Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > uk.telecom > #39683 > unrolled thread

Area codes in Cumbria

Back to article view | Back to uk.telecom

Contents

  Area codes in Cumbria Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-09-28 21:36 +0100
    Re: Area codes in Cumbria Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-09-28 22:34 +0100
      Re: Area codes in Cumbria Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-09-29 09:22 +0100
      Re: Area codes in Cumbria Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-09-29 21:12 +0100
        Re: Area codes in Cumbria Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-09-29 21:23 +0100
          Re: Area codes in Cumbria Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-09-30 09:27 +0100
            Re: Area codes in Cumbria David Wade <dave@g4ugm.invalid> - 2026-09-30 11:19 +0200
              Re: Area codes in Cumbria Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-09-30 10:37 +0100
                Re: Area codes in Cumbria Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-09-30 18:21 +0100
                  Re: Area codes in Cumbria Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> - 2026-09-30 18:47 +0100
                    Re: Area codes in Cumbria David Wade <dave@g4ugm.invalid> - 2026-09-30 21:44 +0200
                      Re: Area codes in Cumbria Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2026-09-30 21:02 +0100
                        Re: Area codes in Cumbria David Wade <dave@g4ugm.invalid> - 2026-09-30 22:43 +0200
                      Re: Area codes in Cumbria The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-01 15:59 +0100
              Re: Area codes in Cumbria Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-09-30 18:18 +0100

#39683 — Area codes in Cumbria

I was on holiday in Cumbria last week when I noticed that some of the
STD (area) codes contain 6 digits. I understood that STD codes were
normally 3 digits (London 020), 4 digits for large cities (eg 0141) or
5 digits. Why 6? Does this mean local calls can be made using 5
digits?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#39684

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> writes:

> I was on holiday in Cumbria last week when I noticed that some of the
> STD (area) codes contain 6 digits. I understood that STD codes were
> normally 3 digits (London 020), 4 digits for large cities (eg 0141) or
> 5 digits. Why 6? Does this mean local calls can be made using 5
> digits?

There are quite a few examples of six digit area codes in this
document. Not that it answers your question.

A cluster of them here:

017683 Appleby Y Y
017684 Pooley Bridge Y Y
017687 Keswick Y Y

Appendix A: Geographic
Numbering - Geographic Area
Codes and applicable geographic
area

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/phones-telecoms-and-internet/information-for-industry/numbering/other/national-numbering-plan.pdf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39685

On Mon, 28 Sep 2026 22:34:09 +0100, Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

>Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> writes:
>
>> I was on holiday in Cumbria last week when I noticed that some of the
>> STD (area) codes contain 6 digits. I understood that STD codes were
>> normally 3 digits (London 020), 4 digits for large cities (eg 0141) or
>> 5 digits. Why 6? Does this mean local calls can be made using 5
>> digits?
>
>There are quite a few examples of six digit area codes in this
>document. Not that it answers your question.
>
>A cluster of them here:
>
>017683 Appleby Y Y
>017684 Pooley Bridge Y Y
>017687 Keswick Y Y

All in Cumbria, I see.
>
>Appendix A: Geographic
>Numbering - Geographic Area
>Codes and applicable geographic
>area
>
>https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/phones-telecoms-and-internet/information-for-industry/numbering/other/national-numbering-plan.pdf

Thanks. I'll look at this with interest later on. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39687

On Mon, 28 Sep 2026 22:34:09 +0100, Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
[snip]
>https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/phones-telecoms-and-internet/information-for-industry/numbering/other/national-numbering-plan.pdf

1.  I didn't know Telex still existed (page 15)
2.  Just skimming through, the 6 digit codes seem to be in Cumbria

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39688

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> writes:

> On Mon, 28 Sep 2026 22:34:09 +0100, Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>>https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/phones-telecoms-and-internet/information-for-industry/numbering/other/national-numbering-plan.pdf
>
> 1.  I didn't know Telex still existed (page 15)
> 2.  Just skimming through, the 6 digit codes seem to be in Cumbria

Claude says:

013873	Langholm	Scotland (Dumfries and Galloway)
015242	Hornby	Lancashire (Lune Valley, near Lancaster)

The rest of them are in Cumbria.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39689

On Tue, 29 Sep 2026 21:23:47 +0100, Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:

>Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> writes:
>
>> On Mon, 28 Sep 2026 22:34:09 +0100, Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/phones-telecoms-and-internet/information-for-industry/numbering/other/national-numbering-plan.pdf
>>
>> 1.  I didn't know Telex still existed (page 15)
>> 2.  Just skimming through, the 6 digit codes seem to be in Cumbria
>
>Claude says:
>
>013873	Langholm	Scotland (Dumfries and Galloway)
>015242	Hornby	Lancashire (Lune Valley, near Lancaster)
>
>The rest of them are in Cumbria.

