Today, Thursday 16 January, a debate on the subject of “Nuisance Calls” is scheduled for the main commons chamber. It is the second item of backbench business to be fitted into a slot between roughly 11:30 and 17:00, and so is likely to begin at some time between 14:00 and 15:00.
The debate will be opened by Mike Crockart MP, who is likely to repeat his familiar call for revisions to the terms of the existing failed regulations, as proposed by Which?

Whilst supporting the obvious need to tidy up anomalies in the existing regulations, we suggest that much more radical action is required for there to be any significant change to the situation.

We have contributed to a number of items on BBC South East Today about the misuse of 084 telephone numbers.
It is therefore a little disappointing to have to respond to an invitation to "Contact Us" with the message that may be viewed below, in response to a recorded clip from the show.

Reflecting on major areas of work in 2013 and 2014

On the issue of improper use of 084 / 087 numbers, the message, and the degree of excitement, is very clear. A series of formal announcements at the end of 2013 confirms that 2014 will see a significant degree of migration from 08 to 03.

Work put in hand on the issue of selection of the appropriate call plan for landline users, will lead to an increased awareness that calls to 01/02/03 numbers are generally made without incurring a call charge. 080 numbers are expensive to operate, and presently (in general) more expensive to call than 03 numbers from mobiles. The expected migration from 08 to 03 therefore includes users of 080 numbers.

The Nuisance Calls issue has been brought back to the fore. We see this as highlighting the inevitable ineffectiveness of the measures presently seen as offering the remedy. More effective reporting and minor tweaks to the regulations will do nothing to address the problem as it exists. 2014 must be the year in which serious attention is given to radical measures that may be effective in addressing the problem. Sadly, as yet there are only limited indications that this may happen.

In summary, we are pleased to see many of our comments, as presented in evidence, noted in the report. We welcome the limited recommendations, but are concerned that they do not include the radical steps required to get to grips with this unacceptable and growing problem.

Not all telephone calls that we receive are welcome - if we wish to remain open to contact by telephone we cannot avoid this fact of life. Some calls are rightly classified as simply "Nuisance". There are laws and regulations intended to prevent the practice of making Nuisance Calls - that is what needs to be stopped. Sadly, poor enforcement action means a low level of compliance.

Our view is that very little is needed in terms of new legislation to address this problem - simply a few tweaks, the need for which has been accepted. The focus must be on measures to achieve compliance, including proper regulation and enforcement action by those best placed to achieve compliance. These are the respective sectoral regulators, not Ofcom and the ICO.

The ineffectiveness of Ofcom and the ICO, along with the mistaken belief that the TPS is some type of "service", as opposed to simply a means of indicating a widely-disrespected preference, leads many people to seek to take avoidance action themselves.

Not only is this unnecessary, apart from the situation of those who wish or need to have a call filtering device, it can also lead to worthless effort or expenditure. There are companies who seek to exploit the problem of nuisance calls for financial gain, in many cases overstating the likely benefit of what they offer and in some cases being engaged in outright scams.

Whilst TPS Limited is not itself wholly blameless in respect of improperly raised expectations, it publishes a list of those known to be engaged in offering products and services that are likely to be misrepresented.

We recently appeared in a broadcast of the BBC Wales series X-Ray which covered both a scam service and an ineffective blocking device. Both items are now available to view in a playlist →

Our stated conclusions are that:

• Many companies exploit people's vain hope that there is something that they themselves can do about nuisance calls.
• The only way to deal with the problem is for proper standards of conduct and compliance with the law to be enforced by those able to undertake such action.

The fair telecoms campaign accepts that there may be situations where a "Service Charge" on a relatively cheap telephone call may be acceptable. One example is where the caller is KNOWINGLY paying the cost of handling their call, rather than having this carried as an expense by the person they are calling.

We wholeheartedly support the Ofcom proposal for the "unbundled tariff" because this enables both the Service Charge and also the telephone company's "Access Charge" to be seen.

This news release makes a number of points, but is primarily aimed at highlighting the danger of imposing a (potentially justifiable) Service Charge under the current arrangements.