SKY TV and the penalty charge - how far will it go? ** WON 21st May**

[Simon7685]

Hi Everybody

***Part 2 is post number 5.***

I appreciate this is a long winded thread and hope you will take the 5 minutes or so to read it. Please leave your comments, good or bad and tell me what you think.

 

This is my story to date regarding Sky TV and the £4 charge for payment other thatn by Direct Debit.

 

I have subscribed to Sky since it arrived on the scene. I originally paid by monthly direct debit. On a number of occasions Sky implented the dd before it was due, sometimes by 3 or 4 days.

 

Like most people my account does not carry money in reserve unless i've just been paid. Therefore for them to take the money before it was due resulted in not enough money being in the account. As I had no overdraft facility the bank bounced the request which resulted in me being charged upto £35 for nothing. If they took it when they said they would, not before everything would be ok but oh no thats not Sky.

 

I phoned numerous times about it, standard response was dd was for variable amounts and the dates of dd were also variable at their behest!

My response - cancel the dd as my account was not still under the 12 month initial contract.

 

So I then started to pay by phoning up (at my cost) and paying by debit card. As far as I was and am concerned this is more or less the same as a dd, but I am in charge of when the money is paid not them.

 

I have to admit that I paid the £4 a month charge for not paying by dd as I did not know I could do any other, so this has been the case until I started claiming my bank charges back. Then I got to thinking, NO this charge is a penalty and should be challenged which is where I begin:

 

1. I phoned Sky to pay on 28 March this year as normal. I asked for the £4 charge to be dropped as it was an unfair penalty charge, the operator I spoke to refused to do it and also refused to put through to a supervisor. I advised her I wished to pay my balance less the £4 charge, she confirmed that was what she would do and stated the amount, I agreed and authorised it.

 

My intention now was to persue Sky in writing as with the banks and ask them to justify their costs or drop the charge. Anyway I did not feel comfortable with what had gone on so contacted my bank to find the Sky operator had taken the full amount including the £4 charge! I telephoned Sky immediately and got to Customer Services where I spoke to the most arrogant rude supervisor I have ever dealt with. He was not prepared to allow me to speak and constantly shouted over me saying I had no right to question their charges, and refuted my claim about them taking my money, I had his name and staff number and the operator who committed the theft, so I terminated the call as it was going nowhere.

 

2. I sent a letter to Sky as with the bank procedure advising them that under the Unfair Terms of Contract act 1999, they could not make a profit from this penalty charge and challenged them to justify it. I also emailed Customer Services and attached a further copy of the letter.

 

Six days later I received a reply to my email. They failed to acknowledge the shabby customer service I received on the phone and had no record of me being charged more than authorised - no surprise there!

It then went on with standard garbage re the dd being the easiest way to pay and if I didn't they incurred more costs and were allowed to reflect this in their charge of £4, I should phone them woth my bank details and they would set up a dd for me.

 

3. I replied advising them I would not be paying by dd. Further more I would not pay their monthly penalty charge. I again challenged them to prove their costs and said if they proved it correct I would pay but not until as I believed in not reflective of their true costs and as such was unenforceable and an unlawful charge.

 

I received a reply in 2 days. They began by apologising about the bad customer service I had received. Saying it was unsatisfactory and could not be justified. - Ok no problem thats fine all I wanted was an apology for the way I had been treated. However regarding the £4 if I paid by dd I wouldnt have to pay it!

 

What would it take to get the message through I thought, so:

 

4. Back to Sky same day. I thanked them for their apology and said no way was I paying by dd. Again I pointed out I was prepared to pay a true reflection of their costs for not going with dd. I again advised about the law on penalties and the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts act 1999, etc, etc, etc. I also questioned their non response to my letter on this.

 

Finally in an attempt to get through to them I said I would not be paying the charge now or in the future unless they proved to me it was reflective of their true costs.

