Barbara wrote on Jul 1
st, 2011 at 5:09pm:
SCV, there is one part of this whole matter that has concerned me for some time; could the GPs etc argue that "having regard to the arrangement as a whole" allows them to argue that it is not the cost to individual patients that matters as long as, for example, BT customers pay no more than the equivalent geo rate and that it is up to the individual if they choose a telecoms provider, even mobile, who charges more ie is that a "get out" clause? Your advice on this would be appreciated as I am involved in a battle over hospitals using 0845 & want to be prepared for any reply.
Anyone providing NHS services must accept that "the arrangement as a whole" is a simple recognition that the NHS is a universal service.
The "whole" means including all parts, all patients, not just a subset who perhaps choose a particular telephone service provider and Call Plan [and then breach the terms of that Call Plan by making geographic calls during times when it does not apply, thereby incurring penalty charges]. (The latter, bracketed, part only applies to 0844, not 0845, numbers.)
There is nothing whatsoever in the clear terms that refers to anything other than what "persons" actually pay to call the NHS Provider, as against the cost of an equivalent call to a geographic number. "Equivalent" can only mean under the terms of the same service from the same provider. It is the reality of the situation which is addressed, not some assumed "norm". It is totally wrong for anyone to suggest that the wholly anomalous case of BT, which originates only 25% of non-business UK calls, is in any way representative of the general position.
The essential wording quoted above is also found in the
Directions to NHS Bodies, which apply to hospitals (and also those few GPs subject to a PMS contract).
(If anything interesting is happening with Chase Farm since I was last involved, or perhaps you have found another, please drop me a message.)