• Whatsapp Facebook NHS

    From Richmond@dnomhcir@gmx.com to uk.telecom on Thu Feb 26 15:48:45 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    The NHS wants to save money on text messages, so it has come up with the
    idea of using Whatsapp to communicate with patients. This is very
    concerning I think. There must be some people in the NHS who know what a
    bad idea this is, but many think it is great.

    Here they are concerned that Whatsapp might be taken away from them.

    https://bmjgroup.com/concerns-over-new-laws-that-could-end-use-of-whatsapp-in-the-nhs/

    I would suggest the government come up with its own secure app, but we
    can't trust the government either.

    Why do text messages cost so much anyway? Oh yes, I remember, because it
    is necessary to pay the charges.

    https://www.zeropartydata.es/p/localhost-tracking-explained-it-could
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Marco Moock@mm@dorfdsl.de to uk.telecom on Thu Feb 26 20:06:16 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 26.02.2026 15:48 Uhr Richmond wrote:

    Why do text messages cost so much anyway? Oh yes, I remember, because
    it is necessary to pay the charges.

    Because the telco companies want to milk the cow till the end.
    That was one of the reasons the internet based text messages were
    created and became so popular.
    --
    kind regards
    Marco

    Send spam to 1772117325muell@stinkedores.dorfdsl.de

    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Roger Mills@mills37.fslife@gmail.com to uk.telecom on Thu Feb 26 21:59:01 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 26/02/2026 15:48, Richmond wrote:
    The NHS wants to save money on text messages, so it has come up with the
    idea of using Whatsapp to communicate with patients. This is very
    concerning I think. There must be some people in the NHS who know what a
    bad idea this is, but many think it is great.

    Here they are concerned that Whatsapp might be taken away from them.

    https://bmjgroup.com/concerns-over-new-laws-that-could-end-use-of-whatsapp-in-the-nhs/

    I would suggest the government come up with its own secure app, but we
    can't trust the government either.

    Why do text messages cost so much anyway? Oh yes, I remember, because it
    is necessary to pay the charges.

    https://www.zeropartydata.es/p/localhost-tracking-explained-it-could

    I'm now getting messages via the NHS App rather than via SMS. My wife is
    still getting SMS messages - on *my* phone! - because she doesn't use
    her own mobile very much, and hasn't signed up for the NHS App.
    --
    Cheers,
    Roger
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richmond@dnomhcir@gmx.com to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 09:24:29 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Roger Mills <mills37.fslife@gmail.com> writes:

    On 26/02/2026 15:48, Richmond wrote:
    The NHS wants to save money on text messages, so it has come up with
    the idea of using Whatsapp to communicate with patients. This is very
    concerning I think. There must be some people in the NHS who know
    what a bad idea this is, but many think it is great. Here they are
    concerned that Whatsapp might be taken away from them.
    https://bmjgroup.com/concerns-over-new-laws-that-could-end-use-of-whatsapp-in-the-nhs/
    I would suggest the government come up with its own secure app, but
    we can't trust the government either. Why do text messages cost so
    much anyway? Oh yes, I remember, because it is necessary to pay the
    charges.
    https://www.zeropartydata.es/p/localhost-tracking-explained-it-could

    I'm now getting messages via the NHS App rather than via SMS. My wife
    is still getting SMS messages - on *my* phone! - because she doesn't
    use her own mobile very much, and hasn't signed up for the NHS App.

    Do you have the NHS app on your phone? or do you use the web app?

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they could
    send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as banks do.
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris Green@cl@isbd.net to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 09:59:35 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they could
    send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as banks do.

    That's my pet hate, banks sending me messages to say there's a message
    that I have to dig out from the depths of their horrible web interface.

    If someone sends me an E-Mail I expect to be able to send them an
    E-Mail. If there's an 'important' message from the bank then they can
    tell me that when I next log in to my bank account. The really
    annoying messages (I get a lot of these from Lloyds) are 'important'
    ones which just tell me that my statement is available. The could
    most definitely go in an ordinary E-Mail.

    Even worse is HSBC who send me E-Mails and messages but won't even
    allow me to send them a 'secure' message, let alone an E-Mail.
    --
    Chris Green
    -+
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 10:27:08 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 2026/2/27 9:59:35, Chris Green wrote:
    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they could
    send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as banks do.

