The PIN phone in a prison in England and Wales does not refuse numbers at random. Some are refused because of what the number is, before anyone looks at who answers it. HMPPS policy states that "Requests for the addition of 0800 numbers as social contacts, and numbers linked to call diversion and re-routing services, must be restricted under these grounds" (Interception, Monitoring and Security of Prisoner Communications Policy Framework, §7.9, issued 11 August 2026). Others are refused because they were never submitted, because intelligence suggests the request is an attempt to get around a restriction already imposed, or because the number is thought to belong to another prisoner. The decision sits with the establishment, not with you and not with the phone provider. These rules cover England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland run separate contracts under different rules.
Why does the PIN phone refuse some numbers?
The PIN phone is not an open line. Each number has to be submitted by the person in prison and added to their account before it can be dialled. If a number was never submitted, or was submitted and not yet added, the call will not connect. That is the most common reason, and it is not a judgement about you.
The second reason is the type of number itself. The policy framework treats certain categories as restricted regardless of who is behind them, because of what those numbers can be used to do.
The third reason is specific to the case. The framework lists grounds for not adding a number, including where "intelligence suggests the submission of a number is an attempt to circumvent restrictions outlined in section 6" or where "intelligence suggests or there is a reasonable suspicion that the contact number is for another prisoner(s)" (§7.9(c)-(d)).
If you are not sure which of the three applies, start with how the PIN phone system works. The sequence matters more than people expect.
Which types of number are usually restricted?
The fix is different for each reason, so it helps to separate them. The table sets out what the framework says and what it means for the person waiting at the other end.
| Type of number | What the policy says | What it means for you |
|---|---|---|
| 0800 as a social contact | Requests for addition "must be restricted under these grounds" (§7.9) | It will not be added as a personal contact number |
| Linked to call diversion or re-routing | Same paragraph, same treatment (§7.9) | The prison is directed to restrict it; the establishment decides on the individual request |
| Suspected of belonging to another prisoner | Not added where there is "reasonable suspicion" (§7.9(d)) | Refusal, and you may not be told the reason |
| Submitted to get around a restriction | Not added where intelligence suggests circumvention (§7.9(c)) | Refusal, and the attempt itself is a security matter |
| Never submitted | Has to be submitted and added to the account first | Nothing to challenge yet; it has to go through the process |
Why can't someone in prison ring an 0800 or a call-diversion number?
Because both can move a call somewhere the prison did not authorise. The framework gives the reason plainly: "such numbers/platforms can facilitate diversion to certain contacts, circumventing restrictions that have been imposed and potentially causing serious harm" (§7.9). A restriction that only holds until a call is forwarded is not a restriction.
This matters for what we sell, so we will say it in full rather than in small print. Prison Phone Calls provides a real 01 or 02 landline number, regulated by Ofcom, which forwards to your UK mainland mobile. That is a call-diversion service, and it falls inside the category the framework names above. What the number changes is the rate the call is charged at: the person calling you is charged at the landline rate rather than the mobile rate, out of the same limited credit they already pay from.
What it does not change is anything about permission. The number still has to be submitted by the person in prison through the establishment's normal process. The establishment decides, and it can refuse. Calls are still recorded and monitored in the usual way. We will never tell you to leave information off a form, choose an area code to look a particular way, or present the number as anything other than what it is. Doing that is exactly the circumvention the framework is written to stop, and it puts the person you are calling at risk of losing phone access altogether.
If the mechanism is the part you are still turning over, this page walks through it end to end.
Does every prison check every number the same way?
No, and this is why two families in two prisons get different answers to the same question. The framework makes mandatory checking of submitted social contacts apply to specific risk cohorts. For everyone else it says: "The checking of submitted social contacts for prisoners in cohorts outside of the above list is not mandatory and can therefore be considered and managed locally in consideration of risk and resource" (§7.5).
Local management means local variation. One establishment may check every number submitted; another may check by exception. Neither is doing it wrong. It also means that what happened to a friend's partner at a different prison tells you very little about what will happen at yours.
