Slightly new to these numbers, but just had a new one to me. What are 0300 numbers all about. More expensive, the same, or what exactly.

Tks

jgxenite wrote on Apr 21^st, 2010 at 1:36pm:

Given the poor level of compliance with other Ofcom regulations the caution is well justified.

After some blips in the early days, there are now no known cases where the regulation of charges for calling 03 numbers is being breached. If any cases come to light, publication in this forum would be expected to lead to correction.

Just to add a little extra detail. 0300 and 0303 are reserved for public bodies and not-for-profit organisations, 034x and 037x for guaranteed migration from the equivalent 084x and 087x numbers, 0330 is the only other range in use at present. The same pricing regulations apply to all 03 numbers.

Dave, now we just need to see the likes of

NHS Direct and National Rail Enquiries having them.... that would be a major start  

NHS Direct and indeed NRE need to pull their fingers out... No longer ANY reason to keep either number...

JoeCurry wrote on Apr 24^th, 2010 at 1:08pm:

NHS24 still happily lies "Calls to us are charged at local rate":

http://www.nhs24.com/content/default.asp?page=s4

CJT-80 wrote on Apr 24^th, 2010 at 2:02pm:

Better not to mention 2p.
That is the rate per minute which some BT callers pay to call 0845 numbers during the daytime. Less than the 5.9p per minute charged for calls to local or national geographic, or 0300, numbers.

This perverse discount for some callers does not make 0845 acceptable, nor does it make the false statements on the NHS24 website correct. We must however be aware of it when addressing this issue.

One may assume that anyone responding to a complaint about NHS24 may consult the BT price list, where they will find this figure for the cost of non-inclusive calls to 0845 numbers given as "local NTS". (see page 39)

Virgin Media treat 0845/0844 numbers at 'premium' rate. 10p connection and 10p per minute thereafter.

CJT-80 wrote on Apr 24^th, 2010 at 2:41pm:

It is unquestionably misleading as the term "local rate" has no true meaning any more. It implies "cheap" when, apart from a few perverse exceptions, calls to 0845 numbers are in fact more expensive than calls to local numbers. That is quite enough for me, without getting into a semantic and moral discussion about use of the word "lie".

All public sector organisations must come to understand that (under the present regime, which will be reviewed shortly) the benefit of the subsidy derived from use of 0845 numbers is essentially improper, unless they can justify imposing a service fee on telephone callers and declare and explain it properly. The regulations which prevent the call cost being greater than for normal calls from BT only apply to BT. BT no longer holds a sufficient share of the market (it has 0% of the mobile market) for its rates to force others to copy, so that they may be considered as the norm. Unless a service delivered by telephone is only offered to the minority of citizens who call from BT lines, then use of a 0845 number (without proper explanation) must be regarded as a rip-off for the majority of callers.

Private businesses, which (unlike most public sector bodies) are implicitly entitled to charge users fees for their services, are engaged in a deception unless they properly declare the charges that are incurred for calling their revenue sharing numbers and the reason for the surcharge.

The simple fact is that most public bodies (especially NHS bodies) could never be expected to provide a proper explanation of the cost of calling revenue sharing numbers, because to do so would involve admitting impropriety. Whilst it is deemed acceptable to quote BT rates with the comment that others may vary, I cannot see any great point in arguing over call cost descriptions (even though those given are false and misleading). One could accurately say that calling a 0845 number is cheaper than, or the same as, a local number from BT.