    That's my pet hate, banks sending me messages to say there's a message
    that I have to dig out from the depths of their horrible web interface.

    Agreed. (Not just banks.)

    If someone sends me an E-Mail I expect to be able to send them an
    E-Mail.

    I fear those days are long gone; emails from companies that aren't sent
    from an unmonitored address are pretty rare these days; often they don't
    tell you it's unmonitored until near the end of the email, so you don't
    spot that fact until you've mostly composed your reply - or, not
    infrequently, they don't tell you at all. (_Sometimes_ emailing the
    unmonitored address triggers an automatic reply, which is infuriating
    but at least you know; at other times you don't even know. Always look
    at the address you're replying to - if it is something like no-reply@
    you have a fair idea.)

    If there's an 'important' message from the bank then they can> tell
    me that when I next log in to my bank account. The really
    annoying messages (I get a lot of these from Lloyds) are 'important'
    ones which just tell me that my statement is available. The could
    most definitely go in an ordinary E-Mail.

    Or even not be sent at all, if you opt out.

    Even worse is HSBC who send me E-Mails and messages but won't even
    allow me to send them a 'secure' message, let alone an E-Mail.

    :-(
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    `Ergonomic' =/= `dext-handed'
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 10:41:56 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:59:35 +0000
    Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they
    could send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as
    banks do.

    That's my pet hate, banks sending me messages to say there's a message
    that I have to dig out from the depths of their horrible web
    interface.

    If someone sends me an E-Mail I expect to be able to send them an
    E-Mail. If there's an 'important' message from the bank then they can
    tell me that when I next log in to my bank account. The really
    annoying messages (I get a lot of these from Lloyds) are 'important'
    ones which just tell me that my statement is available. The could
    most definitely go in an ordinary E-Mail.

    Even worse is HSBC who send me E-Mails and messages but won't even
    allow me to send them a 'secure' message, let alone an E-Mail.


    HSBC used to allow the secure message, then it just disappeared.
    Nowadays, you have to call them on the 'phone, and hope somebody
    answers.
    I hate the websites that have lots of Contact links, that go round in
    circles and bring you back to where you started. They tend to only have specific choices of subjects to discuss, if your question doesn't fit
    into any of them, it doesn't have any chance.
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The Natural Philosopher@tnp@invalid.invalid to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 11:01:31 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 27/02/2026 10:41, Davey wrote:
    HSBC used to allow the secure message, then it just disappeared.
    Nowadays, you have to call them on the 'phone, and hope somebody
    answers.
    I hate the websites that have lots of Contact links, that go round in
    circles and bring you back to where you started. They tend to only have specific choices of subjects to discuss, if your question doesn't fit
    into any of them, it doesn't have any chance.

    I had to physically go into an HSBC branch to get my account closed
    after they debanked me.

    BunchOfCunts
    --
    Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper
    name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating
    or condoning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of
    the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead. They must
    face it, then decide whether this is what they want or not.

    Ayn Rand.

    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Chris J Dixon@chris@cdixon.me.uk to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 11:21:14 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Davey wrote:

    I hate the websites that have lots of Contact links, that go round in
    circles and bring you back to where you started. They tend to only have >specific choices of subjects to discuss, if your question doesn't fit
    into any of them, it doesn't have any chance.

    Quite!

    Those sites that actually have a functioning way of sending
    messages usually respond by email, but seldom include the text of
    your original message.

    This is increasingly annoying when you then need to say , "Answer
    the question below instead of posting boilerplate irrelevance."

    I used to use a different email provider, but we fell out over
    technical issues. Each new move in a long support saga was
    announced by an email telling me to review the latest response
    online. Why not just include it in the email? :-(

    Chris
    --
    Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
    chris@cdixon.me.uk @ChrisJDixon1

    Plant amazing Acers.
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richmond@dnomhcir@gmx.com to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 11:22:21 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> writes:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they
    could send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as
    banks do.

    That's my pet hate, banks sending me messages to say there's a message
    that I have to dig out from the depths of their horrible web
    interface.

    If someone sends me an E-Mail I expect to be able to send them an
    E-Mail. If there's an 'important' message from the bank then they can
    tell me that when I next log in to my bank account. The really
    annoying messages (I get a lot of these from Lloyds) are 'important'
    ones which just tell me that my statement is available. The could
    most definitely go in an ordinary E-Mail.

