118118 Charges on my phone bill??

[onewheeldave]

Why is 1181118 so outrageous and other advertised products like Jaguar and Hugo Boss not? They all advertise for goods or services that you can get a lot cheaper if you're so minded.

 

Strawman.

 

I've never claimed nor implied that 118118 is outrageous and jaguar/hugo aren't- neither could I, given I know nothing about jaguar/hugo and their goods/services.

 

As to why 118118 is outrageous (for those who seriously don't consider £5+ for a short call to directory enquires outrageous), how about:

 

I guess because the target market of 118 companies is people without decent phones who are predominantly elderly and/or poor.

 

and similarly, from Wikipedia:

 

Which?

In February 2015 Which? published a damning investigation widely reported by the media and MoneySavingExpert, highlighting that a simple 15 minute call connected by 118 118 operators could readily cost £75. The social impact is considerable because those that can afford smart phones and web services simply no longer require what is a bygone old style telephony service, while the financially challenged, especially older people who have not readily adapted to new technology, do not enjoy these services.

 

which also touches on the further issue, that 118118 operators will happily connect the victim to the phone number they're enquiring about, and the same outrageous charge will apply to the entire call.

 

Hence how many pensioners have been fleeced by calls costing them £80-£180 for a call they assumed was 5p/minute, and, would have been, had they rang the number direct.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=118118%20pensioners

 

i.e. pensioners, brought up in a world where basic human decency was the norm, and totally unused to the tricks and deceits of modern 'business practice' where it is legal, and acceptable, to fleece the old, disabled and vulnerable, and advertise the 'service' on national TV.

[JFKvsNixon]

Strawman.

 

I've never claimed nor implied that 118118 is outrageous and jaguar/hugo aren't- neither could I, given I know nothing about jaguar/hugo and their goods/services.

 

As to why 118118 is outrageous (for those who seriously don't consider £5+ for a short call to directory enquires outrageous), how about:

 

 

 

and similarly, from Wikipedia:

 

 

 

which also touches on the further issue, that 118118 operators will happily connect the victim to the phone number they're enquiring about, and the same outrageous charge will apply to the entire call.

 

Hence how many pensioners have been fleeced by calls costing them £80-£180 for a call they assumed was 5p/minute, and, would have been, had they rang the number direct.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=118118%20pensioners

 

i.e. pensioners, brought up in a world where basic human decency was the norm, and totally unused to the tricks and deceits of modern 'business practice' where it is legal, and acceptable, to fleece the old, disabled and vulnerable, and advertise the 'service' on national TV.

 

I was actually asking you a question as opposed to introducing a strawman argument. I know you said you struggle sometimes, so I'll try to help. You can tell it is a question by the use of the word "why" at the start and use of a question mark at the end. I took your lack of expression of outrage of other really expensive goods and services advertised on TV, as being a lack of outrage.

 

Just incase you missed it I have said that 118118 and other direct line services are really expensive for what they offer, and I'd never consider using them in a million years.

 

I think where we differ is that I expect private business to work hard to take as much money off me as possible, I wouldn't expect them to work for my benefit but I wouldn't consider them to be immoral so I don't get outraged by their actions. If I had to put a moralistic label onto them I'd suggest that they're more amoral.

[mossdog]

'What Does it Cost to Use 118 118?

Calls to 118 118 cost £2.75 per call plus £2.99 per minute, (minimum 60 second charge applies). In addition you will be charged an access charge per minute by the company that bills you for calls.'

 

I doubt that the calls were .06 seconds and 0.15 seconds they would be 6 seconds and 15 seconds, I've never seen a phone bill record call lengths in hundreths of a second. The bill is showing duration in M:SS format.

 

£5.85 sounds correct for a call under a minute; £2.75 + £2.99 is £5.74, plus an 'access charge per minute by the company that bills you for calls'.

 

It's odd though if you are 100% sure you or anyone else has never used the 'phone to call that number.

Extract from my phone bill.

Thu 19 Nov 15 10:45

118118

Service No. 0:06 More information

Other call

£5.850

Thu 19 Nov 15 10:44

118118

Service No. 0:15 More information

Other call

£5.850 .

And once again..........NOBODY else used the phone!...you obviously find that hard to believe for some reason!

[Quik]

I was actually asking you a question as opposed to introducing a strawman argument. I know you said you struggle sometimes, so I'll try to help. You can tell it is a question by the use of the word "why" at the start and use of a question mark at the end. I took your lack of expression of outrage of other really expensive goods and services advertised on TV, as being a lack of outrage.

 

Just incase you missed it I have said that 118118 and other direct line services are really expensive for what they offer, and I'd never consider using them in a million years.

 

I think where we differ is that I expect private business to work hard to take as much money off me as possible, I wouldn't expect them to work for my benefit but I wouldn't consider them to be immoral so I don't get outraged by their actions. If I had to put a moralistic label onto them I'd suggest that they're more amoral.

 

The point you miss is that they don't target you and me, they target old dears who can barely use a nokia let alone a smartphone.

[the_bloke]

Extract from my phone bill.

Thu 19 Nov 15 10:45

118118

Service No. 0:06 More information

Other call

£5.850

Thu 19 Nov 15 10:44

118118

Service No. 0:15 More information

Other call

£5.850 .

And once again..........NOBODY else used the phone!...you obviously find that hard to believe for some reason!

 

As I said, those times are six seconds and 15 seconds, not points of seconds.

 

At no point have I accused you of making the calls *sighs*

 

Have a read through the comments in the link:

 

https://conversation.which.co.uk/technology/timeline-123-speaking-clock-call-charges-phone-bill/

[onewheeldave]

I was actually asking you a question as opposed to introducing a strawman argument. I know you said you struggle sometimes, so I'll try to help. You can tell it is a question by the use of the word "why" at the start and use of a question mark at the end. I took your lack of expression of outrage of other really expensive goods and services advertised on TV, as being a lack of outrage.

