The cost of calling 0870 numbers will be cut to the same price as national landline rates, the telecoms regulator confirmed today.

Businesses will no longer get a cut of revenue generated by calls starting with the code, which are used by organisations and government departments, Ofcom said.

The changes, which were first proposed last year, follow customer concerns over unclear pricing and marketing of "non-geographic" numbers such as those starting with 0870.

Full article: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/news/2006/04/nr_20060419

See also:-

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/cond...ward/statement

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/cond...info/statement

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1756892,00.html

Don't hold your breath though, and certainly don't rush to dial those numbers for quite a few months yet:

Ofcom has decided that changes to 0870 calls will be introduced 18 months after the conclusion of the wider Numbering Review (due for publication in summer 2006).

So end 2007/start of 2008?

Also, it's not necessarily a reduction for all numbers:

If providers wish to charge more for 0870 calls they will have to make a free-to-caller price pre-announcement at the start of the call.

Which, if it's the only available number on which to contact an organisation that you have to contact, really is toothless.

This website has saved me a few quid

Not really - It's easy enough to change call provider to one that charges less.

Yes, I think the Say No To 0870 site is well known around here, I've been using it since it started up.

Well companies will just move to 0871 numbers and even flat rate charge premium rate numbers.

I think they should leave it alone but make it against the conditions to call it 'National Rate'.

And what is Ofcom doing about the rip off mobile companies? Absolutely nothing. In fact 3-Mobile has increased termination rates several times since the company launched in 2002. Furthermore, Ofcom needs to look at landline service providers too, BT,NTL and Telewest for example charge line rental costing £10 or more per month. This needs to be reduced or withdrawn for those who spend £20 or more on call charges.

For payphone companies who use BT lines, this should be reduced to less than £3 per month per line as they cannot afford to fund for this.

This should also apply to Mobile companies who also charge line rental, the companies have no need to charge line rental and this should be dropped.

Ofcom should also tackle landline and mobile providers who charge extortionate rates for calling internationally. If companies like Alpha telecom and Telco can do it why can't the main providers do it via direct dialling?

Precisely!

Consumers will be totally confused. It baffles me as to why we have 0870 and 0871 when there is so much free numbering capacity.

The headline for this thread is the sort of misleading rubbish that Ofcom needs to push through such changes that just stir up the mess and do nothing to alleviate it.

Ofcom is also proposing removing the price controls on BT that regulate its line rental charges from August 2006. Within the last two years the most basic line rental from BT has risen by 50%!

So it's quick to relax such 'regulation' but does nothing in the short term to fix the 0845/0870 issues.

For guidance on responding to the Ofcom 'Numbering Review' consultation see www.saynoto0870.com/consultation.

I urge everyone to respond via OFCOM.

The deadline has now been extended to Thursday 25 May. Please send your views in. It doesn't matter how long your response is; as a consumer your views are relevant.

I certainly will.

This is what I would like to see:

01: No changes
02: All cities should use 02 codes
03: Introduce 03 national numbers for org's that want them.
0500: Withdraw this number
0800: Raise the payphone access charge to 10.1p per min
0808: Raise the payphone access charge to 10.1p per min
0844: No changes
0845: No changes
0870: 'Make it against the conditions if owners call it National Rate'
0871: Change to an 090 number
070: Change to 06 numbers
076: No changes

Your proposal to change all cities to 02 is crazy!! It's hard enough work encouraging London to remember its code is 020, then there's only 9 other codes left!

03 - Why? What rates would this be charged at? Introducing more confusion.

Raising 080 costs for payphone users is stupid as well - the end user still provides money back to BT for payphone users.

Not a good plan in my opinion.

You don't understand, all payphone service providers recieve revenue from the owners of the 0800 number. So say I call Barclays bank (0800-400-100) Barclays bank is charged 8.1p per minute by the payphone service provider whilst the person calling the 0800 number doesn't have to pay a penny.

If this rate is not increased it could mean that payphone service providers will start charging for calls to freephone numbers or even bar them. Infolines Public Networks which still operates a few payphones has some payphones connected to the NTL and Telewest network, they have barred 0800 numbers from these particular payphones as NTL and Telewest do not calculate and transfer any revenue to the payphone company like BT wholesale does.

Furthermore, the proposed 03 code by Ofcom is going to be charged at geographical rates or part of the consumers bundle or allowance. So if the consumer is on BT Together option 3, no charges will be made to the consumer or if the consumer uses BT Together option 1 they will be charged 3p per minute during the daytime or 5.5p per call at evenings and weekends. The 03 code will be a national number like 0845, however, businesses and organisations using the 03 number will not be able to recieve any revenue.

With regards to geographical numbers,
If cities used 02 numbers then this would free up millions of numbers and could in the long run be more convenient to consumers.

Glasgow and Edinburgh could be 027 and then 3 for Edinburgh and 4 for Glasgow. This will replace 0131 and 0141. Consumers calling from Glasgow could just dial 3 followed by the number just like 020 7/8. And 2 for Aberdeen.

