Ofcom removes BT's obligations on Carrier Pre-Selection and Indirect Access !
Gerry1
Posts: 4,215 Forum Member
✭✭✭
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/consultations/nmr-13/statement/statement-summary
Ofcom's interminably turgid 538-page document "Review of the fixed narrowband services markets" looks like yet another guaranteed cure for insomnia, but section 1.12 of its Executive Summary caught my eye.
It states "we are removing BT's obligation to offer carrier pre-selection (CPS) and indirect access (IA) where BT's retail arm provides the retail access line;" :eek:
I can't help but feel I've missed something subtle.
Surely Ofcom are not proposing to lock everyone with a BT line (that's effectively everyone with a landline unless it's Virgin Media cable) into using BT's phenomenally expensive calls? Is this the end of 18185, Primus and all the other indirect providers?
What does Ofcom's statement mean in everyday simple terms?
I have a BT line but I pay my line rental to Primus and my calls are routed to them via CPS. I also use Indirect Access via 18185 for daytime calls to UK landlines, mobiles, international etc. What will change?
Ofcom's interminably turgid 538-page document "Review of the fixed narrowband services markets" looks like yet another guaranteed cure for insomnia, but section 1.12 of its Executive Summary caught my eye.
It states "we are removing BT's obligation to offer carrier pre-selection (CPS) and indirect access (IA) where BT's retail arm provides the retail access line;" :eek:
I can't help but feel I've missed something subtle.
Surely Ofcom are not proposing to lock everyone with a BT line (that's effectively everyone with a landline unless it's Virgin Media cable) into using BT's phenomenally expensive calls? Is this the end of 18185, Primus and all the other indirect providers?
What does Ofcom's statement mean in everyday simple terms?
I have a BT line but I pay my line rental to Primus and my calls are routed to them via CPS. I also use Indirect Access via 18185 for daytime calls to UK landlines, mobiles, international etc. What will change?
0
Comments
Since you pay line rental to Primus your service is not supplied by BT Retail, and you aren't using CPS. Primus will be paying BT for wholesale line rental (WLR) so nothing will change for you. If you paid line rental to BT, and then selected Primus via a preset option, that would be CPS and could be affected.
In the old days of Mercury (remember them?) I had an account and could prefix calls with 123 to route via them rather than BT. I used it for dial-up modem calls to keep them separate from my parents' BT bill.
The Mercury access codes were 131 and 132.
However, I think it's the other way around: I do have CPS.
If you dial a prefix (e.g. 18185) then it's Indirect Access, whereas if you just dial the number in the usual way and it's routed automatically to your chosen provider, then that's Carrier Pre-Selection.
In fact, you can have CPS without paying the line rental to the company that charges you for your calls. I had this arrangement for many years because historically I'd had free Call Waiting from BT but routed calls automatically via CPS. I'd complained to BT that certain 1XXXX codes weren't available, and it turned out that my System Y exchange couldn't support them. BT offered to migrate my line to the System X exchange in the same building, but the politics meant that the transfer paperwork needed to have a Star Service ordered (or whatever it was called then). They said it would be free, so I chose Call Waiting.
This happy situation remained the case probably for the better part of two decades until BT said it would become chargeable, so I jumped ship and paid line rental to Primus.
And where BT can screw even more money out of its customers.
So much for freedom of choice and competition in the ,market.
AFAIK it is only CPS if you are not paying line rental to that company. If you rent your line from BT Retail, but use preselection to route calls via Primus, then it's CPS. If you pay line rental to Primus the you aren't renting the line from BT, Primus is, and so CPS doesn't enter the picture.
Your best bet is to call Primus, they will know what commercial arrangement they have with BT.
Ofcom chose to drop the obligation (note, not the service, just the obligation for telecomms companies to provide it) because they found that almost no-one uses per-call selection now. Almost all phone use is based on buying bundles of calls from a provider, i.e. "xxx minutes for £yy per month" and so being able to select alternate providers by number or per call was not used by enough people to make it helpful to force the providers to support it.
Er, sorry, no need for such an antagonistic post. Please read on ....
Firstly, no, I did not read the whole report (put of by the comments about its length in post 1 for starters, I relied upon the relevant extract which was quoted).
Secondly, if you think that BT have not in any way lobbied for this change then you are probably seriously deluded (cynically, I doubt that Ofcom would have changed this without representation from the telcos, why would they).
Thirdly, with BT's track record of screwing more & more out of its basic telephone customers (cf. multiple price rises each year, increasing call connection costs and other hidden charges etc), do you really think that BT will pass up the chance of doing what this Ofcom change allows? Yes, I am a realist (see also next point)
Fourthly, as a user of the 1899.com service (with only the cheapest BT weekend call package as I am a low user, and I don't buy any bundles), and having just renewed my annual line rental saver with BT, I have a right to be negative about this, and have a right to view BT in any light that I want to thanks (and I say that as a BT phone customer of some 28 years standing, boy am I prejudiced against BT .....)
And anyway, why not keep this obligation in place? It's hardly costing Ofcom is it. And if so few people use it, then it's hardly costing BT is it.
Edit: Well, talk about timing:~
BT Price Increases Jan4th 2014
Maybe I will be moving from BT next September.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-2434872/BT-opts-millions-customers-new-1-75-month-charges-services-used-free-prices-hiked.html?ICO=most_read_module
Openreach's provision and maintenance of the line to the exchange has nothing whatsoever to do with the services provided on the other end (the exchange) by a Communications Provider (CP) so JunfanMantovani's comment is irrelevant/wrong.