The framework does set an expectation about pace. Where a list has been submitted, "each number should be added to the account once checked, rather than waiting for every number on the list to be checked", and staff "must, where possible, notify prisoners of each addition as soon as is practical" (§7.8). So numbers can arrive one at a time, and the person inside should hear about each one. There is no published national deadline for a decision on a single number, and anyone quoting you one is guessing.
Who decides, and can a refusal be challenged?
The establishment holding the person decides. Restrictions are applied locally by default: "The restriction of communications of a specific prisoner should be applied by the establishment they are residing in, unless it is considered necessary and proportionate to block a number more widely across the estate", in which case "a request to apply the restriction must be made to the Central Authorities Bureau (CAB)" (§4.14).
That has two consequences. A local restriction is a local decision, and the route to question it runs through the establishment, using the person in prison's own complaints process. A restriction applied across the estate through the CAB is different, and a wing officer cannot lift it.
You may also not be told why. Where the reason involves intelligence, staff are not going to explain it, and pressing them will not change that. What you can do is check the simpler explanations first: that the number was actually submitted, that it was submitted correctly, and that it has been added rather than still sitting in the queue. Our page on why a number gets blocked goes through those in order.
The cost question is separate from the permission question, and worth looking at on its own terms.
What should the family do if a number is refused?
Work backwards through the three reasons. First, confirm with the person in prison that the number was submitted, and submitted accurately. A single wrong digit produces exactly the same silence as a refusal. If it was never submitted, or was written down wrong, that is the whole problem and it is fixable this week. How to get a number added in the first place sets out the normal route.
Second, ask whether it has been checked and added yet. The framework expects numbers to be added one at a time as they are checked, rather than held back until the whole list clears, and the person inside should be told of each addition as soon as practical. So the answer to "has it come through yet" should be knowable from the wing rather than a mystery.
Third, if it has been refused, the person in prison raises it through the establishment's complaints process. You cannot do that part from outside. It is a real limit of your position, not a door you have yet to find.
Keep the two questions apart throughout. Whether a number is permitted is the prison's decision, made under the framework's own grounds. What a permitted call costs is separate, set by the rate the number is charged at. Confusing the two is how families pay mobile rates for years assuming nothing can change.
If you are weighing up whether a landline number is worth it before anything is submitted, the plans are set out here.
Frequently asked questions
Does the prison have to tell us why a number was refused?
Not always. Where the ground involves intelligence, such as a reasonable suspicion that the number belongs to another prisoner or that the request is an attempt to circumvent an existing restriction (§7.9), the reason will not be shared. The refusal itself should be known to the person in prison, who can raise it through the establishment's complaints process.
Is a landline number from a diversion service treated differently from any other landline?
It is treated according to what it is. The framework names "numbers linked to call diversion and re-routing services" alongside 0800 numbers as requests that must be restricted (§7.9). The number we provide is a real, Ofcom-regulated 01 or 02 line, but it is a diversion service and we will not tell you otherwise. The establishment decides, and can refuse.
How long does a number take to be approved?
There is no published national deadline, and it varies by establishment. The framework says numbers on a submitted list should be added one by one as each is checked, with the person in prison notified "as soon as is practical" (§7.8). That is an expectation about the order of work, not a timescale.
Why do other families at other prisons get different answers?
Because outside specific risk cohorts, checking submitted social contacts "is not mandatory and can therefore be considered and managed locally in consideration of risk and resource" (§7.5). Local discretion produces different practice at different establishments. Treat what other families tell you as their prison's practice, not a rule.
Can a number be blocked everywhere, not just at one prison?
Yes. Restrictions are normally applied by the establishment holding the person, but where it is necessary and proportionate to block a number more widely across the estate, a request goes to the Central Authorities Bureau (§4.14). Local staff cannot undo a restriction of that kind.
Find out which of the three reasons applies to you before you decide anything else.