Cable Forum - View Single Post

dustymunchkin · 18-10-2009, 01:11

I don't disagree with you. As I said BT 'pre empted' the changes by making calls to 0870 'free' from January 16th.
I've not seen the recorded announcement legislation and can't see how the CPs would be involved. Generally they're in house.That would mean no ansafones out of hours (?)

I read that bit about a free pre recorded announcement in the early part of that document without realising they later dumped that proposal - something to do with call systems interference. It's not true. My mistake.
And yes you are quite right, none of the legislation precludes higher charges being made by your own service provider (so long as it is clearly published) BUT I think you might be missing the relevance of making sharing of revenue illegal.
Why would a business allow it's customers to pay more for calls (that have to be clearly advertised by the business) when they can no longer benefit from the revenue?
If the provider of the line to the business charges more than Nat rate to the caller, the business will just port their phone number somewhere else. The 'effect' rather than the 'legislation' has been to bring charges down to national rates and Communications providers including BT now charge the business (exactly like 0800) That has happened.

The second part of this (which is where the BT bit comes in) is to get the Communication providers like BT and VM to charge in accordance with what they are being charged.

BT are. Vodafone & VM are still charging premium rates. There's nothing to stop them charging more for a call if they make it clear they're ripping you off. Your provider is the one who says how much you pay. They should be charging like 01 or 02.

But then there's Barclays.....They can't share in the revenue so why allow the provider to charge above National rate?
My best guess is that the Terminal provider is providing them with call management services 'free of charge' The provider is taking the cost from the caller.

Ofcom left the TPs with provision of services so they still had a way of making money. I don't think they envisaged the caller paying for them.

If I'm right, it's a loophole that Ofcom need to block. I'm guessing the first to challenge will be BT as it's them that will be paying for the call on package deals. This could be the reason VM and others are holding back.....

I've read the document. As I said quite hard to read but the first 140 pages are 'we thought...and then we thought....and then again we thought..' The actual legislation is about p145 on. (and even then there's a page or two of waffle before they show the actual 5 lines or so of new legislation)

Ofcom spend 3 years trying to make 0870 nat rate without putting a load of tps out of business and Barclays find a way to carry on ripping off it's customers.
Way to go Barclays.
Remind me never to bank with them.:-)

18-10-2009, 01:11	#15
dustymunchkin Inactive Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 12	Re: First VM Bill Error? I don't disagree with you. As I said BT 'pre empted' the changes by making calls to 0870 'free' from January 16th. I've not seen the recorded announcement legislation and can't see how the CPs would be involved. Generally they're in house.That would mean no ansafones out of hours (?) I read that bit about a free pre recorded announcement in the early part of that document without realising they later dumped that proposal - something to do with call systems interference. It's not true. My mistake. And yes you are quite right, none of the legislation precludes higher charges being made by your own service provider (so long as it is clearly published) BUT I think you might be missing the relevance of making sharing of revenue illegal. Why would a business allow it's customers to pay more for calls (that have to be clearly advertised by the business) when they can no longer benefit from the revenue? If the provider of the line to the business charges more than Nat rate to the caller, the business will just port their phone number somewhere else. The 'effect' rather than the 'legislation' has been to bring charges down to national rates and Communications providers including BT now charge the business (exactly like 0800) That has happened. The second part of this (which is where the BT bit comes in) is to get the Communication providers like BT and VM to charge in accordance with what they are being charged. BT are. Vodafone & VM are still charging premium rates. There's nothing to stop them charging more for a call if they make it clear they're ripping you off. Your provider is the one who says how much you pay. They should be charging like 01 or 02. But then there's Barclays.....They can't share in the revenue so why allow the provider to charge above National rate? My best guess is that the Terminal provider is providing them with call management services 'free of charge' The provider is taking the cost from the caller. Ofcom left the TPs with provision of services so they still had a way of making money. I don't think they envisaged the caller paying for them. If I'm right, it's a loophole that Ofcom need to block. I'm guessing the first to challenge will be BT as it's them that will be paying for the call on package deals. This could be the reason VM and others are holding back..... I've read the document. As I said quite hard to read but the first 140 pages are 'we thought...and then we thought....and then again we thought..' The actual legislation is about p145 on. (and even then there's a page or two of waffle before they show the actual 5 lines or so of new legislation) Ofcom spend 3 years trying to make 0870 nat rate without putting a load of tps out of business and Barclays find a way to carry on ripping off it's customers. Way to go Barclays. Remind me never to bank with them.:-)