Jump to content

Recommended Posts

As a Forest Hill Road patient, I have added my name to the petition and have also written to Daniel Marshell.


However, as someone repeatedly affected by this (I'm currently in recurring 'hospital-can-nver-get-my-address-or-GP-right' hell) I would like to take more direct action to embarrass the practice, as they clearly take no notice of anything else.


Any other FHR practice patients who would like to join me?

  • 1 year later...

That said, I think FHR only takes appointments in the morning on weekdays, doesn't it?


Anyway, whilst the principle of paying to phone a Docs surgery does 'seem' worse, but you still need to phone all the other places that use 0845 numbers too. I think the answer is to make all 0845 numbers pointless by choosing an operator who includes them - if enough people do that, there won't be any need for any of them.


They're a hangover from the days of national and local price banding (now obsolete) which was meant to encourage you to call companies who weren't local at no extra expense. Now even some of the shops at the bottom of our road have 0845 numbers.. yet calling Aberdeen is free.

Narnia Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Their number is an 0844 one. Do you know a plan

> which includes those? Do you know the difference

> between 0844 and 0845 numbers by the way, as I

> don't?



Hmm. looks like you're right. 0844 is not covered by TalkTalk. Now en route to throw a half-ender through their windows.


Apparently many places are also changing their numbers from 0845/70 to 0844, to keep the cash coming-in.

According to this site, 0844 numbers charge 5p per minute, and the recipient gets 1.5p of that.


That makes me think they impose charges to dissuade you from calling, rather than get rich.


Either way, if you're paying 9p then your provider must be surcharging an additional 4p!

A GP friend of mine did tell me (his estimation of) the percentage of patients he sees who are 'hypochondriac regulars'. I forget the figure but it was pretty high. It seemed to account for the lion's share of his time.


He said part of the difficulty (and potential danger) with being a GP was that they see so many people with absolutely nothing wrong with them whatsoever - that the chances of missing the ones who are actually ill increases.

As far as the cost of ringing 0844 numbers goes, not only do they fall outside the "free call packages" to which many people subscribe ( BT only include 0845 & 0870 numbers), but the 5p charge which 0844 numbers are supposed to cost, only applies to calls from landlines


Call charges from mobiles are set by the mobile provider and are usually anything between 25p-35p per minute. This means that a 3 minute call to the GP on a mobile to make an appointment could easily cost over ?1.00! And what's more, the GPs get a cut from the cost of the call to their 0844 number (that's why these numbers are being used more and more by commercial organisations selling services such as ticket sales for concerts, travel etc etc.)


If you've got a landline, then at least it's possible to choose to use that and limit the cost to 5p per minute. However, many people with limited budgets may only have a mobile and for them there's no choice - they end up paying the most.


One of the problems, is that telephony call charges are so diverse and complex, that few people know exactly what's being charged - and that includes GPs themselves


0844 numbers are a mechanism for making money and should be limited to commercial providers. They shouldn't be used by organisations providing public services.

Following the consultation that finished last year the government has moved to ban use of expensive telephone numbers by NHS GPs.


Contract changes came into effect on 1 April 2010, giving them 12 months in which to change their arrangements.


The situation is far from "done and dusted" and there are plenty of complications.


There is lots more info on my blog - http://nhspatient.blogspot.com/.


Please make contact for a full briefing on the situation and any help needed to deal with the particular local issues.

These payments are not acceptable to vulnerable or housebound patients who need to call their GP for help-these people could be deterred from calling their GP and for this reason I disagree with the charges.


However, I am not sure how many people making the comments on this thread fall into that category. If you can afford to pay for an i-pod, annual holidays, pets insurance, ?1.50 for a coffee at a cafe or go the delis, boutique shops in ED etc then is it so bad to pay a few pounds to your local GP practice which is probably resource stretched e.g. restricted funding, large population sizes, probably understaffed. Money that could possibly contribute to fund repairs or an extra nurse or receptionist to deal with all of the non-emergencies (If this is generating an income one should hope that it is used to improve the running of the practice). I don't know whether the income is enough for a profit or just to help with running costs. Many GP practices don't use these numbers probably (and correctly) on moral grounds.


