I heard today that ALL Police Forces plan to ditch the Geographic 03 numbers that they have been using and will instead introduce a single number, 101, for ALL non emergency calls. Currently only a few forces offer the 101 alternative which costs customers 10p per call, even if you have a home phone package with inclusive calls. Calls from mobile can vary.

When this happens I want to know if the 10p per call will remain, because if not, then this is yet another stealth tax on the millions of people who have to call the Police each month. The 101 number should be classed as a non-geographic number in the same way as n 03 number.

More on this here

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/CrimeJusticeAndTheLaw/Reportingcrimeandantisocialbeh...

sherbert wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2011 at 9:12am:

That page talks about 101 with respect only to the three areas that it operates currently, so I think it was written prior to the recent announcement. BTW, can someone provide a link to a story on the latest announcement?

What can be reported in areas varies at present. Abandoned vehicles, dumping and fly tipping and faulty street lights can be reported in Sheffield on 101, but not in the two other areas that 101 is available.

I have been advised today that when the the 101 non emergency number is introduced that there will be a fixed cost of 10p from landlines, no doubt calls from mobiles will be vary and cost more. I feel that this number should run alongside a Geographical 03 alternative and not replace it.

Will calls be free from call boxes or will people have to pay the mininum call box charge of 60p? I very much doubt a call box would let you make the call for 10p.

Thanks for your info Sherbert

I have left a message as follows

IT IS DISCUSTING that callers are going to be charged to contact the police, I certainly will not use this number if I wish to contact the police I will either use the local station number or ring 999

sherbert wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2011 at 11:15am:

We await official confirmation of what appears to be an authoritative statement.

All I have been able to glean from various sources is that this will simply be a non-emergency number for contacting the local Police Service. It will not, as originally conceived, also cover reports of matters, e.g. noise, covered by local authorities.

As this looks to be something of a re-launch, the opportunity for the Home Office to re-open negotiations with the telephone companies about the charging basis should have been taken. When granted the number, the Home Office noted the need for consistency of charging and undertook to review the charging basis when assessing the impact of the arrangements initially put in place.

As the scope and nature of the service has changed considerably, there can be no question that a further review is necessary as this goes forward.


I suspect that this item was omitted from the Ofcom consultation - Simplifying Non-Geographic Numbers - as it was seen to be essentially dead. As it appears that it will now return to prominence, Ofcom should be ready to canvass opinion in the context of its general review of NGCS, and to comment at a suitable stage.

The present call cost information for 101 sits clearly within the target area of the type of nonsense that Ofcom seeks to outlaw:-

Quote:

Unless a common simple charge (or none) can be agreed then there must be a PCA. (Note: my advocacy for a PCA for this exceptional case - as is the nature of calls to 101 - must not be seen as undermining my general comments on PCAs.)

---

4PetesSake wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2011 at 10:01pm:

For me the problem is with the variable nature of the charge. The cost of the call has to be met somehow, whether through general taxation or a charge on callers.

Calls to 03 numbers are paid for by the caller at the geographic (lowest) rate they pay for calls (this is generally zero for contract telephones). This is the right approach for many calls to public bodies, where it is proper that citizens incur only the cost associated with a geographical call from their chosen provider and tariff.

In my opinion, 111 should have been priced in the same way as 03 calls (indeed each area ready and able to offer such a service should have had its own 03 number). The 111 trials will be reviewed in the coming Autumn, when I believe that it may have to be reconsidered most seriously. The proposed abandonment of local NHS bodies may make it unworkable in its present form anyway.


Setting 101 at 10p per call from BT makes it cheaper than 03 for some callers at some times, but more expensive for others. The three digit numbers can be priced in any way that can be agreed between the body issued with the number and the telephone service providers; each case should be considered on its merits.

I like the idea of a fixed price per call for 101 and understand the strong arguments for why the rate should not be zero. The police do not have a turnstile at the entrance to a police station, but they do not pay your bus fare or car parking charges when you visit them.

Because of the particular nature of the 101 service, I believe that a single charge rate should be set to apply across all providers, with the necessary cross-subsidy and taxpayer contribution. Whether the appropriate figure is zero, 10p, 20p or £1 per call, it should be the same for all citizens.

If all the costs of the basic telephony (not that of the police call handling, which would be expressed in pounds per call) could be expected to be met at the fixed rate of 10p per call, across all types of telephone, I would not have a problem with this. If such a fixed price went beyond 20p and / or if significant taxpayer subsidy was required, then I would question the propriety of the project. (It seems that I will probably have to raise these questions.)

On the flip side, it can be very difficult if in a strange area (eg on holiday, etc) to work out:

1. What the local police force is
2. Find the number to contact them on

Having one number for all police forces would be useful, but it would need some kind of assistance if automated - eg someone could look up a road name / town etc to put you through if you were not sure which force you needed.

As for the cost, I agree that it should be uniform across all telecom networks.

The idea of a flat rate per call is okay in my eyes, and I'd much prefer that to say 5p per minute (or worse), but if they could keep the cost down (especially as the volume should go up with more forces joining), something like 3 or 4p per call would be good.

Perhaps the local forces will keep their local 03/01/02 numbers, so you have that choice? 101 could be useful for when you don't know the number, but in your home town, you could phone the free alternative.

bazzerfewi wrote on Mar 23^rd, 2011 at 9:40pm:
This is nothing more than adding a third possibility to the options of 1) callers and 2) taxpayers, as to who pays - 3) all telephone users.

If anyone can suggest how a scheme may be implemented whereby certain costs must be met out of the profits of companies, rather than their revenue from charges, then I would be happy to consider the means of funding that is proposed.

(This assumes an absence of total economic regulation by the government, so that all charges are determined by the state.)