Sky Subscriber Services

[saxon]

Hello, for anyone who wants to use a land line no. for sky

01506 831 780 press 3 then 3 again then 2

I get free landline calls, so this may helpothers.

[pugsley]

thanks for that I get free phone calls so this will be useful

[saxon]

Hi, your welcome, check this site out, loads of alternitive numbers for these nice banks as well.

SAYNOTO0870.COM - Non-Geographical Alternative Telephone Numbers

[Bookworm]

Originally Posted by okonski

Taking money from a credit or debit card is not the same and should not be confused with a DD. Card operate a different scheme, and is called a 'continuous authority'. With a DDM you can cancel by revoking it at your bank, a recurring card debit can ONLY be cancelled if the company agrees to your request. If there is a dispute, there is nothing to stop them taking the funds until your card is replaced with a new one bearing a different number, issue number or expiry date.

Sadly, it's worse than that. A continuous authority carries on even after you have been issued with a new card.

My card got cloned and misused about 1 year ago. The criminals used it to set an AOL account (thereby adding insult to injury ). It took FOUR months for Barclays to finally stop the payments, even though they had been notified from the very first day the payment came off my account (another advantage of Internet Banking) and my card cancelled, a stop put to "regular" transactions, and a new one issued. Obviously, I couldn't tell AOL since I didn't know the AOL account number!
BTW, the bank can cancel a continuous authority, of course, they can. It would be a very clear breach of the Data Protection Act if they didn't. And just as well in my case, or I'd still be getting AOL dipping in my account!

[buzby]

Originally Posted by Bookworm

Sadly, it's worse than that. A continuous authority carries on even after you have been issued with a new card!

BW, can you remember if the card bore the same primary number? (Just a change in expiry dates?) I ask because I had a long discussion with banking officials prior to the introduction of the 'validation code' sequence as a method of card verification - the CVV or CV2 codes.

When a continuous debit is not revoked and the card changes, if the primary number and CVV code is the same, the debit will succeed. However if the CVV is different, but not supplied (and never had been), early continuoius debits can still be made as the CVV isn't there to trap the originator. I was told that since 2003 merchants are having to use the CVV, and at a card change and reissue, hese continuouis mandates fail as the olnd and new numbers are not linked in any way. I'm hoping your problem happened before the CVV check became commonplace?

[Biggsy]

The issue arrises again, that direct debit has a lot of problems and that it takes an enormous amount of power away from the consumer. It seems blindly supported by the majority, but questioned by a lot of sensible people.

Can one of the administrators of this board make some kind of suggested action, so that all of us who are sick of both the immorality and perhaps the illegality of blackmailing consumers into setting up a direct debit, is challenged.

[buzby]

Originally Posted by Biggsy

Can one of the administrators of this board make some kind of suggested action, so that all of us who are sick of both the immorality and perhaps the illegality of blackmailing consumers into setting up a direct debit, is challenged.

I'm actually in the middle of drafting a formal complaint to the OFT and my solicitor is checking it. I plan to also forward it to my MP due to the success of the OFT reigning in the Banks and their unfair charges. My main thrust is one of exclusion (if you don't have a bank account, it is discrimination, as it costs more to pay by other means) and the 'fine' element, even customers who pay electronically by home banking and the like are fined in the same way, yet the funds are delivered at no cost to the beneficiary.

I hope to have it uploaded here shortly, with an option for a template letter for others to use.

[Bookworm]

Originally Posted by okonski

BW, can you remember if the card bore the same primary number? (Just a change in expiry dates?) I ask because I had a long discussion with banking officials prior to the introduction of the 'validation code' sequence as a method of card verification - the CVV or CV2 codes.

When a continuous debit is not revoked and the card changes, if the primary number and CVV code is the same, the debit will succeed. However if the CVV is different, but not supplied (and never had been), early continuoius debits can still be made as the CVV isn't there to trap the originator. I was told that since 2003 merchants are having to use the CVV, and at a card change and reissue, hese continuouis mandates fail as the olnd and new numbers are not linked in any way. I'm hoping your problem happened before the CVV check became commonplace?

If by "primary number", you mean the long card number, then it definitely changed, as I used to know my card number by heart (don't ask!), though not in totality, I think -if I remember rightly- that only the last 4 digits were changed.

And since this happened about 1 year ago, draw your own conclusions as to either the efficiency of our banking system, or the veracity of what you got told!!!!

[buzby]

Originally Posted by Bookworm

draw your own conclusions as to either the efficiency of our banking system, or the veracity of what you got told!!!!

Yup I did mean the main number, on an update the trailing digits used to change, but nowadays it might just be the CVV. The situation you outlined could only have been done by your own bank branch manually assisting the originator to reactivate the continuous mandate - of course they might have thought they were doing you a favour, but I doubt they's be so helpful these days! I can't say it doesn;t happen that way to me as I never permit mandates of any kind and have avoided them since 1998.

[Bookworm]

Well, considering that this is was in response to fraudulent activity that got reported to them straight away, we'd have to agree on a very loose definition of "helpfulness" then

[buzby]

Well, when Alzheimer's kicks in, we'll all be past caring....

[Bookworm]

I'd say something witty, but I forget what we were talking about.

[lucyec]

Back on the subject of Sky... can I just say thanks to Saxon for that phone number - I just used it!

Just received another call from Wescot. That £120 is a 'crawl back fee', not a late payment fee as the original woman told me. Apparently it's to pay for the initial free installation as I have cancelled my contract. I thought you only had to pay this if the contrat was cancelled before it ran out, ie within the 12 month period? Anyway, informed the man at Wescot I have written to Sky and the account is in dispute and I don't feel I need to take any action on it until the dispute is resolved. This is right isn't it? He basically said I should call Sky to see what they were doing about it, in the meantime my account with Wescot is in default but on hold for 7 days. Can they put it in default if it's in dispute?

So I duly phoned Sky to see what was happening. The man in Timbucktoo or wherever he was said they had no record of my letter as yet and to call back on Monday *sigh*. But also helpfully informed my that my contract is not technically cancelled and won't be until I pay the whole outstanding balance...therefore surely they can't charge me this 'crawl back fee' (nice name!).

Aaarrrggh!! I'm so confused now. If anyone else understands all this, help is very gratefully received!

[buzby]

Originally Posted by lucyec

Wescot is in default but on hold for 7 days. Can they put it in default if it's in dispute?!

Wescot can do what they like with it, they'll call it a 'default' and probably flag it on your credit record as such until the matter is resolved one way or another.

It can take up to 10 days before a letter is received by Sky and scanned into their system. The person you spoke to isn't in Timbuktu, your call was handled either in Livingston (near Edinburgh), Dunfermline (Fife) and an overspill to an agency call centre in Glasgow.

We need to establish what this 'crawl back' fee is - if your minimum term was 12 months and you've paid for this then you're correct, there will be no contractural obligation, other than 1 month's notice of termination.

[Biggsy]

Ironicaly, I phoned sky three times yesterday before reading this post, with the intention of signing up (to dump NTL). I spent 20 minutes on the phone each time, and still didnt get through. They lost a potential customer.

Is it just an incredible coincidence that both NTL and sky have the same fees for non direct debit payments? resembles price fixing.