    Even worse is HSBC who send me E-Mails and messages but won't even
    allow me to send them a 'secure' message, let alone an E-Mail.

    The problem is how to communicate confidential information securely. I
    don't think Whatsapp is the solution, nor are text messages, nor plain
    text emails. GPG or PGP might be, but most people won't set it up.

    So that leaves maybe a secure email service like Hushmail used to be, or Tutamail, or just setting up a web based service. Are there any other solutions?
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Theo@theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 11:43:38 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
    Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> writes:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they
    could send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as
    banks do.

    That's my pet hate, banks sending me messages to say there's a message
    that I have to dig out from the depths of their horrible web
    interface.

    If someone sends me an E-Mail I expect to be able to send them an
    E-Mail. If there's an 'important' message from the bank then they can
    tell me that when I next log in to my bank account. The really
    annoying messages (I get a lot of these from Lloyds) are 'important'
    ones which just tell me that my statement is available. The could
    most definitely go in an ordinary E-Mail.

    Even worse is HSBC who send me E-Mails and messages but won't even
    allow me to send them a 'secure' message, let alone an E-Mail.

    The problem is how to communicate confidential information securely. I
    don't think Whatsapp is the solution, nor are text messages, nor plain
    text emails. GPG or PGP might be, but most people won't set it up.

    Whatsapp has the benefit of being a) secure and b) widely deployed. I can
    see why it might be useful as a way to distribute information more securely than SMS.

    So that leaves maybe a secure email service like Hushmail used to be, or Tutamail, or just setting up a web based service. Are there any other solutions?

    Those would fail the b) test. I think realistically anything like that
    would be easier to just be an NHS webmail portal where you receive messages
    - but that's another thing you have to remember to login to. (Web) apps
    like 'myChart' and 'Patient Access' already do that function, although it's
    a patchwork with only some trusts using them (they're offered by a private company who only won the tender for some trusts).

    Another B2B one I've used (via the NHS and with other businesses) is 'Egress': https://www.egress.com/

    which is both a webmail platform and sends encrypted messages via email
    which can be opened offline in their app (or via a link to their webmail if
    you don't have the app), but it's a bit clunky to use (and a closed
    platform).

    Perhaps the NHS should build something like that? eg if they had their own IMAP server you could check for messages they could ensure transmission was secure up until your device. Adding it as another mail account to devices might be a support headache though, even if they got clients to auto-detect settings like they do for Gmail et al. I can see why they just want to use
    a platform run by somebody else.

    Theo
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richmond@dnomhcir@gmx.com to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 11:58:47 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
    Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> writes:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they
    could send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as
    banks do.

    That's my pet hate, banks sending me messages to say there's a
    message that I have to dig out from the depths of their horrible
    web interface.

    If someone sends me an E-Mail I expect to be able to send them an
    E-Mail. If there's an 'important' message from the bank then they
    can tell me that when I next log in to my bank account. The really
    annoying messages (I get a lot of these from Lloyds) are
    'important' ones which just tell me that my statement is available.
    The could most definitely go in an ordinary E-Mail.

    Even worse is HSBC who send me E-Mails and messages but won't even
    allow me to send them a 'secure' message, let alone an E-Mail.

    The problem is how to communicate confidential information
    securely. I don't think Whatsapp is the solution, nor are text
    messages, nor plain text emails. GPG or PGP might be, but most people
    won't set it up.

    Whatsapp has the benefit of being a) secure and b) widely deployed. I
    can see why it might be useful as a way to distribute information more securely than SMS.

    So that leaves maybe a secure email service like Hushmail used to be,
    or Tutamail, or just setting up a web based service. Are there any
    other solutions?

    Those would fail the b) test. I think realistically anything like
    that would be easier to just be an NHS webmail portal where you
    receive messages - but that's another thing you have to remember to
    login to. (Web) apps like 'myChart' and 'Patient Access' already do
    that function, although it's a patchwork with only some trusts using
    them (they're offered by a private company who only won the tender for
    some trusts).

    Another B2B one I've used (via the NHS and with other businesses) is 'Egress': https://www.egress.com/

    which is both a webmail platform and sends encrypted messages via
    email which can be opened offline in their app (or via a link to their webmail if you don't have the app), but it's a bit clunky to use (and
    a closed platform).

