The cost of calling HMRC was featured on 5 Live Investigates yesterday (Sunday) evening:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00tpvfr/5_live_Investigates_12_09_2010/

Listen to the programme using this link until 10:02pm Sun, 19 Sep 2010.


As the interviewee says, all public services currently using 0845 numbers should immediately switch on their 0345 equivalent numbers.

I call on HMRC, DWP and all the other users of these rip-off numbers to

Dave wrote on Sep 13^th, 2010 at 2:51am:


Seconded. After HMRC's recent c*ck-up with our money, it's the very least they can do.

In fact, they should go one step further and switch to 0800 or 0808 numbers - both free to call from all landlines and payphones.

Having to pay in order to inquire about one's tax is, frankly, insulting.

Most people would probably agree with you SCV, however what is completely unacceptable is people being kept on hold for ages and ages and having to pay for that luxuary.

Trenod wrote on Sep 13^th, 2010 at 8:41pm:

DWP has made arrangements to pay for calls from mobiles to its 0800 "initial application" numbers, so that they are free to the caller. I assumed you were suggesting that HMRC did the same with all of its enquiry numbers. (The DWP continues to use 0845 numbers for enquiries.)

I would not support the suggestion that those without landlines (28% of socio-economic group DE households and 30% of under-25 households) should be required to use a public payphone, rather than calling from their home.

It is now standard practice with landlines to provide "normal" calls without call charges as part of a Call Plan or package to cover all the times when the phone is used. The "penalty" charges imposed for calling outside the terms of the package make this clear. Contract mobile deals are increasingly offering inclusive calls to normal landlines. Where this applies, getting the taxpayer to pick up the cost of the call is of no benefit to the caller. That does not cover all cases, but it is important to explain that "the taxpayer" would have to pay if advancing the argument for "free to caller" calls.

---

sherbert wrote on Sep 13^th, 2010 at 7:42pm:

Given that not every call can be answered immediately, I suggest that it is the use of 0845 numbers which is "completely unacceptable". The long hold times, and a horrifying number of calls where callers give up waiting, help support the argument against the use of numbers which cause a premium to be incurred.

I am arguing that avoiding the costs of call-backs would enable HMRC and others to save money from their budget by switching to 03xx, because this saving should be seen to outweigh the loss of the revenue share. Furthermore, the waiting times mean that the costly call-backs only provides a modest benefit to callers. The additional time that agents waste on discussing and dialling call-backs reduces their ability to take new calls and thereby puts more pressure on the waiting times.

I agree that where the waiting times are excessive, more money should be spent on making additional agents available. That is not an easy argument to advance at present, if one hopes for it to be accepted. Other options are improved telephone systems, better training for agents to enable them to deal with enquiries more swiftly and improved system support for agents to help them to do their job. Unfortunately all of these points run into the same obstacle.

Spending money on new PAYE systems in the hope of reducing the number of errors and consequently reduce the number of enquiries is another option - but we know what happens when new systems are implemented!

Trenod wrote on Sep 14^th, 2010 at 12:42am:

Firstly can I say how good it is to be able to engage in discussion on these points; "welcome to the forum" sounds a little patronising, but it is good to get into these exchanges.

The problem with mobiles is that they do not charge a "line rental" fee, they recover their costs through charges for outgoing and incoming calls. This makes comparison between landlines and mobiles difficult. They may also be "too profitable" as businesses, but that is another issue.

The process of mobiles recovering money from incoming calls is being halted in stages over the next few years. Some believe that the only effect of this will be a reduction in profits, others (including myself) wait to see what will happen. It could be that outgoing call charges will rise and severe minimum usage limits are set, or some form of line rental charge will be introduced. The complex arrangements with call bundle and handset lease/purchase being combined into a single contract price makes it very difficult to follow just what is going on.

BT has just increased its line rental charge, however the most severe increases over the last few years are in the charges for calls made outside a Call Plan. I am tracking these and they show a steady rate of 30% per annum. This is all about encouraging customers to subscribe to the appropriate Call Plan. BT making 0845 inclusive is easy (because it makes no money on these calls anyway). Talk Talk and Sky have only done the same because they compete fiercely with BT and perhaps feel that they have to; in general commercial terms, it is nonsense for them to do so.

GiffGaff is offering a radically new and different approach. Sometimes this type of thing can change a whole market, sometimes the idea sinks without trace. Many of the present deals are obviously give-aways used to enable the company to win customers and get off the ground. I have no idea how long it will be before it starts to actually make money and what sort of deals it will be able to sustain in the long term. I wish it no ill in saying that time will tell.

