BT Payment Processing Fee - (awkward customers)

Mr_Oink

Having had my phone bill this morning, and not trusting BT with my bank or card details, I elect to pay by cash. The result is the extra charge of about £4.50 per quarter I get hit with - a tax on protecting your banking and card details so to speak.

It crossed my mind that if I pay by Paypoint, BT may get hit with a processing fee of around 30 pence. So if I make 15 separate Paypoint transactions to pay that £4.50 we should be even on the cost :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Actually, come to think of it, if I made a payment every day when I pick up my daily paper - that would mean it would cost BT £27.00 to process my bill payments. Mmmmm. Now there's an idea......

balmk

...or just pay by direct debit as millions of others do.

You will be protected by the direct debit guarantee so if anything does go awry , i.e. if BT take the wrong amount you are entitled to a refund via your bank.

Many companies now charge for non DD payments as the cost of processing other payments is higher. Other customers who do pay by DD should be able to benefit from this and not be penalised by higher bills to compensate for those who pay by other means.

Quentin

Millions use dd to pay their utility bills.

Why not join the real world and save yourself the £4.50?

(The info you give a merchant to set up a dd is the same info you give anyone to whom you write a cheque)

Mr_Oink

Err, you miss the point. My bank details - my choice and BT is a company I just don't trust.

Any scheme that gives control of debiting your bank account by "varying amounts or varying dates" is not something I warm to. It may be awfully convenient for utlility companies et al, but it does not sit well with me.

I think I'll go with the 'pay a pound a day' approach - it's just much more fun!

Quentin

Read the dd guarantee - they cannot just take money without first informing you how much and when. If they break that guarantee you have safeguards.

But you seem determined to waste your money, so carry on, but why bother coming to a money saving forum with all this?

balmk

Mr_Oink wrote: »

Err, you miss the point. My bank details - my choice and BT is a company I just don't trust.

Any scheme that gives control of debiting your bank account by "varying amounts or varying dates" is not something I warm to. It may be awfully convenient for utlility companies et al, but it does not sit well with me.

I think I'll go with the 'pay a pound a day' approach - it's just much more fun!

So why not switch providers to a company that you do trust?

Mr_Oink

Quentin wrote: »

Read the dd guarantee - they cannot just take money without first informing you how much and when. If they break that guarantee you have safeguards.

You have *limited* safe guards - none of which match *NOT* giving any old company the auspices to debit your bank account at will. You also find *you* have to chase getting your money back and mitigating any charges that happen as a result. This can take multiple phone calls, letters and lots of fighting.

Quentin wrote: »

But you seem determined to waste your money,

You seem determined to have an argument in the Holy Church of the Direct Debit. Chill girlfriend!

Quentin wrote: »

..so carry on, but why bother coming to a money saving forum with all this?

I don't believe anyone should be penalised for choosing the way they pay based on NOT being prepared to give direct access to their bank account. Clearly it does *not* cost £4.50 to process a cash payment - it costs about 30p. You are right that I can't save that £4.50, but I can make sure it costs BT £27 to process it :-)

balmk wrote: »

So why not switch providers to a company that you do trust?

Can you suggest one that does not charge for cash payment?

duchy

How petty ......and what a waste of YOUR time !
As the other poster said -if you don't like/trust BT go elsewhere-it's not like the telephone system is a monopoly anymore. (I'd have a bit more sympathy for your viewpoint if it was).
All that time spent standing in line to pay could be used making you money instead-even stuff like competitions, online surveys and the rest would give you a better return. You're just cutting off your nose to spite your face IMO

Mr_Oink

duchy wrote: »

How petty

I agree. It really is. £4.50 for a 30p cost, it is petty.

It's no trouble or a waste of my time at all. I get a newspaper every morning, I'll just pay a pound at the same time on their paypoint machine. Sorted :-)

Buzby

Petty or not, it is equally petty for BT to fine people £4.50 for the temerity of choosing how to pay their bill. As for trust - if anyone thinks I would let any third party have UNRESTRICTED access to my account without good reason needs to take stock. Simply because I have to pay someone on a reguar basis, as a reasonably intelligent person, I have somehow to suspend my good bookkeeping and let sundry firms help themselves?

As for the DD 'Guarantee' - I'm surprised the ASA hasn't ruled on this. It is worthless! People forget the insidious change in the scheme where set or viariable amounts were allowed on a weekly, monthly, quarterly or annual basis. All swept away for an all-embracing 'unspecified amounts on unspecified dates' alternative. Add to this there is no requirement for your bank to confirm your agreement to the DD by checking a signature, all it now takes is for a firm to input your Sorting Code and Account number, something that you didn't previously have to protect.

This 'guarantee' does not cover consequential losses - and if you don't know what that means and have DD's, I suggest you look into this urgently. The only benefit to consumers is that your bill will be paid. It may not be for the correct amount, as British Gas following a meter misreading, attempted to take £2,850 from my account. When this bounced due to lack of funds they charged £20 for the failure to collect, and my bank £30 for not having enough funds! £50 fine for doing nothing!

After 3 issues over 2 years with different firms, I decided I had better things to do with my time than stand over my bank account with a virtual shotgun. DD's were cancelled. Sure it might cost me more in the short term, but in the long run? I know where my money is. Do remember, BT have also changed their rules, they now state they will send a bill FIVE days before a debit is taken. This is from the billing date, NOT after you have recieved it in the post. In many cases, folk get the bill after the debit has gone - due to BT going for alternative postal carriers who take up to 10 days to deliver.

Mr O may not change the world, but until suppliers realise a DD is not a right, such actions are the only way to affect their bottom line.

Heinz

balmk wrote: »

So why not switch providers to a company that you do trust?

I'd suggest Virgin Media.

Oops - their non-direct debit charge is £5/month, not £1.80/month.