariff for the duration of the call.

Example – Caller dials from Mobile phone 07 Number or any 01/02 number
Number dialled 0345 X 118 118
Live operator picks up the call – Caller requires trades person
Operator sources the trades persons number 0345 56445463 (Example)
Operator uses call divert and diverts the call to 0345 56445463 (Example Number)
Trades person picks up the phone and answers the call – Customer and trades person are connected

If this is doable it could provide a lo-call 118 alternative

The charge rate cannot be changed by a third party mid-call. Thus, the call will be billed to the caller as per a 0345 number, regardless of where the RingLocal operator forwards it to.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
bazzerfewi
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


Baz

Posts: 580
Barnsley
Gender: male
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #51 - Aug 15th, 2009 at 3:39pm
 
Cheers for that clarificaton Dave looks like we could be on to a winner

I will let you know when everything is sorted and we are ready to go.

Baz
Back to top
 
WWW bazzerfewi aom@blueyonder.co.uk  
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,494
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #52 - Aug 15th, 2009 at 3:50pm
 
bazzerfewi wrote on Aug 15th, 2009 at 7:30am:
Does the following call pattern contravene any telecom legislation

Baz

The quoted phrase reads like a question asking for replies.

As you claim to have already incurred expenses and secured sponsorship for the "RingLocal" service, I must express surprise that you appeal to this forum for legal advice. This suggests you may be ill prepared for battle with the major 118 providers and their teams of lawyers.

I am astonished that Ofcom has apparently refused to provide you with written confirmation of the regulatory requirements relating to the provision of Directory Enquiry services in response to your formal Notification. Whilst we commonly complain about its failure to deal properly with the interests of consumers and citizens, it also has an implied duty to treat providers of telecommunications services, such as yourself, fairly.


You should have been made aware that under the terms of the General Conditions you are required to adhere to the National Telephone Numbering Plan. This states that 034 numbers are used for "migrating numbers from matching 084 numbers". At one time long ago 0845 numbers offered national calls at the "local rate". Apart from on a few legacy tariffs, this connection no longer applies. Furthermore, for the vast majority of residential telephone subscribers there is no longer a distinct "local rate".

As many migrating numbers will have been in place for some time, one can perhaps understand how the mistaken and misleading idea that 0345 has some connection with a local rate charge for a national call has arisen.

0345 is available for migrating any revenue sharing 0845 number that you are currently operating. If you have however not yet launched the service and promoted the 0845 number, you may want to consider use of a new 033 number.

You must understand that no existing 03 number range is intended to convey the idea of being "local". All those presently in use are described as being "UK-wide Numbers at a geographic rate".

(Should distinct rates for local calls re-emerge as a general feature of telephone charges at some future time, there are unused 03 ranges which could be added to support a facility for UK-wide calls to be charged at the “local rate”. Just for the anoraks - Given the present direction of travel with the NTS condition, it is inconceivable that an alternative range to offer the same facility, but with revenue sharing built in, i.e. a resurrection of 0845 as it was, could occur.)


If, so close to the launch of your service (you previously suggested that a possible three month delay was material), you are still wondering about what type of number to use, I would offer the following advice.

For a service focussed on one particular geographic area the obvious option is a local number. You should have found that the redirection features you need can be provided on a geographic number, although it is understood this may incur greater cost than when on a non-geographic number. You may have to consider whether this is worthwhile to provide the necessary “local” identity. There will be a few local callers for whom a local geographic number is cheaper to call than a “UK-wide” 03 number.

For a nationally promoted service that serves many localities separately, a UK-wide number would be ideal. Such numbers are commonly associated with caller location detection facilities (these do not include recognition of the caller’s full number and can extend to cover calls from mobile cells) to enable the call to be routed to the appropriate point.

If you can make the service work purely through sponsorship and advertising, rather than imposing costs on service users, then a service extending beyond a single locality would be best on a 03 or 080 number. The latter would be more expensive to run and more expensive to call for most mobile callers, although cheaper to call for all landline callers. You would however probably want to avoid 080, so as to sustain your claim that those who use it (e.g. “The Number”) are engaged in a rip-off.