    Perhaps the NHS should build something like that? eg if they had
    their own IMAP server you could check for messages they could ensure transmission was secure up until your device. Adding it as another
    mail account to devices might be a support headache though, even if
    they got clients to auto-detect settings like they do for Gmail et al.
    I can see why they just want to use a platform run by somebody else.


    I think the NHS would probably outsource something like that. They
    already have some company called "Accurx". I don't know much about it
    but I get text messages with links to Accurx telling me to enter my date
    of birth. Quite a disasterous policy I think. But it might work if the
    email server were clearly an NHS domain.

    You say Whatsapp is secure but it is closed source. It says messages are
    E2EE, but the 'end' is the Whatsapp app. The messages is decrypted
    inside the app and who knows what happens to it then.

    Also we know that Meta breaks the law to spy, so it should not be
    trusted with confidential information.
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Andy Burns@usenet@andyburns.uk to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 12:01:59 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Chris Green wrote:

    That's my pet hate, banks sending me messages to say there's a message
    that I have to dig out from the depths of their horrible web interface.

    And then when you get there, it says there are no new messages (looking
    at you Barclays).
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 12:42:32 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they could
    send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as banks do.

    That's my pet hate, banks sending me messages to say there's a message
    that I have to dig out from the depths of their horrible web interface.

    If someone sends me an E-Mail I expect to be able to send them an
    E-Mail. If there's an 'important' message from the bank then they can
    tell me that when I next log in to my bank account. The really
    annoying messages (I get a lot of these from Lloyds) are 'important'
    ones which just tell me that my statement is available. The could
    most definitely go in an ordinary E-Mail.

    Even worse is HSBC who send me E-Mails and messages but won't even
    allow me to send them a 'secure' message, let alone an E-Mail.

    I have had to start writing letters to my bank (NatWest) as it is the
    only secure way of communicating with them. They send me back letters
    telling me that for security reasons they refuse to follow my
    instructions, so I need to send them a letter conmfirming that I am who
    I say i am.

    I have done this but so far they claim they haven't received it,
    although they seem to know what is in it. I have now been through their telephone security procedure four times and every time they say they
    just need to ring me back and then they can proceed - they have never
    rung back.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 12:48:04 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    [...]
    The problem is how to communicate confidential information securely. I
    don't think Whatsapp is the solution, nor are text messages, nor plain
    text emails. GPG or PGP might be, but most people won't set it up.

    So that leaves maybe a secure email service like Hushmail used to be, or Tutamail, or just setting up a web based service. Are there any other solutions?

    Write a letter - see my other post for details of what happens next.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 12:49:21 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 2026/2/27 10:41:56, Davey wrote:
    []
    I hate the websites that have lots of Contact links, that go round in
    circles and bring you back to where you started. They tend to only have specific choices of subjects to discuss, if your question doesn't fit
    into any of them, it doesn't have any chance.

    ('phone systems too, not just websites.) It should be a _law_ that any
    such menu should include at least "Other" (with a text window you can
    type into, not just Other as a selectable option), or ideally "human". (Especially 'phone systems.)

    McDonalds feedback website is particularly bad in this respect, as it
    more or less says you can contact someone via their AI, but the I only
    has a limited set of buttons, none of which is anything like "Human".
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    Analysing a joke is like dissecting a frog ... No one really cares and
    the frog dies. - Jimmy Carr
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Richmond@dnomhcir@gmx.com to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 12:54:37 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Chris J Dixon <chris@cdixon.me.uk> writes:

    Quite!

    Those sites that actually have a functioning way of sending messages
    usually respond by email, but seldom include the text of your original message.

    This is increasingly annoying when you then need to say , "Answer the question below instead of posting boilerplate irrelevance."

    I used to use a different email provider, but we fell out over
    technical issues. Each new move in a long support saga was announced
    by an email telling me to review the latest response online. Why not
    just include it in the email? :-(


    Note that SIP allows sending secure messages, but I don't suppose anyone
    will ever use that. If anyone did the price would go up.
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 12:58:07 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 2026/2/27 11:21:14, Chris J Dixon wrote:
    Davey wrote:

    I hate the websites that have lots of Contact links, that go round in
    circles and bring you back to where you started. They tend to only have
    specific choices of subjects to discuss, if your question doesn't fit
    into any of them, it doesn't have any chance.

