London Blasts 0870 'helpline' generates revenue for Met Police!

BexTech

On page 5 of the Mail On Sunday there is an article on the profiteering from 0870 numbers.

It states that C&W offered both 0800 and 0845 numbers, but the MET had no money to pay for them, so took the 0870 number.

I think the MET should change who supplies the 0845 number, as there are many operators out there who do not charge for incoming calls on the 0845 number but in fact pay you revenue.

Though the MET should have just use a 020 number.

bbb_uk

bunking_off wrote:

....It's worthy of note that the 020 number was released only when call volumes had subsided, so the general Met switchboard could cope....

That is not true. The Met only released the 020 number because of the loads of complaints it had received from me and other people on the saynoto0870.com and the fact that the Met were informed that the papers were going to run a story on the their use of 0870 and the cost of such calls, etc. Only after all this did The Met release an 020 number.

I did go on into what turned out to be a rant so felt obliged to place it in the appropriate section so for those want to read this rant can view it here (post #39). The entire thread can be viewed here.

I couldn't figure out how to point to the whole thread but make it specifically jump to my post number 39 within this thread instead of jumping to just displaying my individual post and nothing else. Can anyone help?

bunking_off

bbb_uk wrote:

That is not true. The Met only released the 020 number because of the loads of complaints it had received from me and other people on the saynoto0870.com and the fact that the Met were informed that the papers were going to run a story on the their use of 0870 and the cost of such calls, etc. Only after all this did The Met release an 020 number.

Yes, and when was this? After calls had died down from the peak of the initial couple of hours. I didn't make ANY assertions about WHY they did it...I'm not a mind-reader. I did make assertions about WHEN they did it. I thus maintain that my assertion was correct.

Sun

Moreover, how many people in shock and terror will go to the website to see if a 020 number exist !!

bunking_off wrote:

Yes, and when was this? After calls had died down from the peak of the initial couple of hours. I didn't make ANY assertions about WHY they did it...I'm not a mind-reader. I did make assertions about WHEN they did it. I thus maintain that my assertion was correct.

bbb_uk

bunking_off wrote:

Yes, and when was this? After calls had died down from the peak of the initial couple of hours...

Actually it was the same day that I & many others had sent and (some had even phoned) complaining about their use of such a number at a really bad time. I got an email back from Ailsa (Director of Information at the Met) which clearly means due to the complaints (and the fact that the email was sent to several newspapers) they then obtained the geographical number. I originally emailed the commissioner but obviously he passed it on to Ailsa. This is the reply I got:-

The Commissioner has asked me to respond to your e-mail. The number used is provided to the MPS as part of a national service hosted by the Police Information Technology Organisation. At our request they have now provided a geographic UK number which will be announced shortly.

Ailsa Beaton
Director of Information
Metropolitan Police Service

This reply was sent about 6pm approx and about an hour or two later they announced the geographical number. I actually emailed the commissioner first thing that morning.

bunking_off

bbb_uk wrote:

This reply was sent about 6pm approx and about an hour or two later they announced the geographical number. I actually emailed the commissioner first thing that morning.

...and I re-iterate, this was sent later in the day, when the call volumes had died down. It is highly unlikely that earlier in the day they would have released the 020 number to the public, because at that time the chances are (and I caveat this because I'm not involved so can't second guess what happened) the desk sat immediately behind the 020 number would not have been dimensioned to answer 1500 simultaneous calls. The non-geographic number, on the other hand, would have a call plan against it to distribute the calls more widely. By 6pm, with the worst having died down, the 020 number would have had sufficient capacity.

Personally, being in the centre of London at the time of the bombs, and passing the point where the number 30 blew up a few minutes before it happened, I'm rather glad that the Commissioner found better things to do than answering emails quibbling about paying 8ppm for my loved ones to verify if I was alive.

dag_2

The Met only released the 020 number because of the loads of complaints it had received from me and other people on the saynoto0870.com and the fact that the Met were informed that the papers were going to run a story on the their use of 0870 and the cost of such calls, etc.

I can believe that - however, according to This source, C&W and The Met got a slap on the wrist from Ofcom about it. The Met didn't take any profit from the 0870 calls - it all went to C&W. Therefore, many of bunking-off's points about call centre staffing costs don't apply.

Apparently Ofcom published guidelines telling public sector bodies not to use 0870 numbers like this eight months ago. If this is true, then surely someone at Cable & Wireless would have read it? Didn't they realise the PR disaster they'd be storing up for themselves by issuing the 0870 number?

Maybe C&W thought they'd get away with it. Phone companies have got away with 0870 numbers for lesser purposes in the past.

But in an interesting twist - right now, there's three Google News results for 0870 Ofcom - the Mail on Sunday and Daily Telegraph article about the Met Police number, and this article about how BT wants 0870 numbers scrapped.

Yes - you read that right - BT has suddenly become all consumer-friendly, and is complaining to Ofcom about 0870 numbers!

If Ofcom decides to agree with BT on this one, then I hope we don't lose all the cheap international phone calls at Niftylist - and I also hope that pay-as-you-go dial-up ISP's don't vanish either.

bbb_uk

bunking_off wrote:

...I'm rather glad that the Commissioner found better things to do than answering emails quibbling about paying 8ppm for my loved ones to verify if I was alive.

The point is someone is profiting from the use of this number at such a tragic time and I have to disagree about 8ppm. During this time everyone worried would have used what nearest phones was available and would include a lot of mobiles being used at over 30ppm. Its not the 30ppm that people would object to providing they were informed of the costs beforehand but the government kept silent on the costs meant how many people who were on the mobilephone in a queue then suddenly they get cut off because they didn't realise the costs are so high.

I actually object more to the fact that companies/government departments are using these numbers to gain revenue and the most of the public are unaware of it - especially when they try and pass the number off as being local or national rate.

C&W (who own that number) have been quoted as saying that they offered 0800 and an 0845 number but the government decided to go for the 0870 number because of the cost involved. So far the government (specifically PITO) has declined to comment to the newspapers, etc. They're probably making up a good cover story for their decision to use this number.

pricefighter

Why do the Met Police,London Ambulance,London Government etc etc continue to promote this very expensive 0870 number?, even though a georaphical one is available

April2

pricefighter wrote:

Why do the Met Police,London Ambulance,London Government etc etc continue to promote this very expensive 0870 number?, even though a georaphical one is available

And Sky News.