(Noting Derrick’s reply to you, I offer some further thoughts, covering some wider issues, in a separate posting.)
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,494
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #53 - Aug 15th, 2009 at 3:51pm
 
Baz

(continuing from my previous posting)

derrick wrote on Aug 15th, 2009 at 10:32am:
... Consumer Protection Act 1987 (partIII), Misleading Price Indications ... Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 ... I will report you to the relevant authorities! ... Why are you continuing to mislead people?

Derrick has offered very good advice, referring to some of the regulations that any trader has to keep in mind when promoting his services. I suggest some relevant compliance issues that you may face.
  • Offering only business numbers and not those from the general number database, any reference to the service being an alternative to the 118 services could be perceived as misleading.
  • Given the existence of equivalent “free” services, claims about relative cost must be made with care.
  • When claiming that competitors engage in “rip-offs”, one must ensure that any claim of not being engaged in similar activities is true and sustainable.
  • Callers would expect to be aware of the priority given to clients when there are a number of providers of the same service. (One wonders how this very difficult area will be addressed.) A claim that every local provider is bound to offer better prices and a better service than every national chain may not be easy to prove.
  • There will be great difficulties experienced in getting the service off the ground, when one needs clients in order to sell the service to callers and callers in order to sell the service to clients and sponsors. There is a severe danger of exaggerated or plainly false claims having to be made.
  • Because you anticipate the service becoming a source of annoyance and perhaps serious threat to established providers of similar services then you must look at this from their point of view. Consider the compliance costs that they suffer, as their first point of attack is likely to be on any that you may be evading.
  • I would suggest looking into the history of how other attempts to break into this market may have faltered through failure to adhere to regulations, so as to avoid repeating the mistakes of others.

derrick wrote on Aug 15th, 2009 at 10:32am:
For gods sake, STOP calling them LO-CALL

I would advise against use of the term “lo-call” for another reason – it means PREMIUM RATE.

Revenue sharing calls operate on a number of levels in respect of the amount of revenue obtained and the consequent cost to the caller. The 084 ranges offer the LOwest amounts of revenue when compared with 087, 09, 118 etc. and therefore are generally charged at the LOwest premium rates.

The, now broken, historic link between 0845 and “LOcal rate” is used to create a term that is accurate to some degree, but essentially wholly misleading. The “LOw” is only with reference to other premium rates, not to rates in general, and the number ranges to which is applies have never had any valid connection whatsoever with locality, indeed quite the opposite.


Dave wrote on Aug 15th, 2009 at 2:03pm:
The charge rate cannot be changed by a third party mid-call. Thus, the call will be billed to the caller as per a 0345 number, regardless of where the RingLocal operator forwards it to.

It has been suggested that once BT ceases to block implementation of the necessary technology, this long-awaited capability will be made available. This could be very exciting for RingLocal, as it would be able to offer varying degrees of discount, or even perhaps cashback, according to the degree of willingness of clients to receive calls. (One assumes that it would never wish to use the potential for imposing variable surcharges).


Please forgive my cynicism and any rudeness when I state that I hope you know what you are doing and are not simply wasting our time with a pipe-dream, as opposed to discussing a business that is all set to launch in the near future. I post my comments in the hope that they will be of general interest as well as of potential value to a commercial operation. In truth, I focus more on the former, as they would not be offered free of charge if I seriously believed the latter.

There are plenty of good sources of business advice and forums for the discussion of business ideas. I suspect that the issues have only been raised here in the hope of endorsement from this website and “the campaign”.

Commercial arrangements regarding advertising on the website must be discussed with the site admin. I hope that other campaigners share my view that (sometimes with regret) we should refuse to offer any form of endorsement to any commercial offering, as to do so would risk undermining the integrity of our wide-ranging campaigning activities.