    Quite!

    Those sites that actually have a functioning way of sending
    messages usually respond by email, but seldom include the text of
    your original message.

    Or, about equally as bad, _do_ include it but do not respond to it in
    any way.

    (I've also learnt not to ask more than one thing at once; very rarely do
    they ever address more than one of your points. Whether they address
    even a single point is a lottery, but two or more is pretty hopeless.
    I've tried numbering them, and then saying as my very first line, "This
    email contains five points", but even that rarely works.)

    This is increasingly annoying when you then need to say , "Answer
    the question below instead of posting boilerplate irrelevance."

    And have email systems that don't display - at their end - your
    communication properly. (You can sometimes tell when they have such a
    broken system when their system says "please reply above this line"; I
    haven't seen that for a _little_ while, so maybe it _is_ getting through
    to them how much that irritates [some] customers.)

    I used to use a different email provider, but we fell out over
    technical issues. Each new move in a long support saga was
    announced by an email telling me to review the latest response
    online. Why not just include it in the email? :-(

    Yes, that comes across purely as a delaying tactic.

    Chris

    John
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    Analysing a joke is like dissecting a frog ... No one really cares and
    the frog dies. - Jimmy Carr
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 13:02:58 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 27/02/2026 09:24, Richmond wrote:
    Do you have the NHS app on your phone? or do you use the web app?

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they could
    send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as banks do.


    I don't think NHS Scotland have one yet.

    One bank annoys because they send an EMail to say there is an important message for me but when you connect you just find something like a 0.1%
    change in interest rate. But no way of contacting the bank except a
    live chat system.

    I much preferred Homelink's system of secure messaging to and from the bank.


    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 13:14:16 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 27/02/2026 10:27, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    I fear those days are long gone; emails from companies that aren't sent
    from an unmonitored address are pretty rare these days; often they don't
    tell you it's unmonitored until near the end of the email, so you don't
    spot that fact until you've mostly composed your reply - or, not infrequently, they don't tell you at all. (_Sometimes_ emailing the unmonitored address triggers an automatic reply, which is infuriating
    but at least you know; at other times you don't even know. Always look
    at the address you're replying to - if it is something like no-reply@
    you have a fair idea.)



    Ditto!

    Years ago I thought of setting up an online system so they had to
    contact me through an online form with lots of pointless questions like
    some companies use when you want to contact them.
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 17:11:07 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 27/02/2026 11:58, Richmond wrote:
    I think the NHS would probably outsource something like that. They
    already have some company called "Accurx". I don't know much about it
    but I get text messages with links to Accurx telling me to enter my date
    of birth. Quite a disasterous policy I think. But it might work if the
    email server were clearly an NHS domain.


    I collected a prescription earlier. They wanted my name (I usually have
    to spell it) and forenames, address and postcode.

    I did try taking a previous prescription with me and showing their
    printed label on the box but did not seem to help.

    There must be an easier way!
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Woody@harrogate3@ntlworld.com to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 17:11:32 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On Fri 27/02/2026 12:42, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they could
    send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as banks do.

    That's my pet hate, banks sending me messages to say there's a message
    that I have to dig out from the depths of their horrible web interface.

    If someone sends me an E-Mail I expect to be able to send them an
    E-Mail. If there's an 'important' message from the bank then they can
    tell me that when I next log in to my bank account. The really
    annoying messages (I get a lot of these from Lloyds) are 'important'
    ones which just tell me that my statement is available. The could
    most definitely go in an ordinary E-Mail.

    Even worse is HSBC who send me E-Mails and messages but won't even
    allow me to send them a 'secure' message, let alone an E-Mail.

    I have had to start writing letters to my bank (NatWest) as it is the
    only secure way of communicating with them. They send me back letters telling me that for security reasons they refuse to follow my
    instructions, so I need to send them a letter conmfirming that I am who
    I say i am.

    I have done this but so far they claim they haven't received it,
    although they seem to know what is in it. I have now been through their telephone security procedure four times and every time they say they
    just need to ring me back and then they can proceed - they have never
    rung back.


