[asterisk-biz] [UK] 03333 numbers et al

[--[ UxBoD ]--]

----- Original Message -----
> On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 10:06:03AM +0100, Chris Bagnall wrote:
> 
> > > Getting really confused over what numbers are best for both a
> > > business and
> > > a client ?!?!? 0845/0800 numbers used to be the ones; though with
> > > 0845 the
> > > providers got a kick back as-well. If you are a new UK business,
> > > and with
> > > to
> > > be national, is the best approach an 03* type number. Any links
> > > to an
> > > definitive(ish) list of inbound pricing for a client ?
> > It may be worth having a look at the telecoms section on the Ofcom
> > website
> > (www.ofcom.org.uk). I do believe (but am open to correction :) )
> > that 03xx
> > non-geographic numbers cannot be charged at a higher rate than
> > geographic
> > (01/02) numbers and *must* be included in any bundles that apply to
> > geographic numbers. So, in terms of a consistent cost for callers,
> > there's
> > nothing wrong with using 03xx numbers if you don't want to indicate
> > a
> > specific geographic presence.
> 
> 03 numbers were originally designed for large organisations to
> replace
> 084/7 numbers which incurred costs to end-users and can be confusing.
> A
> lot of providers (including MNOs) did not allow them in inclusive
> minutes etc.
> 
> Now with 03 numbers they MUST be included in any bundles and are
> considered local rate (even from mobiles), also there should never be
> any payout to the terminating organisation.
> 
> > Having said that, I'm inclined to agree with Andy's response -
> > nothing beats
> > a good ol' geographic number for clarity and avoidance of caller
> > confusion.
> 
> Except that some areas are running out and Ofcom are planning to
> introduce (or consulting and would like to introduce) charges for
> number
> blocks.
> 
> > It's also worth mentioning that I don't know how well adopted the
> > 03xx
> > numbers are for international dialling. I recall a test I did on
> > this list a
> > couple of years ago in which I asked people in various countries to
> > try
> > dialling an 020 3 number I'd set up for testing. It would seem that
> > many
> > international telcos had 020 7/8 in their numbering plans, and
> > hadn't
> > "adjusted" to 020 3 also being used for London numbers - despite it
> > having
> > been in use for some years when the test was run.
> 
> A lot of international traffic goes through BT and they should know
> about them ;)
> 
> Steve
> 
Thank you all ... The information has been extremely useful.
-- 
Thanks, Phil