Simply Be - Premium rate phone number

dr_genestealer

From a recent bad experience with Simply Be sending me the wrong goods and the charges I accrued using the phone number written on the paperwork sent with the goods I realise they are listing their premium rate customer service phone number as the one to call for "Order & Payments".

The most prominent number, in bold on this paperwork is 0871 231 5000. You would HAVE to be an existing customer to even have this paperwork, thus they are promoting you, as an existing customer, to call their premium rate customer service phone number.

I think they should be stopped, as per the Consumer Protection (Consumer Minister Jo Swinson today (13 December 2013).

Copy of shipment paperwork:

wealdroam

dr_genestealer wrote: »

From a recent bad experience with Simply Be sending me the wrong goods and the charges I accrued using the phone number written on the paperwork sent with the goods I realise they are listing their premium rate customer service phone number as the one to call for "Order & Payments".

The most prominent number, in bold on this paperwork is 0871 231 5000. You would HAVE to be an existing customer to even have this paperwork, thus they are promoting you, as an existing customer, to call their premium rate customer service phone number.

I think they should be stopped, as per the Consumer Protection (Consumer Minister Jo Swinson today (13 December 2013).

Copy of shipment paperwork: dropbox.com/s/az2rtzi3lfaci1p/Simplyt%20Be.jpg

Regulation 41 of The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 says:

Help-line charges over basic rate

41. — (1) Where a trader operates a telephone line for the purpose of consumers contacting the trader by telephone in relation to contracts entered into with the trader, a consumer contacting the trader must not be bound to pay more than the basic rate.

(2) If in those circumstances a consumer who contacts a trader in relation to a contract is bound to pay more than the basic rate, the contract is to be treated as providing for the trader to pay to the consumer any amount by which the charge paid by the consumer for the call is more than the basic rate.

If you were to glance a couple of inches to the right Mrs Huish, you would see a non-premium number just there:



Why are you referring to Mrs Swinson's comment made over three years ago, as 'today'?

Ian011

While an 0345 number is shown, it is not "as prominent as" (either in size or by position) the premium rate 0871 number and therefore appears to be in breach of the regulations.

See Section J
http://web.archive.org/web/20160516152008/https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/429300/bis-13-1368-consumer-contracts-information-cancellation-and-additional-payments-regulations-guidance.pdf

Abuse of 0871 numbers was discussed on the radio just last week:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0890kj6
http://www.fairtelecoms.org.uk/radio.html?199

agrinnall

dr_genestealer wrote: »

The most prominent number, in bold on this paperwork is 0871 231 5000. You would HAVE to be an existing customer to even have this paperwork, thus they are promoting you, as an existing customer, to call their premium rate customer service phone number.

It's not a customer service number though, is it? It's an Orders & Payments number. It takes almost no effort to realise that there is a non-premium number to call for enquiries. While Ian may be right that they are technically in breach of the regulations for not making the second number at least as prominent as the first, anyone with an ounce of sense would ring the cheaper number to make an enquiry anyway.

unholyangel

agrinnall wrote: »

It's not a customer service number though, is it? It's an Orders & Payments number. It takes almost no effort to realise that there is a non-premium number to call for enquiries. While Ian may be right that they are technically in breach of the regulations for not making the second number at least as prominent as the first, anyone with an ounce of sense would ring the cheaper number to make an enquiry anyway.

The rules about basic rate don't apply to "customer service" numbers though. It applies to telephone lines which are operated by the retailer for the purpose of consumers contacting the trader about contracts they have entered into.

That means that it wouldn't apply to a general enquiry line, sales line etc but most certainly would apply to a "orders & payments" line.

They seem to have gotten their contact numbers round the wrong way. The 0871 should be their enquiry line and the 0345 should be their "orders & payments" number.

bris

Do existing customers not have payments to make or maybe want to order something else?


You are forgetting that you're enquiry was about a problem so you are directed to the enquiry line as you are not ordering or making any payments.


The numbers are round the right way ay the premium orders line is before any contract is formed so legal.

unholyangel

bris wrote: »

Do existing customers not have payments to make or maybe want to order something else?


You are forgetting that you're enquiry was about a problem so you are directed to the enquiry line as you are not ordering or making any payments.


The numbers are round the right way ay the premium orders line is before any contract is formed so legal.

The line is orders & payments. Even if you assume orders means new orders (rather than existing orders - which imo makes more sense given the inclusion of payments) - you're only going to be making payments for contracts already entered into therefore it most definitely does not comply with the CCRs.

As I said, a sales line doesn't need to comply, but any number given for the purpose of contacting the trader (including numbers that have dual functionality of a sales line) regarding a contract already entered into has to comply.

wealdroam

The document quoted in post #3 is not the legislation.
It is guidance, entitled Implementing Guidance, produced by Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.

I quoted the legislation - in full - in post #2.
There is nothing in the legislation stating that any number should be more prominent than another.