02GF74
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 07:12 AM |
|
|
wish her luck....
... a woman is taken BT to court today over them charging £ 1.50 for customers thatchosse not to pay via direct debit.
If I had known, I would have joined her.
Obscence profict making rip off merchants  grrrrrrrr.......
|
|
|
|
|
phoenix70
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 09:11 AM |
|
|
I Don't think she has a leg to stand on, in this case. It is going to be easy to prove that it does cost more to accept non direct debit
payments, therefore they are justified in charging. Many phone companies out there just refuse to accept anything other than DD and Virgin charge £5
extra a month for non DD customers
|
|
|
Paul TigerB6
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 09:50 AM |
|
|
I thought they give a discount of £1.50 for DD paying customers rather than charging extra (strictly speaking in their legal speak??) Lots of
companies offer discounts in similar ways.
Think she will lose myself
|
|
|
phoenix70
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 10:54 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Paul TigerB6
I thought they give a discount of £1.50 for DD paying customers rather than charging extra (strictly speaking in their legal speak??) Lots of
companies offer discounts in similar ways.
Think she will lose myself
Thats what they used to do, now they are charging extra for non DD, a bit silly of BT to change this as you are right, if it was left as a discount
for DD, then she would have had absolutely no case
[Edited on 28/3/08 by phoenix70]
|
|
|
Paul TigerB6
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 11:00 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by phoenix70
Thats what they used to do, now they are charging extra for non DD, a bit silly of BT to change this as you are right, if it was left as a discount
for DD, then she would have had absolutely no case
[Edited on 28/3/08 by phoenix70]
So now they are charging every single customer an additional £1.50 effectively?? Wow - that might just be a huge own goal then by BT!!!
Come on - win win win!! 
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 11:17 AM |
|
|
What is the grounds of her claim? I don’t think it is illegal to place a surcharge on different modes of payment. Several companies charge 1 or 2%
more for credit card payments to cover the charges they have to pay. Many shops have a minimum payment for debit cards to cover the costs they have
to pay.
Big companies like BT have to employ armies of people to open envelopes, read cheque information, enter it into the computer then take the cheques to
the bank, monitoring their progress to see if they bounce. A direct debit has to be set up once and is then automated. The £1.50 per month probably
reflects accurately the extra cost of processing payments by cheque.
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 02:35 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by phoenix70
It is going to be easy to prove that it does cost more to accept non direct debit payments, therefore they are justified in charging.
do you work for BT or what!?!
So how much does it cost BT when I pay them online? Yet I am still being charged £ 1.50.
|
|
|
phoenix70
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 04:13 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by 02GF74
quote:
Originally posted by phoenix70
It is going to be easy to prove that it does cost more to accept non direct debit payments, therefore they are justified in charging.
do you work for BT or what!?!
So how much does it cost BT when I pay them online? Yet I am still being charged £ 1.50.
As I don't work for BT, I've no idea what it cost to pay online, so you may have a point there. BT will argue it's all about debt
management, it is easier for them, and therefore cheaper to, collect money from you, rather than wait for you to pay them. Definately a bit of an own
goal for BT, should have left it as a discount for pay DD rather than a charge for not.
|
|
|
jono_misfit
|
| posted on 28/3/08 at 05:29 PM |
|
|
Their not the only ones.
Orange charge £2.55 per month for not having direct debit set up. Its stated as non-direct debit charge.
|
|
|