 

Will I at last get through to them?;

 

5. Reply received in 3 days. They note I am clearly disappointed about their stance on the charge. I have to pay by dd or pay their charge. After consultation with their legal department I can avoid the £4 charge by paying my account 2 weeks earlier, so they won't need to send a bill so it won't cost them any money. Or pay in advance on an open agreement with a credit card!

 

Think about this for a minute, you already in advance by one month, now they want another 2 weeks in advance - nice, not!

 

6. Reply to Sky, same day going along the previous tracks, unfair terms, unlawful, unenforceable etc. Then I pointed out that there was already £8 unpaid in charges on my account and this would continue to accrue by £4 per month until they took me to court. When I would state my case and ask a judge to order them to justify their charge and also involve the media.

 

Finally I pointed out that £4 represented a near 27% increase of their basic package price. I am currently unable to work due to a debilitating illnes going on for the last 18 months which they at present can not cure, therefore I am unfortunately having to live on state benefit (which I am not proud of but am genuinely ill) and this was also representing a large chunk of my income.

 

I was absolutely fuming by now and thought that now I may get somewhere as effectively my account appeared to be in a debit situation.

 

Could they get any lower..........................YES!

 

7. I received a letter yesterday from Sky stating I was late in making my payment and I owed them £8, which I could pay by phoning up with a card or,...........yep thats right setting up a direct debit!

 

They have advised me that if I don't pay in 14 days they will suspend all my services until I pay.

 

Oh what a wonderfull oraganisation they really are, am I bothered by that, No, will I pay, NO. It is now down to principle, I will not be walked over!!

 

Watch out for my next move in this protracted saga tomorrow I think and hope its a cracker.

 

Thanks for reading, please comment

Simon

[dw190]

Thanks for reading, please comment

Simon

 

Read with interest and admire you sticking to your guns.

 

I have recently been communicating with Sky on behalf of a friend who took out their Package of See, Speak & Surf. The surf element never worked and their Helpline was useless. After eight weeks and no broadband a letter was sent Special Delivery terminating the contract. On confirmation of delivery from Royal Mail web site the DD was cancelled. They telephoned the next day promissing the BB would be up and running within 24 hours and requested authorisation for the DD to be reinstated, my friend fell for their false promises. Had to cancel the DD again after 48 hours had passed without BB.

 

I have emailed them with reiterating that the letter sent stands as the BB was non existant, they are now attempting to hold onto the twelve month TV contract even though they pulled the plug on the TV.

 

The most interesting part of all this is that my friend has never signed anything, not even for the installation of the equipment.

 

Thay have been given notice to remove their equipment and advised they are agreeing to be charged daily for securely storing if its not removed by the deadline which has now passed.

[buzby]

This is my story to date regarding Sky TV and the £4 charge for payment other thatn by Direct Debit.

 

I have subscribed to Sky since it arrived on the scene. I originally paid by monthly direct debit. On a number of occasions Sky implented the dd before it was due, sometimes by 3 or 4 days.

 

This is a well trodden path. They will only settle prior to Court action. Look at this thread: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-consumer-issues/29691-sky-subscriber-services.html?highlight=sky+subscribe+services

[Mark_Blackpool]

My experience with Sky when we had it - for one year only - was very much the same as the OP's.

 

Further, when the box was originally installed, it could not communicate over the phone line, as there was either a problem with the line (very bad line, so no ADSL possible) or the box. The Engineer noted this on the sheet, and I amended the contract - the bit about "must be plugged into a phone line" before I returned it.

 

Five years later I get a notice from a DCA saying I owe £75. The DCA have no idea why but suggested it might be because it was not connected to the phone line, Sky just decided to sell off lots of apparent "debts" en masse by the look of it - they never invoiced me. I invited the DCA to sue, ignored the stream of letters, and it ended eventually.