    I have to say that my bank - First Direct* - have only ever put a foot
    wrong once in 35+ years with them and that was a delivery error on a
    Eurocard. They at least got Victoria Wine to deliver me a decent bottle
    of white!
    *For those that don't know FD is an autonomous division of HSBC. They
    must be doing something right as they are consistently in the top five
    or six in customer finance satisfaction surveys.
    What is more their call centres are in Leeds (as is their HQ) and
    Paisley in Scotland so if you ring them you only ever have to deal with
    a Yorkshire or Scottish accent!


    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 17:13:17 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 27/02/2026 12:49, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    ('phone systems too, not just websites.) It should be a_law_ that any
    such menu should include at least "Other" (with a text window you can
    type into, not just Other as a selectable option), or ideally "human". (Especially 'phone systems.)



    YouGov frequently have questions where there is no correct answer.




    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The Natural Philosopher@tnp@invalid.invalid to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 18:33:37 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 27/02/2026 17:11, JMB99 wrote:
    On 27/02/2026 11:58, Richmond wrote:
    I think the NHS would probably outsource something like that. They
    already have some company called "Accurx". I don't know much about it
    but I get text messages with links to Accurx telling me to enter my date
    of birth. Quite a disasterous policy I think. But it might work if the
    email server were clearly an NHS domain.


    I collected a prescription earlier. They wanted my name (I usually have
    to spell it) and forenames, address and postcode.

    It's normal.


    I did try taking a previous prescription with me and showing their
    printed label on the box but did not seem to help.

    Mo. you might have got that from someones trash

    There must be an easier way!

    Universal ID card? fingerprints?
    --
    "When one man dies it's a tragedy. When thousands die it's statistics."

    Josef Stalin


    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Davey@davey@example.invalid to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 19:04:06 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 17:13:17 +0000
    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 27/02/2026 12:49, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    ('phone systems too, not just websites.) It should be a_law_ that
    any such menu should include at least "Other" (with a text window
    you can type into, not just Other as a selectable option), or
    ideally "human". (Especially 'phone systems.)



    YouGov frequently have questions where there is no correct answer.





    In the "When did you stop beating your wife?" vein?
    --
    Davey.

    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.telecom on Fri Feb 27 21:33:53 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    Woody <harrogate3@ntlworld.com> wrote:

    On Fri 27/02/2026 12:42, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    Chris Green <cl@isbd.net> wrote:

    Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

    They could send me a gpg encrypted email if they wanted. Or they could >>> send me an email saying there is a message waiting for me as banks do.

    That's my pet hate, banks sending me messages to say there's a message
    that I have to dig out from the depths of their horrible web interface.

    If someone sends me an E-Mail I expect to be able to send them an
    E-Mail. If there's an 'important' message from the bank then they can
    tell me that when I next log in to my bank account. The really
    annoying messages (I get a lot of these from Lloyds) are 'important'
    ones which just tell me that my statement is available. The could
    most definitely go in an ordinary E-Mail.

    Even worse is HSBC who send me E-Mails and messages but won't even
    allow me to send them a 'secure' message, let alone an E-Mail.

    I have had to start writing letters to my bank (NatWest) as it is the
    only secure way of communicating with them. They send me back letters telling me that for security reasons they refuse to follow my
    instructions, so I need to send them a letter conmfirming that I am who
    I say i am.

    I have done this but so far they claim they haven't received it,
    although they seem to know what is in it. I have now been through their telephone security procedure four times and every time they say they
    just need to ring me back and then they can proceed - they have never
    rung back.


    I have to say that my bank - First Direct* - have only ever put a foot
    wrong once in 35+ years with them and that was a delivery error on a Eurocard. They at least got Victoria Wine to deliver me a decent bottle
    of white!
    *For those that don't know FD is an autonomous division of HSBC. They
    must be doing something right as they are consistently in the top five
    or six in customer finance satisfaction surveys.
    What is more their call centres are in Leeds (as is their HQ) and
    Paisley in Scotland so if you ring them you only ever have to deal with
    a Yorkshire or Scottish accent!

    That sounds promising.

    I've now discovered (after nearly 2 hours 'phoning them yesterday and a
    further hour today) that the reason they couldn't ring me back was
    because they withheld their number and I had 'witheld number blocking'
    set up to prevent scammers.

    They had also sent me e-mails in HTML with instructions to follow
    various links; the very thing their security advice tells you not to do.
    To make matters worse, they sent them from an address that was clearly
    not the NatWest Bank. My system caught them as spam and quarantined
    them. I had spotted them but when I 'phoned their helpline and asked if
    they were genuine, I was told they weren't and I should delete them.

