bt direct debit discount question

KimYeovil

Buzby wrote: »

We have stories of people paying needlessly for piles of things because they didn't monitor the bank account statement as they should. Who'se fault is that then?

I'll give you one guess.

Buzby

Ypaymore wrote: »

Thanks for the lecture Buzby. I am happy with my d/ds thank you as i check them regularly.

You missed the point. It is what you CANNOT control that is the problem. Still, if you've got funds swilling about to be called upon with no difficulty awaiting its return, you must be in the minority. For those who have found it easy to let people just take the money they want, they'll aksi be so trusting that they wouldn't think of checking it.

Still - like the ols saying, why have a dog and bark yourself - the thought of giving someone access to my bank account, yet have to stand over my statements in case it all goes wrong, shows a lack of common sense in my book!

Ypaymore

Buzby wrote: »

You missed the point. It is what you CANNOT control that is the problem. Still, if you've got funds swilling about to be called upon with no difficulty awaiting its return, you must be in the minority. For those who have found it easy to let people just take the money they want, they'll aksi be so trusting that they wouldn't think of checking it.

Still - like the ols saying, why have a dog and bark yourself - the thought of giving someone access to my bank account, yet have to stand over my statements in case it all goes wrong, shows a lack of common sense in my book!

I didnt miss your point, just because i dont adopt the same stance as you on d/ds ( i have a number that have never caused me problems) does not imply i lack common sense.

Pls be nice to all MoneySavers. There's no such thing as a stupid question, and even if you disagree courtesy helps.

jellygoodfellow

So all the people who pay by d/d dont have common sense your having a larf are u not.

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/27/27-directdebit-guarantee.htm

"Direct debits are now a major part of daily life, with many people using them each month to pay their household bills. The direct debit guarantee is a powerful safeguard for customers"


Do you work for BT by any chance?

Inactive

ihatebt wrote: »

Thanks for that Y. Will bookmark that. http://www.postoffice.co.uk/portal/po/jump2?catId=68600711&mediaId=19300217

Leaving a telecoms provider can be a complete pain though. Never goes smoothly (in my opinion) Didn't realise the PO did a phone service, I thought they actually became BT many years ago.

I moved my BT line to my excellent ISP last week, I didn't even notice the change, it all went as smooth as silk.

Mark_In_Hampshire

Buzby wrote: »

Yes, there are a lot of people out there who have been fooled into thinking that it makes sound financial sense to let every firm have full access to their bank accounts because they are; (a) too trusting (b) too helpless, or (c) think they're protected by a 'guarantee'.

Some things you might not appreciate.

The 'guarantee' is limited - very limited, as will only allow for the funds (if taken in error) to be repaid to the customer at some unspecified time in the future. All you get back is the money that was taken, IF your bank agrees that there has been a breach of rules. They may take your word for this, they may not - but whilst you are out of the incorrect money, it is YOU who has to do the chasing and pleading to get it back.

If an incorrect debit causes other DD's to fail - tough. That ISN'T covered, you'll pay everyone's bounced payment fees - from your bank, to the suppliers who had their payment requests rejected. All those fees would rightfully fall at the door of the original firm making the erroneous payment request, but they DON'T! Consequential losses are specifically excluded.

If a firm whom you have given a DD Mandate has billin errors and does not take the money for whatever reason, you remain liable to pay by other methods. Hoping to rely on the fact they could take the money is no defence in Law, so they get the benefit, and you get the hassle.

DD's have sneakily evolved and consumers have been mostly totally unaware of the changes. Previously, a DD could be treated almost like a standing order, the payment date was locked down, and the amount taken could vary but only to 1 debit per calendar month. We now have a DD that leaves you on the brink of financial Armageddon - "Unspecified Amounts on Unspecified Dates". This means, they can take as much as they want, as often as they want, when they want - providing of course they gave you 10 days notice. Why? This is a recipe for abuse and disaster. Most of us are adults and have learned to look after our money. Why would anyone then think it a good idea to pass all this responsibility to a computer at suppliers, who could inadvertently bring your world crashing down, yet have no other liability to you, other than paying it back, eventually?

Best yet - READ the DD form, you are told your supplier will retain your instructions and pass them on electronically to your bank for payment. What doesn't happen - is your bank has a chance to check your signature to confirm that it was indeed YOU who created the mandate, they'll just let the money go and if you don't complain, great!

And you're happy with that?

We have stories of people paying needlessly for piles of things because they didn't monitor the bank account statement as they should. Who'se fault is that then? Will the 'guarantee' get the money back? Of course it won't!

For anyone with DD's active, don't believe the hype is is there for the benefit of business NOT yourself. When it goes wrong, you (not they) will be left to pick up the pieces.

Absolutely spot on. Of course the customer remains responsible for checking that un-needed services are not continuing to be supplied and billed regardless of payment method.

I get a little tired of these threads along the lines of "BT can't do that, surely" (e.g. increase amounts with little or no notice, vary dates, give insufficient notiece, take the wrong amounts) when actually, BT can do that. They're quite entitled to do that, because the customer has told them so by signing and returning the DD mandate form without reading it.

e.g.

"I pay by direct debit so I am entitled to 10 days notice before the amount is debited"

No, you're not. READ the form. "We will give you UP TO 10 days notice". 10 days is the MAXIMUM not the minumum. The minimum is effectively one second.

The customer therefore WAIVES arguably the most important part of the direct debit guarantee when signing this form. It isn't just BT either; looking on the Three website "in practice this means you get about or up to five days notification before the amount is debited".

You cannot reverse "part of" a direct debit. If the bill is wrong and you're charged too much - no problem normally, just write back asking for a correct bill. No money changes hands. No need to "reverse" the debit.

Have it reversed in full and you're in breach of contract. YOU remain responsible for paying. YOU agree that any mistakes will be rectified AFTER you pay, not before.

Direct debit is one of those things that begins with the best of intentions and with protections for the consumer, however since any company can now over-ride the DD guarantee by setting their own terms, all protection for the consumer is void.

On a final note, the so-called guarantee laughably refers to a number of "safeguards". None of the points are safeguards. They are in fact "remedies". Direct debit has no safeguards.

And people continue to use it...