Thanks. It was a quick skim on my part, as I mentioned. Could Langholm
and Hornby be 'serviced' out of Cumbria? This seems to be a bit of a
coincidence. Why would a small number of exchanges have 6-digit STD
codes?    

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39690

On 30/09/2026 10:27, Scott wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2026 21:23:47 +0100, Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
> 
>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, 28 Sep 2026 22:34:09 +0100, Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>> https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/phones-telecoms-and-internet/information-for-industry/numbering/other/national-numbering-plan.pdf
>>>
>>> 1.  I didn't know Telex still existed (page 15)

It doesn't.

>>> 2.  Just skimming through, the 6 digit codes seem to be in Cumbria
>>
>> Claude says:
>>
>> 013873	Langholm	Scotland (Dumfries and Galloway)
>> 015242	Hornby	Lancashire (Lune Valley, near Lancaster)
>>
>> The rest of them are in Cumbria.
> 
> Thanks. It was a quick skim on my part, as I mentioned. Could Langholm
> and Hornby be 'serviced' out of Cumbria? This seems to be a bit of a
> coincidence. Why would a small number of exchanges have 6-digit STD
> codes?

Don't theses things all "vanish" at the end of the year? When everyone 
is on VOIP it doesn't matter where they are serviced from. OFCOM says it 
intends to maintain the link between "area codes" but permit "out of 
area use" but I am not sure what the rules are.

Dave

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39691

David Wade <dave@g4ugm.invalid> writes:

> On 30/09/2026 10:27, Scott wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Sep 2026 21:23:47 +0100, Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 28 Sep 2026 22:34:09 +0100, Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
>>>> [snip]
>>>>> https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/phones-telecoms-and-internet/information-for-industry/numbering/other/national-numbering-plan.pdf
>>>>
>>>> 1.  I didn't know Telex still existed (page 15)
>
> It doesn't.
>
>>>> 2.  Just skimming through, the 6 digit codes seem to be in Cumbria
>>>
>>> Claude says:
>>>
>>> 013873	Langholm	Scotland (Dumfries and Galloway)
>>> 015242	Hornby	Lancashire (Lune Valley, near Lancaster)
>>>
>>> The rest of them are in Cumbria.
>> Thanks. It was a quick skim on my part, as I mentioned. Could
>> Langholm
>> and Hornby be 'serviced' out of Cumbria? This seems to be a bit of a
>> coincidence. Why would a small number of exchanges have 6-digit STD
>> codes?
>
> Don't theses things all "vanish" at the end of the year? When everyone
> is on VOIP it doesn't matter where they are serviced from. OFCOM says
> it intends to maintain the link between "area codes" but permit "out
> of area use" but I am not sure what the rules are.
>
> Dave

B3.1.1 mentions this.

"A Geographic Number shall be assigned only to a Subscriber whose Network
Termination Point is physically located within the geographic area
associated with that number (having regard to the relevant Geographic
Area Code), unless:

"a. the Subscriber has requested a Geographic Number that includes the
relevant Geographic Area Code; and

"b. charges for calls to that Geographic Number remain consistent with
charges for calls to other Geographic Numbers that include the same
Geographic Area Code.
"

According to Claude this facility goes back a long way, 2011 or 2003
maybe, but documents are not available from before that (when Oftel was
the regulator).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39695

Richmond wrote:

> B3.1.1 mentions this.
> 
> "A Geographic Number shall be assigned only to a Subscriber whose Network
> Termination Point is physically located within the geographic area
> associated with that number (having regard to the relevant Geographic
> Area Code), unless:
> 
> "a. the Subscriber has requested a Geographic Number that includes the
> relevant Geographic Area Code; and
> 
> "b. charges for calls to that Geographic Number remain consistent with
> charges for calls to other Geographic Numbers that include the same
> Geographic Area Code."
> 
> According to Claude this facility goes back a long way, 2011 or 2003
> maybe, but documents are not available from before that (when Oftel was
> the regulator).