People are increasingly demanding more of the NHS but don't want to pay for it. Yes I know we all pay NI but if you really knew the cost of providing healthcare, you would know that our contributions are a drop in the ocean.

How come my surgery doesn't need to do it then? They are an independent practice The Nunhead Surgery and they are not owned by a big American company like some of the GP practices are (I think Melbourne Grove is one such). Please don't come out with patronising statements such as "if you really knew the cost of providing healthcare". Just because some people can afford to pay does not mean everyone can, and those that can may not be able to in the future.

Well I imagine availability of services has many complex influences - catchment area, economic affluence, cultural attitudes etc. It may work for your practice but not for others.


On the note of expense, 10% of the population carries over 55% of tax bill. If we assume that locals don't fall into that high-earning category then locally each taxpayer (around 27m in total) pays around 1,750 annually into the NHS.


I know that a personal private package (e.g. BUPA) would approach that, and a family pack be beyond that. I also know that we all pay a wee bit extra for the less priveleged and I'm happy with that.


I can also understand that a practice would want to avoid vexatious or indulgent costs that increase the expense for more rational customers.


It's not such a bad deal.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Here is another article from the excellent Special Needs Jungle with tips for responses to the SEND conversation survey. Including shoe horning in EHCPs which they "forget" to ask a question about in the conversation. And living as we do in Southwark with the huge misfortune of 100% academy secondary schools, some thoughts on this and how unlikely inclusion in mainstream is within the current education landscape. Closing date 14 Jan 2026. And please consider a donation to the excellent entirely run by volunteers Special Needs Journal. In my view the government could save money by creating some smaller mainstream secondary schools for kids who can cope in primary school but not  with the scale of secondary, and need a calmer less busy setting. The funding would have to be different - it is currently on a per pupil basis which favours larger schools. But it would undoubtedly be cheaper than specialist provision, and the huge cost to individual children and families (emotional and financial) and to society. https://www.specialneedsjungle.com/tips-help-complete-governments-send-conversation-survey-law/ If anyone wants to take a radical step to help their struggling child, my tip is to move far away: these are the best two schools I have ever visited and in a beautiful part of the country. I only wish we'd moved there before it was too late for my son who had to suffer multiple failings at Charter North and then at the hands of Southwark SEND, out of education from February to October in year 10-11, having already suffered the enduring trauma of a very difficult early life, which in combination with ADHD made his time at schools which just don't care so very unbearable for all of us. https://www.cartmelprioryschool.co.uk/ https://settlebeck.org/ As an add on, I would say to anybody considering adoption, please take into account the education battles that you are very much more likely to face than the average parent. First you have schools to deal with, already terrible; then being passed from pillar to post within Southwark Education, SEND, Education Inclusion Team, round and round as they all do their best to explain why they are not responsible and you need someone different, let's hold another multi-agency meeting, never for one minute considering that if they put the child at the centre and used common sense they would achieve a lot more in much less time without loads of Southwark employees sitting in endless meetings with long suffering parents. It is hard to fully imagine this at the start of your adoption journey, full of hope as you are, but truly education is not for the faint hearted, and should be factored into your decision. You'll never hear from people who are really struggling and continue to do so, only from those who've had challenges but overcome them and it's all lovely. And education, the very people who should be there to help, are the ones who make your lives the most hellish out of everything your child and you face.
    • It’s a big problem all over London. I’ve seen it happen in Kennington and Bloomsbury in the last year. I think there has been some progress recently with some key arrests, but you do need to be very careful when walking around with your phone out, especially, as you say, if wearing noise cancelling headphones. Sorry you experienced this 
    • Luke Johnson (prominent director and co-owner), supported Brexit and backed the Vote Leave campaign. He also described the response to Covid as ‘a campaign of fear’ and 2020 funded a media consultant for the ‘Covid-recovery group’ of anti-lockdown MPs.
    • I'm a bit of an architecture geek and I must confess I find it one of the most gimmicky ugly redesigns I've seen in a while. I'm always open to quirky but this is just not nice in any way shape or form.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...