I called my Husbands mobile and it cost me £45!

[#1]

---

@Alex wrote:

'Not specifically blaming PlusNet here, but there should be a system introduced (by the network, BTW Presumably) that warns the call is chargeable, do you want to continue? I don't know if that is technically possible.

Years ago I used to get that on my mobile when I had to call 0800 numbers - I got some message warning me it is not free on a mobile'

---

Well this announcement service is already in place for BT, so I see no reason why not. I think the issue is that they have not specifically noted which numbers incur a charge as they all appear as 'mobile' phone numbers with an 07 prefix. Interestingly the 0500 numbers which were used for Voip No.'s were discontinued by Ofcom in June 2017 saying it was not popular and caused confusion, lol.

[#2]

Your comment points to the heart of the issue here - not all 07 numbers are mobile network numbers. Ofcom allowed the range to be used for other purposes as well - just the same as the 03 range has different charge bands. You need to look at more than the first two digits to determine the call type.

[Townman]

Townman

and further to that, even looking at the most recent prefixes only show the original network company ownership, not who these prefixes are passed on to via company or customer, which makes the system wholly unreliable

[#4]

---

@Townman wrote:
Let's be absolutely clear here - this is a BT Openreach issue. They determine the charge band for the number called. The CPs determine the price for the band. Consequently there has to be two files. These mobile numbers appear to be in the wrong charge band.

---

I don't think it should be necessary for an ordinary caller to have to find and read these files, which contain literally hundreds of lines. The charging system is ridiculously complicated.

Is Plusnet is really interested in providing a good service? If so, I suggest it provides a simple page where one can enter the first few digits of a phone number, and be told PN's charges for calling it.

[#5]

That's a really good positive idea which I'll sponsor into the SU programme ... but there's no promises!

[#6]

These are the numbers in question described by Ofcom;

070    Personal numbering service
071 to 075
077 to 079    Mobile services
076    Radiopaging services

and their note:

Individual mobile phone companies are allocated different ranges within the 071 to 075, 07624 and 077 to 079 bands, but since the advent of mobile number portability, mobile prefixes can no longer be relied on to determine the current operator of a particular mobile number - only the original operator.

So even though we can't determine which operator has the number, they are all still described as a 'mobile number'.

It seems that there should be a directory of 07 numbers, surely it wouldn't be that difficult to add to the directory at set up?

My Husbands prefix is:

07488 2

Sky

mobiles

UK

As listed here http://www.area-codes.org.uk/mobile/#074 This Sky mobile was charged at 34p/min

[#7]

Yes, and going a little off topic. Don't know if this is true as I believe everything I read on the internet 

Companies used (they may still do) to cold call you into renewing your contract with them from somewhere else. They could tell from your mobile prefix what provider it originally belonged to and roughly when it was dished out.

So they can assume if it is over a year (and you had a twelve month contract), they will call you.

[#8]

Response from ASA:

Dear Mr xxx

Your Complaint: Plusnet plc

 Thank you for your patience whilst we considered your complaint. Please accept my apologies for the delay in our response.

 We understand you raised concerns that some mobile numbers were excluded from Plusnet call plans however this wasn’t made sufficiently clear.  Plusnet have advised us of an issue where some mobile numbers are being allocated as WiFi numbers which would mean under their call plans are chargeable. Plusnet have assured us that this is an issue they are currently investigating however in the meantime any such numbers will be included in their call plans and all customers who have been charged for such calls will be refunded. They have asked for your contact details if you have been affected by this. Please respond if you have been charged for mobile calls, with your written permission for us to pass on your details.

 Based on this assurance we will now close our file and basic information including the advertisers’ name and where the ad appeared will be published on our website, www.asa.org.uk. 

 Thank you for taking the time and trouble to write to us.  If you’d like some more information about what we do and the action we’ve taken against advertisers who break the code, please have a look on our website.

 Kind Regards,

So if anyone is on a call plan that includes calls to mobile numbers and has been charged for some mobile numbers they should make sure they get the refund!

[#9]

@JonoH,

Is there any new news on this please?

[#10]

I haven't heard anything new at my end, still waiting to hear if I can use the Sky mobile in question without being charged  I have marked the topic as new so it doesn't get forgotten. Although it is still marked as fixed, but it isn't, despite having got my money back. Since there has been no word, I would definately be checking your bills to ensure you aren't being unknowingly charged. I think I will have to go to the Plusnet facebook page, to make it more public, if there is no word on here by Friday  because I am sure there are many people who have already been charged for these rogue mobile numbers without even realising  and it simply isn't on to ignore the situation. If PN has not heard back from their suppliers by now, they should be pushing harder for a result, iitbi tbh.

[#11]

---

@jelv wrote:

Response from ASA:

Plusnet have assured us that ... in the meantime any such numbers will be included in their call plans and all customers who have been charged for such calls will be refunded. 

---

It would be useful if someone from Plusnet would confirm here@ that all these numbers are currently included in call plans - as things stand, the last mention of charges from Plusnet staff was from @JonoH in post #59 where he said "We've asked our supplier to go away do some digging and let us know, they haven't quite given us all we're after yet and so the service bills as usual."

@Townman - please would it be possible for you to push for some clarity on this?

[#12]

Hi - I have, but I think @JonoH is on vacation.

[#13]

I agree with @Anonymous someone from PN needs to confirm the current charging situation urgently.

Their last official response on this thread seems directly opposite to what they told the ASA

[#14]

@Townman

Thanks. But surely there must be someone else at Plusnet who can provide the necessary reassurance. After all, they do claim that "we take pride in [...] going that extra mile to look after our customers". It has now been several weeks since Plusnet became aware of this situation, and in the absence of any hard information from staff on this thread one might be excused for thinking they are more concerned about 'going the extra mile' to ward off the ASA than to look after their customers.

[#15]

It's a shame that this thread seems to be the first real visible test of the worth of the superusers program in speeding solutions/results up.

But so far no difference and things are dragging on as usual despite superusers obviously doing their best and putting in the hard yakka.

Like I said a shame as I was really hoping for a definite seed change.

I was considering plusnet mobile but I would have to be crazy to change while things like this are just left hanging.