Non-geographic numbers are not "Normal landlines". Only calls to 03xx numbers have to be (and are in practice) charged at the same rate.


Our campaigning can get complicated as there are three general target areas: Telcos, Ofcom and the various groups of users of the different types of non-geographic number.

This thread is focussed on what HMRC (and perhaps other large public sector users of 0845 numbers) should do NOW.

We may feel that DWP missed a trick by agreeing to pay the mobile operators to make their 0800 numbers free to call. I cannot say whether those who negotiated this arrangement were aware that the mobile companies could have (allegedly) afforded to do it for nothing, and also made all other 0800 calls free at the same time.

I suggest that anyone with the skills or information necessary to enable HMRC achieve a better deal offers this immediately to the officials who are currently looking into its telephone arrangements. I am sure that it would be gratefully received.

With a 03 number there is no external element to the cost of the services used. With 080 numbers there is an additional cost in paying the call originator. With 084 and 087 there is a benefit from the revenue share to offset costs. Because non-geographic numbers have to come with certain additional features built-in, not least the ability to route the calls to terminate somewhere, there is a charge to pay for these features. This is typically levied on a per call basis, as the industry has been used to funding these from revenue share. Some providers are however now offering simple inclusive rental deals. In all cases the actual price paid would depend on which particular services were used and on what scale.

When it comes to HMRC and the like we are talking about massive contracts for complete packages of telecoms services at enormous discounts from standard list prices. This may even be part of a larger contract for a complete call centre operation.

We must however stick to the point:
WITH CALL-BACKS OFFERED TO ALL THOSE WHO PAY EXTRA TO CALL 0845 NUMBERS, IT WOULD BE CHEAPER FOR HMRC TO SWITCH TO 0345.

SilentCallsVictim: Vodafone claims in its online forum (in response to complaints) that it has no choice but to charge for 0800 numbers because BT charges it a premium for connecting calls to those numbers. But I still reckon the big mobile companies could afford to pay for them, at least at certain times (e.g. for a couple of hours in the evening or at weekends). It makes me wonder how giffgaff, a brand new network, can afford to give them free to its members at all times... but as you say, time will tell if that will be sustainable for them in the long term. That's why I'm hesitant about joining giffgaff. They're not even a year old yet and I want to see if they manage to stick to the principles with which they began.

Incidentally, as calls to 03 numbers are inclusive I wonder why BT insists on listing them separately on the phone bill (i.e. not under the section titled: 'Your free calls - included with your calling plan')? I called the NHS Direct 03 number last month, just to test it, and got a recorded message, but even that number is listed separately on our latest bill (with a charge of £0.00).

Have you ever worked in telecoms, SCV? You seem to have a lot of technical knowledge in the field. I find your posts interesting, but sometimes longwinded and difficult to follow.

By the way, I believe Sky only allows 'free' calls to 0870, not 0845 (unlike BT, TalkTalk and Post Office, which allow both). Which is odd - if, as you say, BT loses money on allowing such calls to 0870 but not 0845.

[quote author=sherbert link=1284342717/0#4 date=1284403325]Most people would probably agree with you SCV, however what is completely unacceptable is people being kept on hold for ages and ages and having to pay for that luxuary.

[/quote]
I have a geographic inclusive tarriff.  This means that I don't want to use 0845 numbers.  I'm also unclear about 0345 numbers.  Presumably I have to pay for them.  My biggest objection is that HMRC callers to geographic numbers are now sometimes greeted with a message redirecting the caller to an 0845 number for UK callers and 44 numbers for overseas callers.  If you try to call the 44 number by replacing 44 with 01 you are identified automatically as a UK caller and asked to call an 0845 number, maddening!

[quote author=Dave link=1284342717/0#13 date=1286554310][quote author=Alwyn link=1284342717/0#12 date=1286552390]… I'm also unclear about 0345 numbers.  Presumably I have to pay for them. …[/quote]
Hello and welcome to SAYNOTO0870.COM.

All numbers which start with 03 are treated in exactly the same way as geographic calls by all landline and mobile providers. They have to do that by regulation. So if you have inclusive 01/02 calls, then you have inclusive 03 calls as well.[/quote]
Excellent.  I've listened to the radio prog but it doesn't say where are they to be found for HMRC?  Do you just replace 0845 with 0345 followed by the rest of the number?