    No wonder their customers fall for scams if the bank themselves send out communications that appear to be scams, even to their own security
    staff, and then expect customers to respond to them.
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom on Sat Feb 28 09:03:50 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 27/02/2026 21:33, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    I've now discovered (after nearly 2 hours 'phoning them yesterday and a further hour today) that the reason they couldn't ring me back was
    because they withheld their number and I had 'witheld number blocking'
    set up to prevent scammers.


    Before I retired I used to spend periods on 24/7 call so I had my phone
    set to reject calls with Number Withheld. I asked our Call Centre about
    this and they had no problem because they had other users with the same settings and just put '1470' on the numbers in their system.
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom on Sat Feb 28 09:10:31 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 27/02/2026 19:04, Davey wrote:
    In the "When did you stop beating your wife?" vein?


    No, more common to be

    1. Do you watch football
    2. Do you watch rugby
    3. Do you watch croquet

    With no option for not having any interest in sport and you can only go
    to the next question by selecting one of these.


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom on Sat Feb 28 09:18:30 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 27/02/2026 18:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    I did try taking a previous prescription with me and showing their
    printed label on the box but did not seem to help.

    Mo. you might have got that from someones trash


    All they have to do is use a previous prescription to identify the order
    (I always use my second forename so the label shows the format they use
    on my 'account'). They can they then ask for some identification. So
    only two items needed.

    I make my order online so their online system could print out a sort of prescription ID card.

    If someone who knew me and wanted to get their hands on my prescription
    to sell or to feed an addiction, they would know my name, address,
    postcode so have would no difficulty in collecting the prescription.


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From liz@liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) to uk.telecom on Sat Feb 28 11:05:36 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

    On 27/02/2026 18:33, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    I did try taking a previous prescription with me and showing their
    printed label on the box but did not seem to help.

    Mo. you might have got that from someones trash


    All they have to do is use a previous prescription to identify the order
    (I always use my second forename so the label shows the format they use
    on my 'account'). They can they then ask for some identification. So
    only two items needed.

    I make my order online so their online system could print out a sort of prescription ID card.

    If someone who knew me and wanted to get their hands on my prescription
    to sell or to feed an addiction,...

    Mind you, an addiction to Anusol is pretty rare. :-)
    --
    ~ Liz Tuddenham ~
    (Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
    www.poppyrecords.co.uk
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From J. P. Gilliver@G6JPG@255soft.uk to uk.telecom on Sun Mar 1 11:56:45 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 2026/2/28 9:3:50, JMB99 wrote:
    On 27/02/2026 21:33, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    I've now discovered (after nearly 2 hours 'phoning them yesterday and a
    further hour today) that the reason they couldn't ring me back was
    because they withheld their number and I had 'witheld number blocking'
    set up to prevent scammers.

    Wouldn't work anyway; in the last year (probably much longer), I've only
    been told "number withheld" once on using 1471; all others have shown a
    number, about half and half 07... and 01... ones. (Oh, and the
    occasional 000... one.) So they spoof a number. [When I subsequently try
    1572 option 1 to block them, _that_ says "from an unknown number". But
    1471 gives a number.]

    I may have had number-withheld calls - I don't have them blocked - and
    answered them; I've had calls from my local surgery. I've not had one
    that was clearly a phishing/scam/whatever one that on subsequent
    checking with 1471 said it was withheld. (The one exception I mention
    above I don't know whether it was dodgy or not - I didn't get to it in
    time, so it might have been genuine; obviously, I couldn't ring back to
    check!)

    Before I retired I used to spend periods on 24/7 call so I had my phone
    set to reject calls with Number Withheld. I asked our Call Centre about this and they had no problem because they had other users with the same settings and just put '1470' on the numbers in their system.