It was a strawman. I 'struggle' in communicating with neurotypicals, not in dealing with logic.

 

Post my autism diagnosis, I had my IQ extensively tested in a process lasting several hours, and, when it comes to the elements concerned with rationality/logic, my percentiles where mainly in the 99%-99.9% range, placing me, when it comes to rationality/logic, in the top 1 in a hundred, to the top 1 in a 1000 range.

 

---------- Post added 06-01-2016 at 11:01 ----------

 

 

I think where we differ is that I expect private business to work hard to take as much money off me as possible, I wouldn't expect them to work for my benefit but I wouldn't consider them to be immoral so I don't get outraged by their actions. If I had to put a moralistic label onto them I'd suggest that they're more amoral.

It's not 'hard work' to rip people off- it's the easy way out.

 

I also, like you, expect many (not all, there are still some business people with ethics) businesses to take advantage and use deceit to extract as much money as they can from the naive/elderly/busy public. Unlike you, I do consider it immoral, but then again, I'm not an apologist for the status quo

[ECCOnoob]

The point you miss is that they don't target you and me, they target old dears who can barely use a nokia let alone a smartphone.

 

I would like to see your evidence that they "target old dears".

 

Their advertising is certainly not aimed at the gentle old folk and I don't see 118 ads plastered all over the latest issue of Saga Magazine or broadcast all over Classic FM.

 

Interestingly the biggest and most prominent 118 campaign was sponsoring movies on ITV and ITV2. Not really aiming for the elderly market there.

 

If you want to see "targeted" advertising take a look at the offering on ITV3 daytime. Wiltshire Farm Foods, Viking Cruises and HSL high seat chairs.

 

Face facts. Its just another premium rate service like any other. Just like the whole ringtone services, music seekers, ask me anything and dating services. Heavy advertisements + morons who wont check prices before dialing = profits.

 

There is no hidden agenda here. There is nothing deceitful or immoral. There is no scam. Its a business. The public need to take more interest and actually LOOK at things before just aimlessly using something.

Edited January 6, 2016 by ECCOnoob

[mossdog]

I would like to see your evidence that they "target old dears".

 

Their advertising is certainly not aimed at the gentle old folk and I don't see 118 ads plastered all over the latest issue of Saga Magazine or broadcast all over Classic FM.

 

Interestingly the biggest and most prominent 118 campaign was sponsoring movies on ITV and ITV2. Not really aiming for the elderly market there.

 

If you want to see "targeted" advertising take a look at the offering on ITV3 daytime. Wiltshire Farm Foods, Viking Cruises and HSL high seat chairs.

 

Face facts. Its just another premium rate service like any other. Just like the whole ringtone services, music seekers, ask me anything and dating services. Heavy advertisements + morons who wont check prices before dialing = profits.

 

There is no hidden agenda here. There is nothing deceitful or immoral. There is no scam. Its a business. The public need to take more interest and actually LOOK at things before just aimlessly using something.

.......and what about when you have not "aimlessly used something" but are still being charged by some of these firms as though you have! who are the Morons then?

[PeteMorris]

I would like to see your evidence that they "target old dears".

 

Their advertising is certainly not aimed at the gentle old folk and I don't see 118 ads plastered all over the latest issue of Saga Magazine or broadcast all over Classic FM.

 

Interestingly the biggest and most prominent 118 campaign was sponsoring movies on ITV and ITV2. Not really aiming for the elderly market there.

 

If you want to see "targeted" advertising take a look at the offering on ITV3 daytime. Wiltshire Farm Foods, Viking Cruises and HSL high seat chairs.

 

Face facts. Its just another premium rate service like any other. Just like the whole ringtone services, music seekers, ask me anything and dating services. Heavy advertisements + morons who wont check prices before dialing = profits.

 

There is no hidden agenda here. There is nothing deceitful or immoral. There is no scam. Its a business. The public need to take more interest and actually LOOK at things before just aimlessly using something.

 

Yes I see your point about targeted advertising, but I think you make the case too simplistic. It's 'obviously' targeted at someone. That type of person is highly likely to be someone who just remembers the number and isn't 'tech savvy'..So it's bound to hit the elderly, the none too bright, and the occasional middle of the road user. Who else would be daft enough to pay such extortionate call charges...knowingly? So although on the face of it, it's apparently not targeted at anyone in particular, common sense should point you in the direction those who can be abused by such charging.

 

---------- Post added 06-01-2016 at 13:23 ----------

 

.......and what about when you have not "aimlessly used something" but are still being charged by some of these firms as though you have! who are the Morons then?

 

Quite!..........

[Ghozer]

Extract from my phone bill.

Thu 19 Nov 15 10:45

118118

Service No. 0:06 More information

Other call

£5.850

Thu 19 Nov 15 10:44

118118

Service No. 0:15 More information

Other call

£5.850 .

And once again..........NOBODY else used the phone!...you obviously find that hard to believe for some reason!

 

 

Right ok, put it this way...

 

if you say there is physically no way anyone else could have used the phone to make those calls, that leaves a few options..

 

1) a Crossed / Faulty line - call BT, tell them and get it sorted

(however, this is unlikely as I guess you haven't had any other dodgy calls, no random rings, no popping, cracking or cross talk when making calls)

 

2) someone 'hacked' the cab you're in, and used your line to make a call - (workmen and other people with access are known to do this :S)

 

3) it's a fault on BT's system / billing system

(highly unlikely, however possible, I did know it once when I worked for PlusNet - someone getting charged for calls they didn't make, but it was years ago)

 

4) You (or someone in your house) did make the call(s) and you forgot/don't know, or someone's not admitting it...