 

Personally, apart from perhaps National Geographic and Discovery I really fail to see the benefit of Sky over a Freeview box with a built in HDD. You could even buy the "24" and "Lost" box-sets for a fraction of the cost of an annual subscription, and watch them when you want, if that's the main reason for having Sky (it seems to be, as it's what they focus their advertising on)

 

Given the number and the nature of repeated threads like this, I'd have to question why you don't just tell them to shove it and get Freeview instead: Sky appear best avoided on a whole number of levels.

[Simon7685]

Hi again Everyone and thaks for your comments so far, well here is part 2 and my reply to their last contact, I am emailing it today and following up with a hard copy in the post on Monday.

 

Please again let me know what you think, particularly if you are subjected to this penalty charge.

 

X XXXXXXXXXXX

Head of Operational Finance

Sky Television

PO Box 43

Livingston

EH54 7DD

16 June 2007

Dear Ms XXXXXXX

Account Number:XXXXXXXXX

Account Holder:XXXXXXXXX

Account Password:XXXXXXXX

References:

1. My Email sent 17 May 2007@16:36 to Customer Services with letter attached – which was also posted with cheque for payment of services.

1a. Your Email sent 23 May 2007@10:37 from xxxxxxxxx Customer Relations

2. My Email sent 24 May@13:08 with further penalty charge letter attached.

2a. Your Email sent 25 May@10:30 from xxxxxxxxxxxxx Customer Relations Department

3. My Email sent 25 May@17:08

3a. Your E mail sent 28 May@12:50 from xxxxxxxxxxxxx

4. My Email sent 30 May@12:02

4a. Your Letter dated 11 June 2007 – signed electronically by yourself.

I refer to the above references relating to the £4 penalty charge levied against me for not paying my bill by your chosen method. As such I will now bring the following to your attention:

1. I have been subjected to many £4 charges for not paying by Direct Debit since the account with Sky Tv was opened back in the year 2000.

2. The charges are an unfair penalty under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999, because they are a disproportionately high sum in compensation compared to the true costs incurred by Sky Television to process my payments.

3. Under the law of penalties, the charges are an unlawful ‘extravagant penalty.

4. It is my right to pay my bill in my way without incurring a penalty charge for doing so.

Obviously your stand on this matter will be, and I quote ‘Sky handles payments for over 8 million subscribing customers. Receiving manual payments and producing paper statements involves additional time, resource, material and cost.’ - To this I do not have a problem. However you must also be aware that any charge levied has to be fair and reflect the true cost incurred, otherwise it is an unlawful charge.

You will note from the references at numbers, 1 and 2. I have previously asked you a total of three times to provide to me a breakdown of your additional costs you claim relating to my payments. To date you have failed to do so. I suggest that this is because in fact your true costs are probably more in the region of pennies and not pounds, which would therefore mean you, are making a profit on the £4 thereby making it unlawful and unenforceable under the UTCC Regulations of 1999.

If on the other hand if Sky TV can conclusively prove in Black & White with a breakdown of charges that the additional cost for every subscriber paying other than by your chosen methods is £4. Then I shall no longer have a problem with paying and will pay any outstanding £4 charges on my account. Until this occurs I will not be paying the charge as I have not done for the last 2 months.

I trust this firmly sets out my position and demonstrates my resolve in this matter.

I now refer to Reference 4a, dated 11 June 2007. Firstly you state I am late in paying my latest invoice. This is totally refuted by me. I have paid the charge for the services I have received but not the £4 penalty charge. As a result there remains on the account an outstanding £8 or 2 months penalty charge for not paying by direct debit. I again reiterate prove the cost justified and it will be paid.

I now refer to paragraph beginning ‘Unfortunately, if we do not receive payment within the next 14 days all your Sky services will be suspended.’