    Interesting; I had assumed that was just for private users who'd decided
    to have their CLID blocked. Useful to know it (1470) can be set on more
    complex systems such as a call centre.
    --
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    Religion often uses faith as a blindfold, saying anyone who doesn't
    believe the same as us must be wiped out. It's not God saying that.
    It's people, which is so dangerous. - Jenny Agutter, RT 2015/1/17-23
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David Wade@g4ugm@dave.invalid to uk.telecom on Sun Mar 1 12:24:44 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 01/03/2026 11:56, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
    On 2026/2/28 9:3:50, JMB99 wrote:
    On 27/02/2026 21:33, Liz Tuddenham wrote:
    I've now discovered (after nearly 2 hours 'phoning them yesterday and a
    further hour today) that the reason they couldn't ring me back was
    because they withheld their number and I had 'witheld number blocking'
    set up to prevent scammers.

    Wouldn't work anyway; in the last year (probably much longer), I've only
    been told "number withheld" once on using 1471; all others have shown a number, about half and half 07... and 01... ones. (Oh, and the
    occasional 000... one.) So they spoof a number. [When I subsequently try
    1572 option 1 to block them, _that_ says "from an unknown number". But
    1471 gives a number.]

    I may have had number-withheld calls - I don't have them blocked - and answered them; I've had calls from my local surgery. I've not had one
    that was clearly a phishing/scam/whatever one that on subsequent
    checking with 1471 said it was withheld. (The one exception I mention
    above I don't know whether it was dodgy or not - I didn't get to it in
    time, so it might have been genuine; obviously, I couldn't ring back to check!)

    Before I retired I used to spend periods on 24/7 call so I had my phone
    set to reject calls with Number Withheld. I asked our Call Centre about
    this and they had no problem because they had other users with the same
    settings and just put '1470' on the numbers in their system.

    Interesting; I had assumed that was just for private users who'd decided
    to have their CLID blocked. Useful to know it (1470) can be set on more complex systems such as a call centre.

    It depends on the call centre system. When I worked in a local council
    we couldn't set individual numbers on the phone system so it was set to "withheld". We had a few mobiles so we could call those folks with
    Anonymous Call Rejection set.

    Dave
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The Natural Philosopher@tnp@invalid.invalid to uk.telecom on Sun Mar 1 12:31:27 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 01/03/2026 12:24, David Wade wrote:

    It depends on the call centre system. When I worked in a local council
    we couldn't set individual numbers on the phone system so it was set to "withheld". We had a few mobiles so we could call those folks with
    Anonymous Call Rejection set.

    Lot of times the hospitals will call from a particular secretary's phone
    but give a caller ID of the main hospital switchboard which is
    essentially useless
    --
    "The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
    look exactly the same afterwards."

    Billy Connolly

    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From David Paste@pastedavid@gmail.com to uk.telecom on Sun Mar 1 13:21:03 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 27/02/2026 11:01, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    I had to physically go into an HSBC branch to get my account closed
    after they debanked me.

    BunchOfCunts



    HSBC debanked you? HSBC?? Holy moly you must be a bad person ;)
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The Natural Philosopher@tnp@invalid.invalid to uk.telecom on Sun Mar 1 15:27:32 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 01/03/2026 13:21, David Paste wrote:
    On 27/02/2026 11:01, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

    I had to physically go into an HSBC branch to get my account closed
    after they debanked me.

    BunchOfCunts



    HSBC debanked you? HSBC?? Holy moly you must be a bad person ;)

    Not really.

    The wanted me to provide an organisational tree of my one man company

    I don't think my answer satisfied them.
    --
    The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all
    private property.

    Karl Marx


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom on Mon Mar 2 09:38:10 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 01/03/2026 12:24, David Wade wrote:
    It depends on the call centre system. When I worked in a local council
    we couldn't set individual numbers on the phone system so it was set to "withheld". We had a few mobiles so we could call those folks with
    Anonymous Call Rejection set.



    Similar to what I was told when I asked if there would be any problems
    if I use 'Anonymous Call Reject'. A lot of places seem to keep a mobile
    handy for that sort of situation (and probably for if their system crashes).



    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From JMB99@mb@nospam.net to uk.telecom on Mon Mar 2 09:40:58 2026
    From Newsgroup: uk.telecom

    On 01/03/2026 12:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
    Lot of times the hospitals will call from a particular secretary's phone
    but give a caller ID of the main hospital switchboard which is
    essentially useless


    Last time I received a call from anyone in NHS Scotland / Highland, the
    NHS Scotland 0800 was displayed.

    It was funny during lockdown, I receive a call from a US number and was suspicious.

    Turned out the local medical centre had a new pharmacist who was
    American and her phone not been set up yet!



    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2