Liverpool,Manchester,Newcastle,York,Leeds,preston,Carisle could be 026 and then:

15: Liverpool
16: Manchester
19: Newcastle
13: Leeds
04: York
14: Sheffield
19: Carisle
12: Preston
54: Blackburn
53: Blackpool
74: Bradford


Birmingham,Coventry,Leicster could be 024, then:

Birmingham: 21
Coventry: 76 (No change)
Leicster: 16
Tamworth: 27
Stafford: 28
Burton: 83
Warwick: 90

Bristol,Exeter,Penzance and plymouth could be 025:

Then 13 for Bristol
Then 52 for plymouth
Then 20 for Penzance
Then 15 for Exeter

Bournemouth,Brighton,Southampton and Portsmouth could be 023:

Then:

Bournemouth: 02
Brighton: 73
Portsmouth: 92
Southampton: 80
The whole of isle of wight: 98

Guernsey,Jersey,Isle of Man could be 021:

Then Guernsey could be: 81
Then Jersey could be: 34
Then Isle of Man: 24

Oxford,Newbury,Slough,Colchester,Southend,Clacton,Great yarmouth, Norwich,Luton and Cambridge should be 022:

And then:

Oxford: 06
Newbury: 07
Slough: 08
Colchester: 09
Southend: 10
Clacton: 11
Great Yarmouth: 12
Norwich: 13
Luton: 14
Cambridge: 15

The big cities and towns shown above will certainly free up numbers and means that a numberchange will not happen for at least 20 years, maybe more.

Then last but not least London. Change number 5.


020 15: East London
020 16: West London
020 17: Central London
020 18: North London
020 19: South London
020 25: East London businesses
020 26: West London businesses
020 27: Central London businesses
020 28: North London businesses
020 29: South London businesses

This will ensure that London will never see a code change again and all a person has to do to call from Morden to a number in Edgware is dial 18 followed by the number like 18959-1234 or from a mobile 020-18959-1234

So it would be necessary to introduce 12 digit telephone numbers to avoid further changes.

m419 Interesting suggestions on how to change geographic phone numbers. Moving all cities to 02 numbers would be a good idea, (and one which Ofcom already has plans for) as it would remove the shortages of numbers in various areas.

A few problems spring to mind though:

Prefixing 'local' numbers, (i.e. the bits after the dialing code) with a 0 or 1 like you suggested for parts of London and the north would bring about the end of local dialing across those cities (missing out the area code when dialing from a landline) as short codes are accessed using numbers that begin with a 1 and all phone numbers begin with a 0. So your suggestion of dialing from Morden to Edgeware from a landline you would have to use the area code.

This is because when you dial from a landline, the following happens:

You dial a 0, the telephone exchange then expects you to dial an area code and waits for an addtional 8, 9 or 10 digits (depending on the dialing code) before the call is setup. Eg It would wait for an extra 10 digits for calls to MOST numbers as most UK numbers are 11 digits in length.

You dial a 1, depending on the next few digits the telephone exchange waits for between 2 and 5 additional digits before setting up the call. The 1 prefix is for short codes and access to other networks (eg 118118, 1471, 150, 141, 1263 etc)

You dial a 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 or 9 (with the exception of 999) the telephone exchange waits for 5, 6, or 7 additional digits (depending on your area code (eg it waits for 6 extra in Birmingham (0121), 5 extra in Lapworth (01564) and 7 extra in London (020)

Another phone number change for London is very unlikley to happen for a long time yet. Especially if you are not even suggesting changing the area code. This would lead to lots of confusion and consumers wouldn't understand why the changes are taking place - it would just be bad publicity and cost millions.

Using the code 024 21 for Birmingham numbers and keeping 024 76 for Coventry is also a little flawed. This would mean that Birmingham numbers currently in the format 0121 812 1234 would become 024 21812 1234 (12 digits) where as Coventry numbers would be 11 digits. Not a good idea.

One final point changing to 12 digit phone numbers is not necessary, what needs to change is the why phone number blocks are issued to phone compaines. Currently in geographic areas the phone number blocks are issued in blocks of 10,000 numbers (by Ofcom) which leads to many numbers being unused by small compaines but unavailable for allocation to other companies.

Sorry to disagree with nearly everything you have said m419 I hope you can see the reasons why I have.

Those 'regional' codes are bizarre! I mean what on earth does Manchester have to do with Newcastle for instance?

My phone number has changed 3 times in 10 years with the changes affecting London. You would really, really be pushing it changing it again!

Are you sure about that or have you just made that up?

Well it has been all over the news for the last couple of months.
Last edited by BexTech : 24-04-2006 at 15:31

Details here on Ofcom's consultation regarding the deregulation of price controls on BT.

Well I was only showing an example. You have made me realise the restrictions.

Well if all those codes after the 02 code started between 2 and 8, i'm sure it would work and if say Birmingham had a 1 digit number after the 02 code.

Furthermore, if London was divided into several areas and if businesses were given different allocations, then it would likely that a numberchange would never happen for at least 30 years. The city is constantly growing and its important that there is enough telephone numbers.

With regards to Newcastle and Manchester. A survey showed that a large number of consumers call people between those cities in the north and I thought it would be convenient if a local dialling system existed allowing people to call between these cities without the full area code and freeing up millions of numbers at the same time.

Furthermore, one day it will be possible for mobiles to adapt to local dialling,meaning that if you are in Birmingham and want to call 0121-112-1234, you would only need to dial 112-1234, (This is a non-existant telephone number by the way as it starts 112). This would only work in the area you are currently in. Mobile networks can tell which mobile phone mast you are close to and which you are using similar to the O2 home service which identifies customer post codes to offer cheap calling. So it is possible.

And another thing, it might be time for shortcodes to go.

In some NTL areas, they have withdrawn all shortcodes and just left 1471 and 1571.

If BT did this they will withdraw the following instantly:

123 (Could be replaced by an 0845 number)
150
151
152
154 (Offers the same as 151)
155 (Could be jointly used via 100)
1263 (These could be replaced by 0800 numbers)
1471 (Maybe withdraw it completely and offer caller display units if the customer doesn't have a phone which has a display.)
1571 (Use a 0800 access number)
118 numbers (Replace them with 0871 or 0900 numbers)
999 (Withdraw 999 and just use 112)

The numbers which start with 15 are already available to be called on alternatives such as 0800-800-150.

NTL mostly advertises its 0845 or 0800 number for customer service whilst in some areas 1503 is the the short alternative.

Oftel was talking about withdrawal of shortcodes a while back,but looks like its been brushed under the carpet.

This will release some more numbers too, like 0121-126-3870 (1263 has been used in this number) or 0207-150-0000, All these numbers have been blocked by Ofcom and BT.

Regional codes make a bit of sense when the whole region switches, e.g.

020 Greater London (As current, some outlying areas may be moved into this code)
021 South West (including South Coast to west of Solent)
022 Home Counties and East of England (incl Oxon)
023 Solent and South Coast to East (Extend current)
024 West Midlands (Extend Current) (incl Glos and Wocs.)
025 East Midlands (incl Lincs and Northants)
026 North West
027 Yorkshire
028 Northern Ireland
029 Wales
030 Scotland
031 North East
032 Channel Islands
035 direct access to Éire

041 British Public Service bodies - e.g. 043 1 for NHS, 043 2 for Police, 043 3 for Fire Service
042 for overseas embasies and their diplomats - 118042 would get you put through to your embasy for the same price as calling them direct.
049 British Armed Forces

Within the North West of England we would see the inital
026 2 Greater Manchester (0161)
026 3 Greater Manchester (none 0161)
026 3 Merseyside (0151)
026 4 Merseyside (none 0151)
026 5 South Lancashire
026 51 Preston
026 52 Blackpool
026 6 North Lancashire
026 61 Lancaster
026 7 Cheshire
026 71 Chester
026 8 Cumbria

04X would be used for national numbers (the purposed 030)

01X would be permantly withdrawn, which would allow a later switched to full number dialing (Excluding the 0) All shortcodes (except 999) would move to 11X XXX numbers.

All numbers except those free to call, geographic rates and mobiles (easy to id though the 02, 03, 04, 07, 0800 prefixes) must also have a recorded announcement detailing charges including VAT before connection.

None of this 'regionalisation' makes any sense at all!! If you changed 0161 to 026 2, you still have 7 figures afterwards. That's the same as local figures now.

The other thing I think everyone has forgotten is that whilst people on here may comprehend the reasoning behind it, you change the country's codes and it's bloody complicated. PhONEday was easy compared to what is being suggested here. You get the older population and you'll never get them used to dialing 8 figure local numbers that easily. I still see it now in London, 6 years after the 020 code was introduced.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

Sorry, I quoted too much of the initial quote by DonnyDave.

I was speaking about his claim that BT basic line rental has increased by 50% in the last 2 years.
Last edited by timboy : 25-04-2006 at 13:07

Right I see, I think this is based on the fact that a few years ago you were able to get a basic line rental for around £9.25 this included £3 maybe more of inclusive calls, BT then forced everyone onto BT Together where the line rental is now £11, so the line rental has gone from £6.25 (£9.25 - call allowance of £3) up to £11 in a couple of years, you may have got a larger call allowance, I can't remember now.

Details of BT Standard here.

BT Standard cost £9.50 per month when paid by direct debit. This included a call allowance of £2.15. Assuming one used all the inclusive call-credit (I think most people would); then the underlying line rental is therefore £7.35.

In July 2004 BT Standard was scrapped and subscribers on it were migrated to BT Together Option 1. This package now costs £11 per month, thus the true increase was £3.65 or almost half of £7.35.