Well my oh my a truly wonderfully democratic organisation Sky TV is. I find it disgraceful that an organisation as big as yours will stoop to such school playground bullying tactics. Well, I don’t like bullies and neither do Her Majesty’s Court Services, which is where I am prepared to go with this so;

1. Should my services be suspended then by that action so is our relationship as supplier / customer.

2. Your equipment consisting of digibox, controller and satellite dish as per the agreement remain your property, they will however be being stored by me on my property, as such I will bill you accordingly for the storage at a rate of £20 per day or part day until collection by your representative, at my convenience.

3. I shall under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 be applying to recover all penalty charges from the date of inception of the contract, to the present date.

4. Under the County Courts Act I will be entitled to interest of 8% per annum from the date I was deprived from the money. I shall be asking the court to enter judgement in my favour for the full amount owed

5. I shall also request the court for a directive to you to reveal your true costs to be made known.

I will be requesting that this is all done through the small claims track, thereby I will not be liable for your costs in the event of losing, which I firmly believe would not be the case anyway.

As a customer of Sky for a number of years I feel it is a shame that I need to go to these lengths and that Sky as a company should resort to the tactics they have against a customer.

You will note from earlier correspondence notably reference number 4, I am a person who £4 a month is a great deal to. I am seriously ill and my condition continues to degenerate all the time, whilst my consultants look for a long term cure for me. I have for the most my time with Sky had the full package; it is only of recent date that I had to reduce this because of the monies on which I have to live. Last year it was all inclusive holidays in Egypt, this year it is no holiday and the Sky basic package for my family. I have been dragged down and subjected to many humiliating ordeals, just in order to get basic benefits that I spent most of my life paying in to, I am not going to be walked over and bullied by Sky over this.

I will use whatever means I can to highlight my case for everyone to see including contacting Newspapers and TV if necessary, I am resolute in my stand be assured.

I look forward to a reply from you regarding this charge with either the breakdown requested or the charge dropped or even maybe your offer of compromise, which I would be prepared to consider. I have no wish to want to stop viewing Sky TV, I just want a fair deal.

Yours sincerely

XXXXXXXXXX

[buzby]

Just for clarification - it is an 'Invoice' charge - not a non DD fee (unless changed recently). Also, you may find this of interest; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/telecoms-mobile-fixed-broadband/98853-ofcom-investigation.html#post921341

[Simon7685]

Just for clarification - it is an 'Invoice' charge - not a non DD fee (unless changed recently). Also, you may find this of interest; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/telecoms-mobile-fixed-broadband/98853-ofcom-investigation.html#post921341

 

Hi thanks for your views. I think Sky do refer to it as above, however they have also said I can avoid it by paying by dd, therefore by association it has to be a charge for not paying by dd. That is how I will refer to it as things progress and hopefully will make a judge see it that way to if we get to court.

 

I see the situation as I have nothing to lose in this but everything to gain. Once they realise how serious I am will they really want to go to court which will cost them thousands for the sake of £4 a month? If they cancel my subscription then they lose out also and I will turn to freeview.

 

Apart from anything else though it is realy about the principle of the man in the street being bullied into what the big boys want and I for one do not think that is right or fair.

 

Thanks again and any other thoughts you have will be appreciated.

Simon:-)

[tiaposy]

subscribing.

[buzby]

Being bullied isn't a matter for civil court - also whether Sky charge for the DD payment method or not, the judge could rule in his opinion that is is OK. However, the charge as billed 'Invoice Administration charge' could never be upheld, as Sky never issued an invoice... ever. It was a statement! The difference is subtle, but the end result is the same, and Sky have no defence. Challenging them on the DD gives them room to manoeuvre.

[Simon7685]

Being bullied isn't a matter for civil court - also whether Sky charge for the DD payment method or not, the judge could rule in his opinion that is is OK. However, the charge as billed 'Invoice Administration charge' could never be upheld, as Sky never issued an invoice... ever. It was a statement! The difference is subtle, but the end result is the same, and Sky have no defence. Challenging them on the DD gives them room to manoeuvre.

