BT Payment Processing Fee - (awkward customers)

Mr_Oink

The only thing I need to clarify is the availability of features like caller display/id, call diversion and choose to refuse (and any associated costs).

Mark_In_Hampshire

AAISP don't insist on direct debit, nor did Zen when I was with them.

Mr_Oink

Mark_In_Hampshire wrote: »

AAISP don't insist on direct debit, nor did Zen when I was with them.

Thanks Mark, but I'd never use AA in Bracknell. Seriously overpriced guff IMHO. Really, their pricing for one thing reads like a sketch from Monty Python.

I have experienced 'Zen' and found it be mixed. When it worked it was great and cheap, but their technical support dealing with a line fault was utterly hopeless. The clincher was minor spamming and cold calling - it was such a turn off, I moved provider. Also, IDNET beat them in terms of providing FTTC. It's been live in my area for a year and ZEN spent too long faffing around - which was not untypical of dealing with them in general.

Granted Zen are a tenner a month cheaper than IDNET, but they are just in totally different leagues. IDNET kick their backsides totally IMHO.

If I can nail the simple 'caller display' then that will do nicely.

steveE2

Mr_Oink wrote: »

The only thing I need to clarify is the availability of features like caller display/id, call diversion and choose to refuse (and any associated costs).

Caller display is inclusive with any call inclusive pack, other features are £1.53 p/m
http://www.idnet.net/solutions/home/phone/features.jsp

Mr_Oink

steveE2 wrote: »

Caller display is inclusive with any call inclusive pack, other features are £1.53 p/m
http://www.idnet.net/solutions/home/phone/features.jsp

Thanks, I had spotted that. I don't actually want a call package - and the notion of paying £4.59 per quarter for caller display (something I currently get free with BT) is a sticking point.

There is a saving on the direct debit costs as they have agreed to waive their £1 per month, but that is lost against the cost of provisioning caller display.

BT charge £13.50 per month for line rental - Idnet £12.00 so there is a £1.50 saving there.

IDNET charge for 1571, BT don't

IDNET appear to charge 20p to set a call up, BT 11.5p
{granted BT will increase prices shortly, but what is to say other providers wont do the same}

So moving provider would be splitting hairs - which is a pity. I'd happily ditch the 1571 but paying for caller display is a no-no. We make just three chargeable calls a quarter on the phone, so a package (which would get free caller display) would be a bad deal for us.

It was close - I nearly moved..... just not close enough. The trust is there, but it's not really a big enough difference. Plus, if we move and then need to move back because it turns out to be troublesome there will be a tie-in with BT for 12-18 months for a new contract.

Sigh......

Diesel44

I have just been looking into the dreaded direct debit route, I have seen ' Monthly whole bill direct bill' mentioned on here quite a lot. Am I correct in thinking that I will be billed each month, or to put it better, My direct debit will be for the month just gone, so my online account will be renewed each month, I pressume that they will email me each month to inform me of my new months figure.
If this is correct, over the year my account will change 12 times, I will receive 12 emails.
But if I want to pay by cash, they charge me for one bill.
What a crazy world we live in nowadays.
Seriously, is this how the monthly whole bill direct debit works.

Heinz

Whole Bill Direct Debit means you pay your line rental etc. in advance and your calls in arrears, in full, every quarter or every month.

In the case of Monthly Whole Bill Direct Debit, you will, indeed, receive 12 emails telling you that a new bill awaits your perusal and that, about 2 weeks later, a specified amount will be called (I now pay BT about £23/month).

I don't get your "my account will change 12 times" part - it's no different to any other monthly expenditure (e.g. a monthly supermarket shop - for which you know roughly what the bill will be but not specifically until you pass through the checkout).

steveE2

Mr_Oink wrote: »

Thanks, I had spotted that. I don't actually want a call package - and the notion of paying £4.59 per quarter for caller display (something I currently get free with BT) is a sticking point.

There is a saving on the direct debit costs as they have agreed to waive their £1 per month, but that is lost against the cost of provisioning caller display.

As you're already paying them for your Broadband the phone would be an addition to your bill and shouldnt be charged any extra anyway.