Alignment with one or more worthy commercial sponsors who underwrote certain campaign expenses, with their names attached openly to the campaign and being known to have subscribed to all of its declared objectives, would be another matter. That is however not where we are at present.

May I suggest to the moderators that this thread should be re-located within the “Call Providers” section of the Forum. It is dedicated to discussing a particular service provider, even though wider issues are being covered.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
sherbert
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,011
Gender: male
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #54 - Aug 15th, 2009 at 5:14pm
 
SilentCallsVictim wrote on Aug 15th, 2009 at 3:51pm:

Please forgive my cynicism and any rudeness when I state that I hope you know what you are doing and are not simply wasting our time with a pipe-dream, as opposed to discussing a business that is all set to launch in the near future.



SilentCallsVictim...of course he does not know what he is doing if he did he would not be here asking all these questions.

I have said before on the other thread, he is well out of his depth, and has not got a clue on what he is doing. I have said on the other thread he is making false statements on his web site and for that reason I hope 3i and their partners will sue. He says 'bring them on'. There lies the arrogance of the man.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
bazzerfewi
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


Baz

Posts: 580
Barnsley
Gender: male
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #55 - Aug 15th, 2009 at 7:11pm
 
This is learning curve for me and that is why I seek both your advice and that of ofcom. In reply to me being arrogant well that is your opinion. I have been called a lot in my life but never arrogant, and I know people from all walks of life.

All I know is that it is now our belief that we have come up with a workable plan, we have not made any false statements as we believe that the 118 services are expensive and not in the callers best interest.

The RingLocal programme will be for everybody that wants to use it but initially we will be operating a business service in business hours while testing the market.

As for all the criticism well "THE BEST THING TO DO IS DON'T USE THE SERVICE" carry on using the alternative.

Baz

Back to top
 
WWW bazzerfewi aom@blueyonder.co.uk  
IP Logged
 
Dave
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 9,902
Yorkshire
Gender: male
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #56 - Aug 15th, 2009 at 7:45pm
 
sherbert wrote on Aug 15th, 2009 at 5:14pm:
I have said before on the other thread, he is well out of his depth, and has not got a clue on what he is doing. I have said on the other thread he is making false statements on his web site and for that reason I hope 3i and their partners will sue. He says 'bring them on'. There lies the arrogance of the man.

sherbert, the thread to which I gather you refer is the one on the SayNoTo118800.co.uk site. bazzerfewi has never posted on that thread, so all I can assume is that you are getting confused with this Baz and the other one claiming to be called Barry.  Undecided
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
sherbert
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,011
Gender: male
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #57 - Aug 16th, 2009 at 9:30am
 
My apologies to all Embarrassed

I assumed he was one of the same. Undecided

So if I am wrong I take back all I said on this thread. Embarrassed

Can't do more than to say sorry Embarrassed
Back to top
« Last Edit: Aug 16th, 2009 at 9:31am by sherbert »  
 
IP Logged
 
sherbert
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,011
Gender: male
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #58 - Aug 16th, 2009 at 9:36am
 
I have sent a PM to bazzerfewi apologising

Embarrassed
Back to top
« Last Edit: Aug 16th, 2009 at 9:42am by sherbert »  
 
IP Logged
 
derrick
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,124
Re: Alternative Lo-Call 118 Service
Reply #59 - Aug 16th, 2009 at 10:14am
 
sherbert wrote on Aug 16th, 2009 at 9:30am:
My apologies to all Embarrassed

I assumed he was one of the same. Undecided

So if I am wrong I take back all I said on this thread. Embarrassed

Can't do more than to say sorry Embarrassed



Hmm, he never denied it though!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print
(Moderators: DaveM, CJT-80, Forum Admin, Dave, bbb_uk)

Website and Content © 1999-2024 SAYNOTO0870.COM. All Rights Reserved. (DE)
Written permission is required to duplicate any of the content within this site.

WARNING: This is an open forum, posts are NOT endorsed by SAYNOTO0870.COM,
please exercise due caution when acting on any info from here.


SAYNOTO0870.COM » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.


Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge