I believe that this answers many of the questions.

Click the image to see it clearly in full size. See the complete poster at this link.



The unqualified statement “no more than the cost of a call to an 01 or 02 number” is intended to mean what it says.

The comments at http://www.nhsglos.nhs.uk/telephonenumbering/ offer explicit reassurance, confirming that for all 03 numbers this does apply to inclusive packages and calls from mobiles.

The reason for choosing the 0300 range is given, although there is no explicit explanation of why the 0345 range was not chosen.

Whilst the latter portions of the numbers are being retained in most cases, there is some re-jigging of the middle portion to reflect organisational changes as a result of the NHS reforms, so that each (new) organisation may have a distinct block of numbers, as was the case previously.

For an organisation with many 084 numbers, 034 only provides a temporary "cheap fix". A move to 030 (or 033) has to happen when new numbers are required. I still maintain that this provides an appropriate option for DWP and HMRC, as in these times of restricted expenditure cheap fixes are needed.


One is always looking for ways in which a job such as this could have been done better. I have to say that if the excessive time it has taken for this change to be made has been used to get it right, then it has been well spent.

catj wrote on Dec 1^st, 2012 at 11:00am:

You are correct. The term "landlines", as used in the terms of your (hypothetical) mobile phone contract needs clarification. If it is intended to refer only to 01 and 02 numbers, rather than non-geographic landline numbers such as 080/084/087 and 09 (as is the case with some mobile contracts), then it should be made plain that it also includes 03 numbers.

Unfortunately the statement "03 numbers are included in bundled minutes" would not be true in a case where the bundle did not include 01 and 02 numbers. Furthermore, the term "bundled minutes" is not generally used to describe the unlimited inclusive calls provided under the terms of landline Call Plans.

To completely cover the point and avoid any potential for confusion, a much longer statement would be required. In the context of a poster, I believe that the wording used is sufficient. Likewise, the more extensive information provided on the website is also sufficient and proportionate.

The real problem is the lack of proper, widely-understood terms to cover the different categories of telephone call types for the purpose of charging. Let us hope that Ofcom will address this fully and properly as it seeks to "Simplify Non-geographic Numbers".