 

Hi again Buzby and thanks for your comments I try to take everything on board. Any advice anyone wants to offer as I continue what feels like a one man crusade against Sky will be gratefully received. I am a little suprised at the lack of comments on this, I thought there would have been more!

 

I have email confirmation from Sky's Custoner Relations department that the charge is for not paying by DD but for the paper invoice etc I have pasted the relevant parts below;

 

I note you are clearly disappointed with our stance in this issue and have to reiterate our previous explanations.

 

The contractual method of payment is monthly by direct debit from bank account or credit card and as with many other companies a charge may apply in the absence of this.

 

A charge of 4.00 (GBP) takes into consideration the cost of producing the paper invoice, envelope, postage payment processing of cheque/one off credit card payment/ giro, support and administration staff etc.

 

As you seem to be happy to continue with this method of payment the only way to avoid this charge would be by paying prior to the next billing being processed to your account, which is fourteen days prior to the payment due date.

 

Furthermore you may wish to consider an advance payment where the monthly subscription would be debited until such times the credit expired.

 

I also confirm that my response is based on information provided on contacting our Legal team.

 

What do you think?

Simon

[Simon7685]

subscribing.

 

Sorry tiaposy I don't understand from one word if you have any views please post them.

 

Thanks

Simon:-?

[tiaposy]

Simon,

I was just subscribing so I could watch your thread!

I have the same problem with Sky and was wandering what to do, so am following your thread with interest!

[Simon7685]

Simon,

I was just subscribing so I could watch your thread!

I have the same problem with Sky and was wandering what to do, so am following your thread with interest!

 

Hi again

 

It's great to know there is somebody else in the same position. My advice send them a letter saying you disagree with the penalty charge and stop paying it. The more people stand up to them the better. What is your name if you don't mind me asking?

 

If you want any help with letters or anything else, please ask. I am by no means an expert mind.

 

Cheers and welcome to the crusade!

Simon:)

[buzby]

At least Sky is consistent. As I noted earlier, your position should be they are making a charge for an Invoice they do not send you. IT is not your fault if they call it something inappropriate. Sure, you can challenge the validity of the additional charges, but as noted in my statement of claim (in other thread) I had all bases covered.

 

Incidentally, Sky's seemingly 'reasonable' approach to you funding your account in advance and therefore avoiding the charge - because they take it from your credit account balance, was they way I had worked for nearly 2 years, until they arbitrarily changed my billing date without warning, meaning the inbound payment didn't arrive until the same day as the debit. They weren't interested that it was their fault the charge was applied due to their amendments, and the £4's just rolled on until - when it came to £20, service was removed.

[Simon7685]

At least Sky is consistent. As I noted earlier, your position should be they are making a charge for an Invoice they do not send you. IT is not your fault if they call it something inappropriate. Sure, you can challenge the validity of the additional charges, but as noted in my statement of claim (in other thread) I had all bases covered.

 

Hi Buzby

 

My latest statement/bill of service/invoice, etc, etc, etc (think that covers all their options apart from toilet roll) arrived today. I have scoured it and yes, there is no mention of it being an 'invoice' or even 'bill', they refer to it as, 'Your Sky Statement'. I am begining to see now the angle you are coming from (I think (and hope!)).

 

So, your advice is to challenge the fact there is no invoice (they call it a statement), therefore they can't charge an 'invoice admin charge' as in effect I am charged for what I never receive?

 

In addition to this, their 'invoice administration charge' is in effect a penalty. Their own customer relations state that in the absence of a dd they make an 'Administration Charge', therefore if I don't pay as they want me to it will cost me more? So by association it has to be a penalty and as such it has to be without profit as per the Unfair Terms in Customer Contracts act of 1999?

 

Is this more an appropriate direction to go, what do you think?

How far did you go with them and what was your outcome if you don't mind me asking? Also would you mind letting me know your christian name so I can address things in a more casual manner?