BT charge £13.50 per month for line rental - Idnet £12.00 so there is a £1.50 saving there.

As you already have Broadband the phone would be £10.21 per month.(normally only 11.22 who told you £12?)

The small print

IDNet line only package is £10.21 when taking out a broadband package.

IDNET charge for 1571, BT don't

Correct,currently £13.23 for equivalent Line rental Call display and 1571

IDNET appear to charge 20p to set a call up, BT 11.5p
{granted BT will increase prices shortly, but what is to say other providers wont do the same}

IDNET charge 0p setup on line only with daytime calls @2.55p and E/W @0.51p
One of my main reasons for joining was the saving on setup charges

So moving provider would be splitting hairs - which is a pity. I'd happily ditch the 1571 but paying for caller display is a no-no. We make just three chargeable calls a quarter on the phone, so a package (which would get free caller display) would be a bad deal for us.

So IDNET line rental with Caller Display but not 1571 would be £11.72 (10.21+1.51 call display),wether that would be a good enough saving only you can decide.

It was close - I nearly moved..... just not close enough. The trust is there, but it's not really a big enough difference. Plus, if we move and then need to move back because it turns out to be troublesome there will be a tie-in with BT for 12-18 months for a new contract.
Sigh......

Shouldn't be any problems as it is still a BT line and no downtime or difference noticed when i transferred, only the billing is changed,but a return to BT retail would involve another contract

Mr_Oink

The sticking point is paying for Caller Display and 1571. That's made it 'no thanks' for now.

Naf

Ok: here's the deal.
I used to pay BT by card over the phone every quarter because my finances were in somewhat of a mess I couldn't set one date every month for the money to come out; doing this had left me with hundreds of pounds of bank charges in the past. When I moved house, BT moved my line no problem, but decided the old address was a better place to send my bill, meaning I got cut off for late/non payment. Because their service is so badly thought out, you can't even speak to their own agents once your line is like this, so I had to walk to the end of the street and use the payphone; thankfully this is a freephone number. At this point I had no idea what had happened, and so it took a lot of arguing to convince the guy I hadn't received a bill at all, or a reminder and he eventually looked at the addresses. Got the line reconnected, paid the bill when it arrived at the right address; no problem, right? How very, very WRONG you would be. No problems until the n ext bill where I had a LATE PAYMENT CHARGE and a LINE RECONNECTION FEE added. Absolutely livid I called them back, more arguing and eventually had them removed. Sorted? Not a chance. Next bill came through with TWO LATE PAYMENT FEES. And after fixing these, the advisor actually had the gall to still recommend DD to me!
So if I had been paying by Direct Debit, I would have had to pay these charges upfront, and only had them back as credits on my next bill, which was wrong each time anyway; or gone to my bank, asked for a Direct Debit indemnity (which can take two weeks anyway), then still been liable for late payment fees.
Or for another example, Orange worked out my mobile phone bill wrong by over £60 one month, but it took me telephoning them for well over 5 hours over about 3 months to get it rectified, again, had I paid by direct debit I would have been out of pocket, and the fact they would have already taken the money off me would have made them much less inclined to look into it for me.
Now I work for one of the high street banks, and see time and time again companies abusing their privilege of claiming direct debits; claiming too much and refusing to refund it themselves, claiming too little and after months or even years sending a bill for the full balance they never claimed themselves, taking payments twice where only one was supposed to go, not cancelling direct debits when customers change providers, setting them back up automatically without getting new authorisation from the account holder, not setting up direct debits where they already had authorisation to do it, not claiming direct debits then blaming either the customer or the bank. I see these customers numerous times a day, which means other banks do too. It's just not on.
I have nothing against the principle of allowing a company to take money direct from my account; I pay my life insurance, home insurance and broadband by Direct Debit, but these are fixed payments so I have much more confidence they will go smoothly, and they do. Everything else I pay by standing order, but am fighting the case with everyone over their non-DD charges because I am in credit with all of them.
Once they get their acts together I may consider setting up Direct Debits, but as it is there is just no way, and it is not fair to penalise someone because your company can't keep a customer's confidence. I liked the idea of setting up a DD but then paying early, but it still doesn't help if they screw up your bill and claim money you don't owe anyway.