MSE News: 'Just been charged £183 for one call via 118 118' – that's more than a sex

Oblivion

I suppose they've got to pay for those bloody stupid TV adverts somehow.

magpiecottage

Silly me.

I had not realised 118 118 was the price of using them.

Credit-Crunched

£10 wrote: »

Most of the comments on this thread are missing the point that Martin is making here.

The blog does not question whether or not 118 118 is operating legally - of course it is. If they weren't, consumers wouldn't need to turn to the community to air their grievances and look for a solution, it would be a clear case of law.

Nor is it relevant to point out that the customer should have read the smallprint first. Let's face it, who does when they're in a hurry? If someone has the ability and the time to scrutinise the T's & C's, they wouldn't be using 118 118 in the first place - it would be quicker and cheaper to use Google. And if you think the customer should have looked up the costs BEFORE an emergency occurred, so they were already aware of what it would cost them should they ever need to dial such a number, I challenge you to memorise the pricing of every service of convenience that you MIGHT need to use one day...

The point is that 118 118 is not operating in an ethical, open or customer-centric manner. They are clearly overcharging for a low-value service by trading on their customers' predicaments, and disguising their exorbitant charges behind woolly, hard-to-find terms and conditions.

Therefore, we should sympathise with the tweeter's plight, as it is often only a joint community effort that results in unethical business practices being nipped in the bud. If enough people complain about a company's underhand tactics, there just may be enough collective clout to persuade the company to make things clearer or cheaper. MSE has used its influence to bring about positive changes to benefit consumers on many occasions, and long may it continue.

How is it unethical? It is business, you are paying for a service and for the convenience.

Should Martin Lewis lead a crusade against the price of Popcorn at a Cinema or the price of Haribo at a service station on the m4?

No, because it is the buyers choice to use these services or facilities, and they should accept the conditions when doing so.

£10

Credit-Crunched wrote: »

Should Martin Lewis lead a crusade against the price of Popcorn at a Cinema or the price of Haribo at a service station on the m4?

No because neither are likely to cost £183, and both are priced more clearly than 118 118.

redux

I made 3 calls to a different directory service from a mobile, starting with £5 credit and surviving, when there was no internet connection.

The only other time I've used directory service from a mobile, I got details of the nearest tyre places and we arrived at one 5 minutes before it would have closed. Without the £1.50 directory call there would have been the cost of two hotel rooms for the night.

Twice in 15 years is survivable.

IDeamOfFairies

agarnett wrote: »

Unfortunately characters like IDeamOfFairies (that'll be the MSE'er who couldn't read their own smallprint when choosing a username )

It was MY choice not to add an "R" to my username as my grandson could not say the word DREAM and said DEAM so my username was made in his memory

And if that is the best you can do - maybe you need to get out more

agarnett

IDeamOfFairies wrote: »

It was MY choice not to add an "R" to my username as my grandson could not say the word DREAM and said DEAM so my username was made in his memory

Aw...Bless! Please accept my apologies for inadvertently desecrating the memory ...

And if that is the best you can do - maybe you need to get out more

It is assuredly however not the best I can do ... I am very much a mountain-mover if the mood takes me on some of these deliberate consumer traps. Setting them and then defending the right to continue setting them is not nice behaviour in any sense, whether it is done by individuals in the name of business, or whether it is done by individuals simply following their own misguided cultural norms.

problemcashback

Another example, there have been a few this week, start using the Internet, there was a story last year of a woman spending £100 a month!! On 118 calls her money saving tip, you guessed it use the Internet, some people shouldn't be allowed to spend money

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2957951/How-one-call-directory-inquiries-cost-137-Thought-end-192-mean-cheaper-service-NOT-wrong.html

Fella

MSE_Helen wrote: »

The firm 118 118's adverts once gave the nation a great giggle ...

No they really really didn't. Everyone hates the ****s. They have always been as funny & as welcome as a turd in a swimming pool. Or in this case, two turds.

Disgraceful behaviour by that firm here, clearly a scandalous ripoff. Hope they get done for it.

gjchester

Consumerist wrote: »

. I wonder how often it's used by employees so the employer picks up the tab.

Probably not a lot, most small company exchanges will be set not to allow calls to 118 numbers to be made,