The London 2012 Olympic Games comprise 26 sports. ... London 2012. One Churchill Place Canary Wharf London E14 5LN
Tel: 020 3 2012 000

Head Office 020 3 2012 000

Community Relations Team 08000 722 110, 24

Please try these numbers and add them to the database if they are correct

Dave wrote on Feb 20^th, 2011 at 10:38pm:


I can't see one on the website

I have found an additional telehone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6188; the Committee they may direct you to the correct department

I have, thus far, added two alternatives for London 2012 number 0845 267 2012 and they are 020 3201 2000 for Head Office and 0800 072 2110 for Customer Relations.

If anyone finds any more or more suitable ones, please advise by posting here and I will amend the listings. 

P.S.  Its quite clearly a matter of total luck as to how 18185 decides to route your call to this number or the time of day as I tried calling them just now using the 020 number and got the usual message telling me to dial the 0844 number and saying I had "not been charged" for making the call to the geographic number.

I have tried repeatedly now using 1411815 and I can't get through to the London 2012 ticket line and just get the message telling me to call the 0844 number so to be sure I had not imagined things and accidentally dialled the 0844 number when I got through earlier I logged on to my 18185 account and sure enough the call history shows this entry:-

09-05-2012       15:58:31  02079981919  00:13:07  0.0500

At least 18185 haven't charged me for any of the calls where I got the message to call the 0844 number as I feared they might have done given that I also got the "zero p per minute message" on each of these calls before tthen getting the message telling me the number had changed to the 0844 number (a bare faced lie on Ticketmaster's part with the connivance of BT or the telecoms network since the message to call another number is a telephone network originated message).

I'm going to try to remember to call tomorrow before 4pm and see what happens

Dave wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 4:35pm:


Dave,

I'm pretty sure its time of day related with time of day governing which carrier and/or routing path 18185 uses to connect the call (I am being rejected persistently now time after time but got straight through just before 4pm).  If you could always get through before 4pm UK time then it would be pretty worthwhile. 4pm is 5pm which is close of business in Europe so I expect this is how time of day comes in to it.

The fact that a totally misleading network message is played saying the number is changed rather than an honest message saying that the call recipient refuses to accept calls to this number from UK callers is surely a regulatory matter of the highest concern.

Surely refusing to connect calls to a number depending on where you originate the call from is a matter that ought to interest Ofcom and a totally misleading network message saying "the number has changed" also ought to interest them.  HMRC do not claim their UK geographic numbers have changed they just tell you that the number is only available to callers from overseas.  This is an honest and accurate depiction of what is going on.  Although the fact that UK callers have their call rejected to an still existent number should still be a matter for Ofcom.

This is the kind of thing the OFT ought to be getting very stirred up about since it is a blatant attempt to prevent a consumer in the UK using the lowest cost possible method of reaching a still in existence 020 number that they want to call.  Of course it is an established fact that the OFT is completely useless on all matters of competition in the field of telephony.  If not they wouldn't have 0845 numbers themselves which they have extensively misdescribed as "local rate", numbers and these are numbers which they still have in use to this day whilst 03 is now beginning to become widely used by many other governmental bodies for telephone contact.

I don't agree with you that the alternative number should not be in the database with notes.  Fact is that I got through with it today and that I had to use Google to find the number because you had removed it.  Also the fact the number exists but is being rejected by Ticketmaster for UK callers with a misleading network message needs publicising and not hiding.  Since the 020 number that sometimes works costs you nothing if it doesn't work then I see no harm in it continuing to be listed with the right notes of explanation and/or encouragements to email sebastian.coe@london2012.com about the matter.

Can somebody also tell me which telco the 020 range this number is in belongs to so we can then make a complaint about the deliberate misleading network message that "the number has changed".

NGMsGhost wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 4:51pm:

I don't regard it as being of the "highest" concern; there are things much higher than this.

For example, (I know that it was certainly the case at one time) that some of the smaller telcos that have blocks of numbers that haven't been issued to customers, were classed as connected and therefore metered. They usually play a message saying something like "You've called a non-working «such and such telco» number. The big telcos do not do this and do as they should do: that is return not recognised, unobtainable or similar. If this is still going off, then I regard it as a higher concern. This one sprung to mind when you talked about this telco returning the "misleading" message of state.

Then there's the case of calls to a supermarket chain that are being overcharged by one large landline provider to which the regulator isn't bothered about.

These are two examples. I'm sure we could think of more pressing issues if we put our minds to it.


NGMsGhost wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 4:51pm:

By the same token, a withheld CLI to a number where anonymous calls are rejected does not permit onward connection to a subscriber.

Then what has "lowest cost possible method" got to do with it? There can only be one cost for calling one particular number from one particular telephone call provider.


NGMsGhost wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 4:51pm:

I did not say that it "should not" be in the database, I said "I am not sure that it is really worthwhile to add it".

There are two reasons for my position:

1. It has been demonstrated to work only with a particular call provider at some times (and not others).

2. Refer to my comment below. I think that it would be more worthwhile to try and find a number that works more reliably. If such a number cannot be found; for example the generic 0161 numbers don't go to agents who will help, then the possibility of listing the 020 number, with suitable note, can be reassessed.


NGMsGhost wrote on May 9^th, 2012 at 4:51pm:

As I said in my posting, the network announcement is a TalkTalk (formerly Opal) one, so that is the provider. It is the same provider as the 0844 number. It is also perhaps worth noting that other TicketMaster 0844 numbers are on the same TalkTalk block.


I suggest that the 020 number is a single number that has been set-up specially for this purpose (one of the requirements being that it is a London number). I suggest that it is essentially a virtual number that directs to another location, much like the 0844 numbers do.

If I was looking for an alternative for this one, I would be looking in the area of the company's numbers. My undertstanding of TicketMaster is that it is based within the 0161 area code and that it has lots of these for each 0844 number to point to. Some answer with a generic TicketMaster message and this would surely be worth a shot as if it does go through to someone who can help with London 2012 enquiries (perhaps the 0844 and 020 both go through to the same place) then it will be a much more reliable alternative than the 020 "overseas" number.

This thread has been running for over a year, and someone has yet to explore this avenue and share with us their findings.

If no one has been that interested to carry out such a simple step, then maybe people aren't that bothered about finding an alternative.