Comment from the fair telecoms campaign
See comment from the fair telecoms campaign.
New BT Phone - not the answer to nuisance calls - http://tiny.cc/ftmr_bt6500.
Posts by David Hickson (Silent Calls Victim)
5 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jun 2010
Psst, wanna block nuisance calls? BT'll do it... for a price
Nuisance calls DOUBLE, Ofcom vows to hunt down offenders
Wednesday 9th January 2013 11:10 GMT
Ofcom misses the point
The fair telecoms campaign has long been pursuing Ofcom over its persistent (mis-)use of its powers to address persistent misuse of telecommunications networks and services.
Our media release in response to yesterday's announcement of a further (in)Action Plan is found at http://tiny.cc/FTMR_inaction.
Ofcom's powers cover any business with a UK presence that instigates misuse, even if it is conducted from outside the EU. The key point is that Ofcom has a policy that knowingly and deliberately tolerates Silent Calls.
Many of the complaints that Ofcom receives identify the perpetrator of Silent Calls, but it takes no action because it deems the relevant activity to be acceptable.
On the wider issue of nuisance calls, the only way to ensure that this issue is properly addressed will be for a citizen-focussed agency to deal with the problem as a whole, ensuring that the statutory powers of the respective regulators and the influence of others are properly and effectively engaged. See - http://tiny.cc/FTBlog_NCProps.
Ofcom stamps out mobile termination fees
Ofcom proposes UK phone numbers prefix re-org
Friday 17th December 2010 16:31 GMT
"Service charge" for NHS Direct, HMRC and DWP
The key element of the Ofcom announcement is the revelation that the 0844 and 0845 numbers used by NHS providers and other public bodies are "business rate" numbers. In exactly the same way as with calls to the X-Factor, the rate for calling them includes a "service charge" which Ofcom wishes to see declared separately. See my media release at bit.ly/gGDmRN.
Ofcom sides with mobile operators on 0845
Wednesday 16th June 2010 09:33 GMT
More to come from Ofcom ... we hope
BT has made a noble attempt to do Ofcom's job for it - assuming of course that BT was intending to hand back all this extra cash to the customers who paid it in the first place.
It is now for Ofcom, when the outcome of the current review is seen in the Autumn, to do its own job properly. With the "NTS condition" lifted from BT, regulation of the surcharges levied on PRS and "revenue sharing" calls will have to applied across the market - Yes Ofcom has at last discovered that BT's rates are not universally copied because of its market dominance.
In my submission to the Ofcom "call for input", I propose that regulation would have to be against a tariff-specific base rate, with banded limits for each call type. Discounting of 01/02/03 calls against the base would be permitted, e.g. through inclusion in packages.
The vital issue is for the extent of the surcharge to cover the cost of paying over money to the call recipient to be limited and known by the caller. We will then be able to see whether we are being ripped off by our bank, our doctor, HMRC or our telephone company - or perhaps all of them, as at present in some cases.
It is for Ofcom to ensure that we can see what is going on, not for BT to collect penalties from those who it believes are being greedy (even if we agree with its judgement. Under present regulations BT can do almost nothing about what it charges for 084 calls, it can however increase its rates for chargeable 01/02/03 calls at the constant rate of 30% per annum, so they now cost more than the most expensive 084 call.
Ofcom must act firmly to end this madness. Thanks for trying BT, but get ready to sort yourself out when your shackles are removed - that is when we will see your true colours.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