A lot earlier (1970s?) weren't they called "out of area numbers" and 
pretty expensive, ISTR charged by distance of chosen exchange from the 
location's natural exchange.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39696

On Wed, 30 Sep 2026 18:21:22 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
wrote:

>Richmond wrote:
>
>> B3.1.1 mentions this.
>> 
>> "A Geographic Number shall be assigned only to a Subscriber whose Network
>> Termination Point is physically located within the geographic area
>> associated with that number (having regard to the relevant Geographic
>> Area Code), unless:
>> 
>> "a. the Subscriber has requested a Geographic Number that includes the
>> relevant Geographic Area Code; and
>> 
>> "b. charges for calls to that Geographic Number remain consistent with
>> charges for calls to other Geographic Numbers that include the same
>> Geographic Area Code."
>> 
>> According to Claude this facility goes back a long way, 2011 or 2003
>> maybe, but documents are not available from before that (when Oftel was
>> the regulator).
>
>A lot earlier (1970s?) weren't they called "out of area numbers" and 
>pretty expensive, ISTR charged by distance of chosen exchange from the 
>location's natural exchange.

IIRC there was a huge cost if you wanted an 0171 number when you lived
in 0181. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39697

On 30/09/2026 19:47, Scott wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Sep 2026 18:21:22 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
> wrote:
> 
>> Richmond wrote:
>>
>>> B3.1.1 mentions this.
>>>
>>> "A Geographic Number shall be assigned only to a Subscriber whose Network
>>> Termination Point is physically located within the geographic area
>>> associated with that number (having regard to the relevant Geographic
>>> Area Code), unless:
>>>
>>> "a. the Subscriber has requested a Geographic Number that includes the
>>> relevant Geographic Area Code; and
>>>
>>> "b. charges for calls to that Geographic Number remain consistent with
>>> charges for calls to other Geographic Numbers that include the same
>>> Geographic Area Code."
>>>
>>> According to Claude this facility goes back a long way, 2011 or 2003
>>> maybe, but documents are not available from before that (when Oftel was
>>> the regulator).
>>
>> A lot earlier (1970s?) weren't they called "out of area numbers" and
>> pretty expensive, ISTR charged by distance of chosen exchange from the
>> location's natural exchange.
> 
> IIRC there was a huge cost if you wanted an 0171 number when you lived
> in 0181.

This is no longer the case. For example:-

https://www.voipfone.co.uk/support/guides/numbers/telephone-numbers#geographic

However, with Internet Telephony you can choose ANY geographical number, 
no matter where you are actually located. You could finally finish up in 
Calcutta! And, of course, if the number is called by another Voipfone 
customer, the call is totally free.

There are many uses for these numbers; the obvious one being that a 
business can have a prestigious telephone address whilst being somewhere 
else entirely. You can also now move your office to anywhere in the 
world and keep this telephone number.

For the personal user, it means that if you have moved abroad but still 
have family in the UK you could take a number for the town your relative 
lives in, they can then make ordinary calls to you, no matter where in 
the world you are, for the cost of a local call.

.. although I believe rules are being put in place to ensure UK numbers 
are only accesible from the UK

Dave

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39698

David Wade <dave@g4ugm.invalid> writes:

> On 30/09/2026 19:47, Scott wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Sep 2026 18:21:22 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Richmond wrote:
>>>
>>>> B3.1.1 mentions this.
>>>>
>>>> "A Geographic Number shall be assigned only to a Subscriber whose
>>>> Network Termination Point is physically located within the
>>>> geographic area associated with that number (having regard to the
>>>> relevant Geographic Area Code), unless:
>>>>
>>>> "a. the Subscriber has requested a Geographic Number that includes
>>>> the relevant Geographic Area Code; and
>>>>
>>>> "b. charges for calls to that Geographic Number remain consistent
>>>> with charges for calls to other Geographic Numbers that include the
>>>> same Geographic Area Code."
>>>>
>>>> According to Claude this facility goes back a long way, 2011 or
>>>> 2003 maybe, but documents are not available from before that (when
>>>> Oftel was the regulator).
>>>
>>> A lot earlier (1970s?) weren't they called "out of area numbers" and
>>> pretty expensive, ISTR charged by distance of chosen exchange from
>>> the location's natural exchange.  >> IIRC there was a huge cost if
>>> you wanted an 0171 number when you >> lived >> in 0181.
>
> This is no longer the case. For example:-
>
> https://www.voipfone.co.uk/support/guides/numbers/telephone-numbers#geographic
>
> However, with Internet Telephony you can choose ANY geographical
> number, no matter where you are actually located. You could finally
> finish up in Calcutta! And, of course, if the number is called by
> another Voipfone customer, the call is totally free.
>
> There are many uses for these numbers; the obvious one being that a
> business can have a prestigious telephone address whilst being
> somewhere else entirely. You can also now move your office to anywhere
> in the world and keep this telephone number.
>
> For the personal user, it means that if you have moved abroad but
> still have family in the UK you could take a number for the town your
> relative lives in, they can then make ordinary calls to you, no matter
> where in the world you are, for the cost of a local call.
>
> .. although I believe rules are being put in place to ensure UK
> numbers are only accesible from the UK
>
> Dave

