|
|
|
Start new subject | Reply to this subject
|
[1]
|
 marvin42 |
Wed, 17/12/08@09:55
|
|
If anybody gets as annoyed as I do by the use of 084 numbers, you can take part in the consultation process at click here
|
fourm member |
Wed, 17/12/08@13:42
|
|
Just for the record, you can take part in the consultation process if you think 084 numbers are a way of providing enhanced services without having to cut back frontline care.
|
marvin42 |
Wed, 17/12/08@14:32
|
|
Does that mean that, in order to maintain frontline services, I have to pay more for a call to my GP 2 miles away than to relations in St Louis, USA? That is what is happening at present.
20 min call to GP (if I'm lucky) = 80p, 20 min call to USA = 25p.
|
johndrew |
Wed, 17/12/08@15:27
|
|
The excuse given by GPs, apparently, is that use of these numbers prevents the caller getting an engaged tone.
Use does not appear to enable quicker connection to Reception, enable an appointment to be booked either sooner or more quickly or even guarantee you wont be disconnected by overloaded staff or as a result of a `glitch`.
Surely it would be better if the problems above we fixed before GPs made more profits from patients?
|
carver |
Wed, 17/12/08@16:26
|
|
My GP uses an 084 prefix for the surgery and now has enlisted the use of an automated service to put you through to the relevant people.
Only problem is you first get an automated response, then you get a choice of 6 different numbers to press for different sections, total time to get through this lot is 1 minute 10 seconds, best part about it is you speak to the same people no matter what number you press.
Before this system my calls were free to any land line No beginning 01 or 02, I now have to pay to call a doctor.
At least before this, if I got an engaged tone it didn't cost anything.
|
fourm member |
Wed, 17/12/08@17:28
|
|
marvin42 So, that's 80p for a consultation over the phone saving you the trouble of going to the surgery and waiting around, not to mention the cost of doing 4 miles by car.
Sounds like a bargain to me.
|
laurie53 |
Wed, 17/12/08@21:29
|
|
Since the NHS senior management is obsessed by finance rather than patient care it is small wonder that such attitudes filter downwards to the scalpel face.
My local hospital has recently started charging disabled drivers for parking, I know of nowhere else in the country (Scotland) that does this.
One wonders how much they pay for their Performing Rights licence to have their damned music blaring out in every waiting area and corridor. Since it's calculated on square footage I should think it's a tidy sum.
|
picklsey |
Thu, 18/12/08@03:44
|
|
laurie53 it could be because the men in suits put a lot of our nhs money in the Iceland bank and have no chance of getting it back.my wife has just been taken of a tablet because there is a cheaper one available and the doc told her that was the reason ,the doc. was fuming and told her there will be a lot more cutbacks.
|
marvin42 |
Thu, 18/12/08@04:29
|
|
fourm member Its not 80p for a consultation, its 80p to make an appointment for a consultation which still involves a visit to the surgery, including a 4 mile drive. A geographical call would cost 5p (irrespective if length of call) so the increase in cost of a 20 minute call is 160% and the 084 number has no benefits over the geographical (except financial to the NHS and telecom companies). What sort of bargain is that? By the way - 20 minutes is likely to be a minimum and a longer call increases the cost. As I said before a geographical number would cost 5p per CALL so a 30 minute call (£1.20) would be an increase of 240%.
|
newman35 |
Thu, 18/12/08@05:58
|
|
marvin42 I'm with you on this, and object strongly to the NHS forcing us to pay extra.
Time was when a phone was a means of calling someone; you dialled a number, spoke, and knew how much it cost. Of late the phone has become a 'cash-cow' with a plethora of 'specialised, premium numbers' - to 'help' our choices!
In effect they simply encourage us to be on longer, listening to menus, and racking up profits for the providers.
The beauty of it is that calls cost, say 20p, and it doesn't seem enough to get very excited about, but multiplied by the usage it mounts up very rapidly (particularly when you are put on hold!).
If the charges were going to the NHS it wouldn't be so bad, but the telco companies take the lion's share.
Fortunately our doctor has not shown such a need to change to premium numbers - hope he doesn't or I know of many patients who will be up in arms.
Great, isn't it when phone companies offer us all kinds of wonderful sounding 'unlimited free calls' packages - but then in the small print excludes the very numbers that are taking over nearly all our calls, anyway!
|
fourm member |
Thu, 18/12/08@07:56
|
|
marvin42 If it is really taking 20 minutes to make an appointment I'd suggest changing your GP or complaining to the oversight body because that can not be an acceptable response.
Let me say that, because I don't come across 0844 numbers for the NHS services I use, I don't really have a position on this. I started out just to draw attention to your supposition that you should be opposed to 0844 numbers to take part in the consultation.
That said, saying 'Since the NHS senior management is obsessed by finance rather than patient care' as laurie53 did misses the point that senior managment has to be obssessed with finance because money for the NHS is finite.
Some people never seem to get that - money for the NHS is finite.
As for charging for disabled parking, I suspect the fault lies with our fellow citizens and not with the hospital. Charging for parking removes the incentive to 'borrow' granny's badge which is an all too widespread practice.
|
marvin42 |
Thu, 18/12/08@08:37
|
|
fourm member I would agree with everything you say - my original intention was not to suggest that only those opposed should join in the consultation, though I can now see that it came over that way.
I have been complaining about these (and 0870) numbers for about 2 years and was beginning to think I was on a loser. Hopefully the consultation will come up with a common sense result.
It isn't right that public bodies should be using a system which financially penalises those that most need their services. The excuse is usually that there are benefits to these numbers, but the consultation document itself recognises that there are no benefits which cannot be applied to geographical numbers. Therefore its all down to cost - these numbers are a back-door way of charging extra costs to those most in need, which, particularly in the current climate, cannot be right.
|
laurie53 |
Thu, 18/12/08@20:25
|
|
"Charging for parking removes the incentive to 'borrow' granny's badge"
No it doesn't. Withdrawing the badge removes that incentive.
So far as I am aware it is only one car park, an NHS controlled one, in the whole of Scotland which finds it necessary to charge disabled people (tho' I hear there may be another one, also NHS, in Glasgow).
|
fourm member |
Thu, 18/12/08@21:12
|
|
laurie53 I certainly know of car parks in England which charge for disabled parking.
Withdrawing the badge might seem the way to stop abuse but try and imagine the furore if granny lost her badge because her relatives used it while she was in the operating theatre and, therefore, not in a position to prevent its misuse.
|
marvin42 |
Fri, 19/12/08@01:16
|
|
I know it happens but I don't think misuse of Blue Badges is a bad as people think. I tend to agree with laurie53. Misuse of the badge can lead to a fine of £1000.
If you want to be inspired try my new thread click here
|
laurie53 |
Fri, 19/12/08@10:07
|
|
fourm member Regulations in England are different.
It is normal to charge charge for disabled parking there, and to put a time limit on it.
In Scotland most public sector car parking for the disabled is free and without time limit. Many commercial car parking firms also offer this facility.
|
|
[1]
|
|
Total threads 325740 | Total posts 2111779 | Total users 293198
|
|
Forums > Speakers' corner
|
Back to top
|
