Extortionate charges by BT

The request was refused by Office of Communications.

Dear Sir or Madam,

I'd like to know if, as part of Ofcom's slow-motion investigation of BT, it has got round yet to asking BT what the actual cost to it is of transferring a domestic phone line to BT from another telephone company, as opposed to the extortionate £125 which BT charges for the service.

If Ofcom has found out what that actual cost to BT is, I'd like to know how much it is, and when I can look forward to getting a refund of the difference.

Yours faithfully,
Michael McCarthy

Michael McCarthy left an annotation ()

When I moved into my current flat I found that its phone line had previously been made over to a non-BT phone company. I had an ongoing contract with Tiscali, which I took out at my previous flat, for a dial-up service that could only be supplied over a BT line. I was outraged to be told by BT that it would charge me £125 to revert my domestic phone line to itself. I cannot believe that the work involved costs anything like the £125 I was forced to pay, but BT has refused to disclose the actual cost.

OCCtelecoms, Office of Communications

Ofcom reference: 1-77179329

30 December 2008

Dear Mr McCarthy

Freedom of Information: Right to know request

Thank you for your request for information regarding BT. Your request was
received on 22 December 2008 and I am dealing with it under the terms of
the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (`the Act').

Generally any information provided will consist of copies of original
documents in paper or electronic format.

Where we hold the information you have requested we will endeavour to
answer your request in full and within 20 working days. If we are unable
to provide the information requested, we will explain why under the Act
the information has not been provided.

If you have any queries then please contact
[1][Ofcom request email]. Please remember to quote the
reference number above in any future communications.

Yours faithfully

:: John Ingham

Telecoms Associate

Central Operations

[2][email address]

:: Ofcom

Riverside House

2a Southwark Bridge Road

London SE1 9HA

020 7981 3000

www.ofcom.org.uk

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[Ofcom request email]
mailto:[Ofcom request email]
2. mailto:[email address]

OCCtelecoms, Office of Communications

1 Attachment

Reference: 1-77179329

Date: 22 January 2009

Email: [1][FOI #5037 email]

Dear Mr McCarthy

Freedom of Information: Right to know request

Thank you for your email to Ofcom on 22 December 2008 regarding the cost
of transferring a telephone service to BT from another provider. Your
request for information has been considered under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 (`the Act').

Unfortunately we are unable to disclose this information and it is being
withheld under the exemption in section 44 of the Act. Under this section
information which we hold on this subject is exempt from disclosure since
it was obtained in exercise of a statutory power and disclosure is
prohibited under section 393(1) of the Communications Act 2003. It is
likely that other exemptions will also apply.

Ofcom has published findings on the issue you have raised. Further
information can be found at the following links:

[2]http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/o...

[3]http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/o...

[4]http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/...

[5]http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/...

[6]http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/...

[7]http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/...

You should ensure that when using the provided information in any way,
including publishing the information, you comply with all relevant
legislation. For example, the information provided may be protected by
copyright under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended).
If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice. For Ofcom's policy on
copyright and related issues, please refer to our website at
[8]http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/accoun/dis...

If you believe you have been charged incorrectly and wish to dispute any
charges which BT has applied to your account, you should complain directly
to BT. All communications providers are required by Ofcom to have in place
a code of practice which sets out their formal complaints procedure and
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) scheme. BT's code of practice can be
found on their website at
[9]www.btplc.com/Thegroup/RegulatoryandPublicaffairs/Codeofpractice/Consumercodeofpractice/ConsumerCodeofPractice.htm

Furthermore, BT is a member of Otelo (the telecoms ombudsman) for dispute
resolution. Consumers can go to Otelo if they are unhappy with the final
response to their complaint, or if it has been ongoing for over 12 weeks.
Otelo can be contacted on 01925 430 049 and more information can be found
at [10]www.otelo.org.uk

If you have any queries then please contact
[11][Ofcom request email]. Please remember to quote the
reference number above in any future communications.

Yours sincerely

:: John Ingham

Telecoms Team

Ofcom Consumer Services

[12][email address]

:: Ofcom

Riverside House

2a Southwark Bridge Road

London SE1 9HA

020 7981 3000

www.ofcom.org.uk

If you are unhappy with the response or level of service you have received
in relation to your request from Ofcom, you may ask for an internal
review. If you ask us for an internal review of our decision, it will be
treated as a formal complaint and will be subject to an independent review
within Ofcom. We will acknowledge the complaint and inform you of the
date by which you might expect to be told the outcome.

The following outcomes are possible:

o the original decision is upheld; or

o the original decision is reversed or modified.

Timing

If you wish to exercise your right to an internal review you should
contact us within two months of the date of this letter. There is no
statutory deadline for undertaking internal reviews and it will depend
upon the complexity of the case, but we aim to conclude all internal
reviews within 2 months. If you wish to request an internal review, you
should contact:

Graham Howell

The Secretary to the Corporation

Ofcom

Riverside House

2a Southwark Bridge Road

London SE1 9HA

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have
the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a
decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner's Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire

SK9 5AF

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[FOI #5037 email]
2. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/o...
3. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/static/archive/o...
4. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/...
5. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/...
6. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/...
7. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/...
8. http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/accoun/dis...
9. http://www.btplc.com/Thegroup/Regulatory...
10. http://www.otelo.org.uk/
11. mailto:[Ofcom request email]
mailto:[Ofcom request email]
12. mailto:[email address]

Michael McCarthy left an annotation ()

It's absurd that the Freedom of Information Act should exempt Ofcom not merely from disclosing what the actual cost to a monopoly supplier of a particular service is, but even from disclosing if it has ever put that particular question to BT.

I also object strongly to Ofcom's attempting to fob me off by inviting me to trawl through six long documents in search of generalities which clearly won't in any case answer the precise questions I posed.

Michael McCarthy left an annotation ()

The lessons to be drawn from this and parallel enquiries appear to be as follows:

BT currently requires phone users to pay £124.99 for performing what seems to be an inherently simple task, whether carried out manually at its exchanges or electronically, i.e. diverting an existing phone line to a different supplier of phone services. The fact that BT refuses to disclose the actual cost of this work can only strengthen suspicions that this charge is disproportionate.

BT is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act, and Ofcom is either unwilling or unable under existing legislation to investigate BT’s pricing policies, to compel BT to divulge the actual cost of diverting a line, or even to disclose how many complaints BT has received regarding this charge.

This is clearly a highly unsatisfactory situation, which needs to be addressed by bringing BT, as successor organisation to a state monopoly, i.e. Post Office Telephones, within the scope of Freedom of Information legislation. It could also be tackled by extending the powers and changing the culture of Ofcom, which appears at present to offer rather less useful service to BT’s customers than Wikileaks might conceivably provide by exposing the gap between BT's costs and its charges.