if you ever find a company who you want to do business with has a non geographcal number then email them and ask for their geographical landline number. If they refuse then simply email them saying that unless they give you that information you will adamantly refuse to do business with them!

let me give you a related example. I sell gas and electricity. I was buying a pizza and I was chatting with the shop owner about it. I politely asked "who are you with" as I wanted to see about a potential sale.

He told me where to go. I then said "do you want me to buy this pizza or do you want me to walk out right now? Do you want me to tell my friends not to come here because you are so rude?" He backed down and gave me ten minutes of his time.

they then have to back down.  As I said elsewhere if you look at https://www.ico.gov.uk/Global/contact_us.aspx you will see that the information commissioner has set a very good example by publishing "Call us on 08456 30 60 60 or 01625 54 57 45. Our helpline is open from 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday"

why can't everyone else do the same? I believe that there is NO excuse for not publishing both and I refuse to do business with a company that won't publish a geographical landline number. I think if more people did it then things would be very different.

agentq wrote on Sep 5^th, 2009 at 4:29pm:


That is 'blackmail' and harassment and I would have reported you to your company and the relevent authorities;

I have people knocking on my door asking me who I buy my gas, electricity and telephone calls from. I tell them it is none of their business and send them on their way.

No wonder door to door sales people have such a bad name with this practice going on and happily admitting to it.

Nasty, and if you came to me with that sales pitch I would have no hesitation in showing you the door and if you proceeded with your threat I would sue the pants off you and your company.

What a 'delightful' firm you must work for, and what a 'delightful' person you must be, to think that this an acceptable practice.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Sep 5^th, 2009 at 7:34pm:



SilentCallsVictim...I am amazed that you tolerate  this disgraceful practice.

This was the bit I found objectional


He told me where to go. I then said "do you want me to buy this pizza or do you want me to walk out right now? Do you want me to tell my friends not to come here because you are so rude?" He backed down and gave me ten minutes of his time.


That can't be a legitamate way of conducting any business

agentq wrote on Sep 6^th, 2009 at 5:32pm:

(It is unfortunate that we are failing to recognise the special position of 03xx numbers.)

This threat can sometimes be helpful in getting the information, but I hope nobody is suggesting cutting off one's nose to spite the face. In reality there may be far bigger factors affecting choice of a provider - the potential cost of a few premium rate phone calls may be more than offset by a price saving.

Some see use of revenue sharing numbers as an ethical issue. I do not accept this for private businesses - it is only a fairly modest example of price misrepresentation, commonly dwarfed by other far more serious examples. If one were to treat it as an ethical issue then for most of us there are many more such considerations to bear in mind (e.g. ownership, location of call centres, use of executive bonus schemes, carbon emissions, staff welfare policies, .....), some of which may be weighted more highly.

I am inclined to the view that a company which gives out an alternative geographic number on demand, but persists in using a revenue sharing number, is actually worse than one which does not offer an alternative. If there is a usable geographic alternative, then the only reason for retaining the revenue sharing number must be to exploit those who are unaware of the need, or somehow unable, to access the alternative.

Even those who publish both revenue sharing and geographic numbers, without making it clear that the revenue sharing number should only be used by those who (perversely) find it to be cheaper, are profiting at the expense of those who do not understand the issues. (Nothing personal Mr Bond.)

I do however recognise that these views are not shared universally, as they run counter to the principles of consumerism.

---

My advice to businesses is as follows:

• If you can justify obtaining subsidy for your costs from telephone callers, then go ahead and use a revenue sharing or premium rate services number with no shame.
• If you otherwise need the benefits of a non-geographic number, then use 03.
• If you can use one or more geographic numbers, then be ready to justify the confusion you would create by mucking about with anything else.
• If you wish to pay for incoming calls from landlines, then use a 080x number, but offer an alternative for mobile callers.
• If you want to be very clever and offer alternative numbers to allow callers to take advantage of particular pricing schemes on various packages (e.g. 0845 and 0844 for those on BT call plans, but calling outside the time period covered by their plan), then you must be very careful to provide detailed and up-to-date information on who those numbers are intended for and when they should be used.
• Only quote terms offered by a particular telephone company if you are an authorised marketing representative of that company, so that these may be accompanied by an appropriate declaration of interest and responsibility for the information provided. (The world is presently littered with out-of-date, incomplete examples of BT charges, which are atypical and consequently meaningless.)

sherbert wrote on Sep 6^th, 2009 at 9:44pm:

There is no mistake. The example covers costs for BT calling plan customers making non-inclusive calls. 0870 calls cost exactly the same as geographic numbers for BT customers, so a 0870 alternative would be of no use in helping them to save money.


This element of my advice to businesses is for those who wish to offer alternative numbers to enable some callers on particular packages to be able to save some money. Those who wish to engage in what I see as a rather silly exercise need to be very clever. I chose an example which not only highlights the absurdity of offering alternative numbers but also that of the BT charging structures. I will expand on this to perhaps make the point more clearly.

Imagine “Cheap to call us Ltd” a business with a geographic number that wants to enable people to be able to call it more cheaply. It therefore has lots of alternative numbers to suit every different telephone tariff. These are all re-directed to its central switchboard. Its “Contacts” web pages include lists of all the possible tariffs being used by callers with explanations of every situation where a particular alternative will be cheaper to call than the geographic number. They are reviewed and updated weekly.

It has a mobile number on each of the networks for the benefit of those with in-network calls in their package. It also has a geographic number in sufficient local charging zones, for the benefit of those who pay less for local calls.




The point I am trying to make is that companies who offer alternative numbers are playing a rather silly game, given the current and constantly changing complexity of telephone tariffs. Those who use the saynoto0870 database must be assumed to be sufficiently clued-up to know what they are doing as they are specifically looking for alternative numbers. I nonetheless fear that there will be some BT customers outside the applicable period for their call plan who look up geographic alternatives to 0845 and 0844 numbers and consequently pay more. Any general attempt to offer alternative numbers MUST be qualified by a sufficiently up-to-date and accurate description of who should use each number and when, so as to justify the potential for confusion caused by having multiple numbers.

Some may wish to emulate “Cheap to call us Ltd”, but they must do it properly. I regret that the ICO and JBPT do not quite achieve this, however noble may be their intentions. In most cases I would expect a business to focus on its proper business activities, rather than trying to be an expert on telephone charges.

I say, choose the single number that is right for your business, be ready to justify that choice, but get on with whatever it is that you do best. My only qualification would be for those who wish to offer the extra facility of paying for calls from landlines by using a 080x number - this must however be as an extra, representing an alternative to the primary number for use from mobiles.


Consumerists dream of a world in which every caller has the details of their telephone tariff, as it applies at that time, in their head as they prepare to make a telephone call. Alternatively they would hope for callers to be ready and able to try different numbers, through a variety of providers, so as to hear a pre-call announcement of exactly what it will cost them, before deciding which one to proceed with.

I do not share either part of that dream, as I am not a “consumerist”. I therefore do not worship “Choice” as a deity; he is a good fellow worthy of respect, but there are limits to his usefulness.

Dolcetta wrote on Sep 16^th, 2009 at 4:08pm:

Refer to the Frequently Asked Questions for the site, in particular the last one.

If it answers your question (i.e. you have Skype installed), then do post some feedback on that thread.