Gerry1, the implication of your OP as regards provision of CPS and IA and the possibility of it being the end of some Indirect Providers is perfectly correct, however you are confused with regard to CPS and the services provided by companies such as Primus, where you either only have a phone service from them, or you are not on an LLU'd exchange (ie most current Market 1 exchanges), then the phone service is provided using BTw's (BT Wholsesale's) WLR3. So in this context SteveMcK is correct.
There are very few, if any, companies left that will offer a stand alone CPS service to a new customer, they want the money for line rental as well!
That's not to say that customers who signed up for a CPS service years ago still haven't got it, but any remaining such customers could be forced to pay a supplementary fee for it and a similar situation might arise for IA access on 1xxx numbers, either by BT Retail or whoever the line rental is paid to - I have come across some instances where the line rental is paid to another CP and there is also a CPS service routing calls to yet another provider!.
If CP's (that includes BT Retail) are not obliged to provide access to IA or CPS why should or would they if they think they can "persuade" a customer to take a calls package or charge a fee for the IA. And to be clear we are talking "access" to the services. The services are still present as part of the WLR3 provision by BTw and that doesn't change. What I'm not clear on is whether providers other that BT Retail will be allowed to ask for this access to be turned off on their individual provision.
It should be noted that phone services provided by LLU providers and Cable (Virgin) are not obliged to provide IA on 1xxx numbers - and they don't/won't, so there is already reduced choice for customers there.
I was a BT customer for many many years, however over the last decade or so, I've used IA and CPS and still use IA regularly. My line rental on one line, I moved to my Broadband provider because it was slightly cheaper and more convenient to be all on one bill. Another line with very low o/g usage was moved to another CP (Primus) because it was much cheaper and call packages weren't required/wanted nor broadband on the line. The Ts&Cs of my broadband provider states that whilst they currently allow IA they may choose not to do so at a future date. Primus - where they use WLR3, have guaranteed to continue providing IA only until the end of the year (see MSE website), what happens then remains to be seen, but I think we can guess what could happen - less choice for the customer, not conducive to competition at all!
So mossy2103 you are quite right OFCOM are yet again ignoring the consumer, however it's BT Retail they've rolled over for, because I'm sure I read a submission from a number of IA providers opposing OFCOM's proposal when it was in consultation. If I can find the link for it I will post it
Sorry SteveMcK, on this last point you are very wrong. There are many many users of IA services like 1899, 18185 etc.Low users do not want expensive calls packages and there are millions of phone users that don't have extra packages in any event.
I will happily admit that I'm now prejudiced against BT, OFCOM and the current CARTEL of large CP/ISPs.
As mossy2103 has already mentioned, BT Retail have been upping their prices way above inflation more than once a year, and haven't you noticed that every time they do so, all the others follow suit. The competition IMHO only exists in who can con the customer into the longest contract :eek:
As someone whose residential line is on a Market 1 20CN exchange who is forced to pay more for broadband than those that have a choice, OFCOM's latest anti-competitive decision has got me putting pen to paper to complain about them, not only to them, but to my MP and the Secretary of State as well.
Talk about Rip-Off Britain :mad:
Edit: Oh, and whilst there is competition in the fixed voice retail calls markets, how OFCOM can state that no company holds a position of SMP is beyond me, as BT Retail still have the lions share of customers
Thanks.
It will cause a (relatively) massive increase in call costs for people such as myself who make around one daytime call per day and get free evening and weekend calls.
At the moment that costs me ~ £1 a month in call charges.
If and when this goes through it looks as if it will now cost between £5 and £7.
Would there be enough people concerned by this corrupt Ofcom (who are clearly acting only in the interests of BT in this matter) change to get a 'Downing Street Petition' going?
A Downing Street petition sounds like a good idea if all else fails. If true competition is to exist, then ALL CPs (including cable) should be required to give access to IA services on 1xxxx numbers.
BIB - this is the point, CPS/IA should either be a requirement for all CP's to provide or none,
As BTR's Market share of the calls market reduces to the point where they no longer have significant Market share, then OFCOM has to remove any compulsion on BT, as competition is established in the 'calls' market and for that compulsion to remain would be distorting the Market and put BTR at a disadvantage....the alternative would be for OFCOM to compel TT, Sky and VM to provide CPS, any they were never going to do that
CPS is were an end user who pays line rental to BT may pay another provider for some or all calls made from that line..but instead of having to dial an access code before the telephone number, the end user just dials the number, the carrier of the call is pre- selected.
If you have Sky , then all your calls are billed by Sky, they don't have to offer CPS, so they don't.
I remember One Tel used to work on BT lines by dialing 1878 before the number however on cable 'phones you needed an 0800 number. Surely BT would just do the same?
Ah, thank you.
Will be interesting to see how the phone companies react to the phone call discounters move.
Well yes, but they charge more if you go through the 0800 number. Instead of zero pence per minute (5p connection charge) for UK landlines it's 1p per minute.
Can't believe Ofcom are doing this. Totally ridiculous.
Even the 0800 rate quickly becomes uncompetitive for geographic unless used only briefly and rarely.
Losing 18185 access will force landline customers to opt for inclusive packages from their landline provider, and will destroy competition by driving small companies like 18185 out of business.
This is exactly the reverse of what Ofcom should be doing. :mad: