Sorry if this has been covered in an earlier thread, but on checking my most recent bill I found I'd made calls totalling £5, all of zero duration and to my own home number!!?

Not understanding how this was possible I checked with BT and discovered this was connected to the 1471 service which although it is free in the first instance, if you then press "3" to use call-back you are charged ~7.5 pence each time, in addition to the normal call charges, for the privilege.

I'm not saying it's extortionate and many will find it a useful service as long as we all know about the cost and realise that most caller ID phones can do the same job free.

There is an announcement that a fee is charged, the same thing happens on the new 1571-0 service.

It was widely published on many forums and in newspapers and magazines that BT started charging for pressing 3 sometime back, I think it has recently increased too.

It was suggested you either get the free caller display service and just dial the number from there, or write down the number on 1471 and dial it back.

There is a message on 1471 that there is a charge.

I have brand new caller display units for sale if anyone wants one.

Agreed.
Unfortunately I had never heard the announcement at the end because the caller display phone was already showing the number calling and for convenience I was just pressing 14713 immediately.

That was exactly what the BT scumbags were hoping for.

People who habitually use 14713 don't wait to listen to the message so they wouldn't hear the little extra bit tagged on at the end.

Even though I subscribe to several forums I hadn't heard about the change. It was only because I didn't hang up immediately that I happened to hear of the change.

I checked with several people and none of them knew about it.

I bet BT have made a nice bit of extra dosh from that.

(Rather in the same way that they make money from people who use the 1571 system and cause their callers to get stung for a connexion fee every time they call whilst they are engaged).

Had you ever wondered why the basic 1571 service is free?

Well, now you know.

Oh yes, I hate 1571, and yes BT offered it free because they knew they could get even more money out of people.

With this in mind can anyone recommend a good answerphone with caller ID? I'd love to ditch 1571, but must admit it has been useful at times.

Most DECT phones store (the numbers of) at least the last ten missed calls nowadays. That works for me.

A cheap answerphone plugged into another socket does the rest.

So let me get this right: there's an announcement saying you'd get charged but you didn't listen to it and are now complaining?

Why would you expect anyone who's used this service for years to carry on listening beyond the point at which the details of the last person to call are given?

Would you be surprised if most folks either press "3" or just hang up? Which I'd guess is precisely what BT would be hoping for.

Well, you seem to have got the facts correct. Well done!

It's the rather elementary logic with which you appear to be having a bit of a problem.

This 'elementary logic' beats me too.

Are you seriously suggesting people are so eager to make that return every call that they have never listened to the end of the message? If you are, chill out guys!

Now you know there's a charge (I guess those who are too busy to listen to the end of the announcement are too busy to read the mail that told users that this charge applied), rememberto rightdown the number and dial it yourself - save yourself a small fortune.

Same as when you call directory enquires - always decline their nice offer to 'connect you' - there's an horrendous charge associated with that.

Oh dear.

I suppose, in your favour, at least you admit your problem

Let me try to explain.

When the '3' part of the 1471 service was introduced, it was free, and remained so for many years.

When you call 1471, what you hear is someone very slowly reading out something along the lines of:

"Telephone - number 0 - 2 - 0 - - 8 - 5- 5- 5 - - 1 - 2 -3 - 4 - called - on the - 27th - at seventeen fifty three - - - to - return - the - call - - press - three".

Now, you and 3db might like to listen to the whole of that message, and then wait to see of BT have sneakily added anything to the end, but normal people will be in the habit of pressing three as soon as they recognise the number. This they may well have done for years with no charge, and then BT (knowing full well that only a complete idiot would be in the habit of listening to the message to the very end before pressing three), decide to make themselves a bit of extra money by adding a charge.

Quite legal, but the action of utter scumbags.

Thanks, I was beginning to think I was the only one who doesn't like wasting time.
Frankly I can't understand why anyone would hold on to the bitter end of the announcement until told by BT that they should hang up the phone now like a good chap.

I corrected your post

They also wrote to you about the introduction of the charge many moons ago, have always mentioned it since when referring to the service and the charge is detailed on their website.

What more would you expect them to do? Have the notification first before they tell you the number? I bet people would then complain they had forgotten about it by the time they had listened to the whole message?

Perhaps there should be a visual & audible warning before you enter any shop something like "Warning - entering this premises and taking advantage of our service will cost you money - do not enter our premises to take advantage of our services if you do not wish to give us money"


Oh, silly me, you really expect something for nothing, don't you?

You'd be better aiming your anger at the directory enquiries companies.

Perhaps what BT should have done is put the "you will be charged x pence per minute for this call" message on AFTER you press 3 and before connecting you.

Orange for example do that with calls to 0800 numbers from your mobile, which they now charge for. If you dial an 0800 number you get a warning message that it may cost you or use up some of your free minutes allowance and are given a few seconds to hang up if you don't want to proceed. If you wait then you get connected.

I've no doubt BT could have done something very similar and probably have avoided all the hassle people are feeling.

Since you wish to be pedantic, I'll just point out that you did nothing of the kind. I said " reading out something along the lines of" because I'm not anal enough to actually transcribe it. Nice to know that someone is


So as well as being sufficiently anal as to transcribe the 1471 message, you've been rummaging about in my rubbish?


That would be a rather less scumbag approach, yes.

Of course, not charging people for something that costs them next to nothing and brings in custom would be an even better option.


You might well do that but I doubt anyone else would.


A rather poor attempt at an analogy

What would be a better analogy would be if Asda installed a device that flashed a sign saying "you will be charged £2 for the use of this trolly" after you'd removed the trolly and were out of eyeshot (having previously provided free trolly use for many years).


Self knowledge really is a wonderful gift.


Duh, no, I expect to pay for the call


Why would I be angry at them - I never use them

But BT fully intend that people use the paid for 1471 without realising it is costing them money.

They know perfectly well that people don't read all the guff they send out with every bill.

Of course, you'll always get some anal suck-up who'll tell you that if people can't be bothered to read everything they are ever sent by everyone with whom they do business it's all their own fault, but even courts of law have been known to find in favour of consumers when obscure changes to t&c's have been burried away in pages of fine print.

BT very sucessfully pulled exactly this stunt many years ago when for no logical reason (other than to scam their customers) they suddenly started charging peak rates for daytime phonecalls on bank hollidays when these hade been cheap rate for many, many years.

There are still people who aren't aware of this change.

Not sure if BT deliberately buried the charge for 1471 - don't have a BT phone so wouldn't know the how/what/when/where of the information they may have sent out. But equally I don't recall seeing anything from Orange saying I would now have to pay for 0800 calls. They probably did but I never read it - or at least don't recall reading it. So I suppose the same could be said of BT customers who were notified of the change but never read it.

However at least with Orange 0800 calls I get the option to cancel a call as I have no option BUT to listen to their warning message about being charged. So one would have to argue that the technology exists to make customers aware of a potential charge. Which then leads to the question as to why BT could not do something similar and insert a warning AFTER you press 3.

Surely that would be a minor inconvenience? Especially if. like Orange 0800 calls, there was a couple of seconds pause to let you hang up if you didn't want to incur the connection charge?

I might also add that I, like many others, signed up for on-line billing and no longer receive paper bills from BT.
AFAICR I have had no letters from them for a couple of years now.
If BT have advertised this change to 1471 callback on their website I'm afraid I didn't spot it.

I just added/modified your post a little
No, you appear to make so many assumptions. I think it would be wierd that BT single you out to not tell you when they have told all of their other millions of customers. But as you claim not to know of the charge, you clearly have just binned the information without reading it. As it's been years since this charge has been introduced, you ovbiously have failed to read the information anumber of times!


Asda don't charge for use of their shopping trolley? If they decided to introduce a charge, they would advise you of the charge before you used their service. But of course there will always be those who don't read the notice and will complain when they don't get their money returned


So you agree you do expect to receive the service of connecting you for free
If you don't want to pay the connection charge, just dial the number yourself
Of course that will waste you upto about 5 valuable seconds which if you can't wait to hear the end of the message, I'm not sure you can spare this time either
(in which case you'll have to pay for the time & effort saving service BT offer)


Why not, they used to be free and the operator used to connect you for free too? As you clearly don't bother reading the literature sent to you advising amendments to charges, I'm surprised you realised there is now a charge.
Last edited by dawson : 13-07-2006 at 02:24

Of course they do

Pissing off customers is a great way to attract and retain them, isn't it

Perhaps BT should follow the initiative of Bill Gates?

To return the call press 3

You have decided to connect the call by pressing 3, are you really sure you wanted to do this? To confirm press 3

You have decided you really want to connect the call. Did you know you would be charge for this service? To confirm, press 3.

You have decided to proceed despite knowing there is a charge. Do you know the charge associated with this service. Press 3 to confirm or press # to hear the cost.

Are you really sure you want to use the service despite knowing a charge will apply and that you are aware of the cost of this service. To confirm press3.

We are about to attempt to connect your call for you at the charge you have been advised, To confirm press 3.

Are you really, really sure? To confirm press 3.

I wonder if that would be sufficient advice for some people?
Last edited by dawson : 13-07-2006 at 02:28

This charge was introduced 2 years ago, and advice of it's intended introduction weeks before that

If you signed up for online billing, check those terms and conditions. I suspect they may notify you by email and they cannot be held responsible if you don't receive their emails, perhaps because of an overactive spam filter.

Or perhaps that the terms of service advise you to keep up to date with the terms and conditions of supply via their website if you have agreed to online communication.

In any event, the charge was also notified in the media (e.g. BBC news) as well as adverts in most of the daily press.
Last edited by dawson : 13-07-2006 at 02:32

I disagree that it's a matter opf being a corperate 'suck up'.

It's a matter of personal standards of honesty.

It's quite obvious that BT knew full well that the vast majority of people would not become aware of the charge - if they did it's unlikely that they'd use the 'service' since nowadays the chances are that your last caller is in your phone's memory anyway, so why would anyone pay BT 10p rather than use their phone's feature?

BT's action is the sort of borderline dishonesty that whilst not illegal offends people with higher standards than the typical corperate slimeballs who make their fortunes by 'clever' advertising and small print that is designed to make people think they are getting one thing when they are actually getting something quite different.

And if anyone complains they can hold their hands up and say: "don't blame me if people don't read the small print".

Clearly, this type of person will see nothing wrong with BT's behaviour because they would probably indulge in exactly the same type of behaviour themselves if they thought they could make any money out of it.

You will never reconcile the viewpoints. Those who believe that all activities shoul be as honest, transparant and above board as possible will never agree with those who use small print and sneaky wording to deceive people into paying more or getting less than they were lead to belive they would get.