BT Processing Payment

FredL

I was just taking a look at my bill, and noticed the dreaded BTPS payment fee. I pay quarterly, online, by debit card. I prefer to pay this way rather than by direct debit so I can keep an eye on my bill for hidden charges (such as payment processing fees).

The processing fee for me is £5.67 per quarter - £22.68 a year to make four online payments. Apparently "Which? estimates that when paying by debit card, the cost to the retailer is 10p to 20p."

I asked BT about this, and they just T&C'd me.

What does the community think? Is this a reasonable fee, or am I being ripped off?

giraffe69

I think you should switch to direct debit but if you exert your inalienable right not to do so then you will pay. It is not just the processing fee which as you say is quite small especially for debit cards but the fact that the chasing of those who do not pay punctually is far more expensive.

FredL

the fact that the chasing of those who do not pay punctually is far more expensive

With respect I'm not sure I completely agree with you, as a quick google reveals that BT already have a late payment penalty fee system in place.

So, the high cost of payment processing is still a mystery.

I'm beginning to feel like I'm being ripped off by BT....

macman

But you freely chose to sign up with BT knowing that they would charge you for not using DD.
The remedy is simple-use DD, or switch to a provider who does not charge you.

Buzby

Yes, we are being ripped off, and royally so. DON'T switch to DD, as this is a tacit addmittance you don't have the ability to manage your financial affairs, and have to let your supplier do it for you (or you just don;t care, take your pick).

It is a great money-spinner and the Govt see nothing wrong with it - as the DTI said as long as the chage was fair and not done 'unfairly'. All the companies do this to a lesser or greater extent - shifting the cost of collection to the punter, when it used to be part of their operating profits, so yes it IS a scam.

Credit Card charges are being regulated first, so hopefully those who pay electronically will soon have the same protection.

Heinz

Buzby wrote: »

DON'T switch to DD, as this is a tacit addmittance you don't have the ability to manage your financial affairs, and have to let your supplier do it for you.

It's funny how different people can interpret things differently. I would deduce the exact opposite (I can manage my affairs and, hence, my account is kept healthy enough to be able to service my debts when calls are made).

Buzby

Well, on the basis that I have the intelligence to pay my bills on time, what other explanation could there be? Anyone entering into a DD, which is now 'unspecified amounts on unspecified dates' ir giving the supplier full control of this account - to take as much as they want and as often, leaving the account holder to complain and seek an indemnity before getting any money back. Heck, you don;t even need to SIGN a DD mandate anymore, the supplier can simply assert you agreed.

With that level of flexibility, I'd say anyone who saw nothing wrong with this was indeed taking a cavalier attitude to their future financial security - and for very little benefit. The evidence of this can be seen littered around the various MSE threads.

FredL

Differing opinions then about direct debit.

The BT processing fee annoyed me because I saw my payment method as being about personal choice. Why should I be penalised if I pay on-line when the bill is due, promptly, using my debit card, at little or no cost to the supplier?

Then there is the question about whether I'm being ripped off or not. Perhaps four on-line payments do cost £22 a year to service. But given the recent outcry regarding the sneaky card surcharges airlines were charging, and the estimated cost of an on-line transaction (10 - 20p), I suspect this is a rip-off.

I wonder if these fees could be more transparent so we could make a more informed decision. Do we have any rights to request a fee breakdown?

Heinz

FredL wrote: »

Differing opinions then about direct debit.

Indeed.

Those who have had a problem of an incorrect or early call which resulted in them incurring overdraft charges take the opposite view to me who has never had such a problem and is therefore quite happy to make the savings that result from agreeing to DD calls.

Buzby

It has nothing to do with 'having a problem' but the very real issue of losing full control of your finances simply because they have engineered the system in a way that you might save a little money.

Regarding the point of bring 'ripped' off - supposed it does cost £22 per annum to service it, what relevance is that to anything? If someone sends me a cheque and it costs me 80p in the bus to deposit it, should I be able to charge them this amount additionally as it is a real cost to me?

Of course not. Which is why the acceptance that we must somehow be sympathetic to the business and their banking tariff, so that we can subsidise their carp banking policy because it eats into their bottom line? The premise is laughable, and the sooner consumers wake up and smell the coffee - the better.