You've gone around in a circle there I think. Not everyone is on VOIP
yet. We were discussing the current and historical rules.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39699

On 30/09/2026 22:02, Richmond wrote:
> David Wade <dave@g4ugm.invalid> writes:
> 
>> On 30/09/2026 19:47, Scott wrote:
>>> On Wed, 30 Sep 2026 18:21:22 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Richmond wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> B3.1.1 mentions this.
>>>>>
>>>>> "A Geographic Number shall be assigned only to a Subscriber whose
>>>>> Network Termination Point is physically located within the
>>>>> geographic area associated with that number (having regard to the
>>>>> relevant Geographic Area Code), unless:
>>>>>
>>>>> "a. the Subscriber has requested a Geographic Number that includes
>>>>> the relevant Geographic Area Code; and
>>>>>
>>>>> "b. charges for calls to that Geographic Number remain consistent
>>>>> with charges for calls to other Geographic Numbers that include the
>>>>> same Geographic Area Code."
>>>>>
>>>>> According to Claude this facility goes back a long way, 2011 or
>>>>> 2003 maybe, but documents are not available from before that (when
>>>>> Oftel was the regulator).
>>>>
>>>> A lot earlier (1970s?) weren't they called "out of area numbers" and
>>>> pretty expensive, ISTR charged by distance of chosen exchange from
>>>> the location's natural exchange.  >> IIRC there was a huge cost if
>>>> you wanted an 0171 number when you >> lived >> in 0181.
>>
>> This is no longer the case. For example:-
>>
>> https://www.voipfone.co.uk/support/guides/numbers/telephone-numbers#geographic
>>
>> However, with Internet Telephony you can choose ANY geographical
>> number, no matter where you are actually located. You could finally
>> finish up in Calcutta! And, of course, if the number is called by
>> another Voipfone customer, the call is totally free.
>>
>> There are many uses for these numbers; the obvious one being that a
>> business can have a prestigious telephone address whilst being
>> somewhere else entirely. You can also now move your office to anywhere
>> in the world and keep this telephone number.
>>
>> For the personal user, it means that if you have moved abroad but
>> still have family in the UK you could take a number for the town your
>> relative lives in, they can then make ordinary calls to you, no matter
>> where in the world you are, for the cost of a local call.
>>
>> .. although I believe rules are being put in place to ensure UK
>> numbers are only accesible from the UK
>>
>> Dave
> 
> You've gone around in a circle there I think. Not everyone is on VOIP
> yet. We were discussing the current and historical rules.

True, for the next few four months, but on the 31st January, or very 
soon after everyone will be on VOIP.

Just for info there were according to this page:-

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2026/09/openreach-confirm-post-january-2027-measures-for-uk-analogue-phone-switch-off.html

one week ago, still 1.2 million out of 16.2 million lines not on VOIP . 
However they are migrating 44,000 per week by the 31st January 2027 POTS 
will be switched off and and EVERYONE will be on some kind of VOIP service.

For most this will be conventional VOIP but for a few this will be by a 
kind of "off-premises" VOIP known as Emergency Voice Access (eVAC) where 
there is an ATA in the exchange driving a copper circuit to the premises:-

https://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2026/04/openreach-pilot-emergency-uk-phone-lines-for-2027-analogue-switch-off.html

Apart from being charged a very expensive 35 quid a month for this 
service, I assume to encourage users to switch it works like 
"on-premises" VOIP with a local ATA. Users have to dial the full STD 
number so any "Exchange Code" is a pure illusion.

Dave

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39700

On 30/09/2026 20:44, David Wade wrote:
> However, with Internet Telephony you can choose ANY geographical number, 
> no matter where you are actually located. You could finally finish up in 
> Calcutta!
And many of them do...

-- 
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a 
kind word alone.

Al Capone

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#39694

David Wade wrote:

> Don't theses things all "vanish" at the end of the year?

Near enough (end of January).

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | uk.telecom

csiph-web