 

Thanks again for your input, look forward to receiving some more.

Simon

[tiaposy]

Hi.

My name is Jo.

I have been having problems for ages, that is why I cancelled the DD - they were taking too much money & taking it too early. I wish I could tell them to shove-it but am addicted to Sky+!!

[IdaInFife]

Hi, watching also with interest. The 'sky statement' comes attached with a giro slip and amount to pay. Surely that makes it a means to pay which in turn makes it an invoice??? sorry playing devil's advocate.

 

Also what might help in any lettrs/emails why not point out to sky that effectively you are being charge £4 for this but customers who pay by direct debit also can recieve 'statements' if they book box office or have skytalk i.e. extra services in which they are advised what will be taken on the next dd and they are not charged so effectivley you are being charged only for the added giro at the bottom. Might help your case!

 

Idax

[Simon7685]

Hi Jo

 

Nice to have a name to discuss things with. Have you actualy complained to Sky about the charge? It can't do any harm or compromise you but it is a place to start.

 

Simon

[Simon7685]

Hi, watching also with interest. The 'sky statement' comes attached with a giro slip and amount to pay. Surely that makes it a means to pay which in turn makes it an invoice??? sorry playing devil's advocate.

 

Also what might help in any lettrs/emails why not point out to sky that effectively you are being charge £4 for this but customers who pay by direct debit also can recieve 'statements' if they book box office or have skytalk i.e. extra services in which they are advised what will be taken on the next dd and they are not charged so effectivley you are being charged only for the added giro at the bottom. Might help your case!

 

Idax

 

Hi Ida

 

Interesting point on the invoice/statement dilema. As I understand at present, (which I will try to confirm as a point of law) there is a fundamental difference between the two and the terms are not interchangeable.

 

I am learning all the time just as I did with the bank charges, which although not yet concluded has given me the resolve to take these 'buggers' on. Also, not being able to work is a real pain and enough to drive me to total distraction, so although I may be physically a wreck at least my brain might not turn to mush, but it might with the 33 tablets a day I have to take!!

 

I love the bit about the statements people who are on DD can get and I am sure it will be valuable information for me as my case progresses.

 

Thanks very much for your input and feel free to do so again.

 

Thanks

Simon

[Simon7685]

Is this another Sky way to get penalty cash?

 

A thought occured.........are they clever or is it coincidence? They wrote to me earlier (post 5) and said if I didn't pay the £8 outstanding in 14 days off goes my service. Looking back that translates as 28/06 which is coincidentally the same date as this months 'statement' must be paid by!!!

 

Are they hoping I pay this months and come the 28th they disconnect anyway. I currently have 2 x£4 outstanding as of the next payment that will be 3 x £4.

My subscription is £15, so when I pay that, they switch me off due to arrears of £12. T's & C's state if services are interupted due to non payment they are not liable for any sort of recompense to the customer.

Therefore theoritically they will have their £12 plus £3 to boot and I have no Sky.

 

I know its complicated to grasp (try putting it in words(nightmare)). Are they that clever??? Surely not????

Simon:lol:

[buzby]

Surely that makes it a means to pay which in turn makes it an invoice??? sorry playing devil's advocate.

 

No - it is only a payment slip, and it is appended to a 'Statement'. Sky continuously refused to play ball until they got the Court Papers, then suddenly I got a phone call, and in return for a non disclosure on the terms of the settlement they'd send a cheque. They did with a week before the case called, and I discontinued the action.

[Simon7685]

Hi Buzby

 

Did you read post 15? If not please have a look and let me know what you think.

 

Incidentally Sky replied to my last letter/e mail today. I always thought they were automatons who worked there, standard reply received no mention of any of the points I raised or questions I asked. So time to move forward, can you tell me, did you use the Bank action letters in your case with them (adapted appropriately)? I am going to go for all my £4's back and wondered if the S.A.R request in the library would be a good move. Any help on this one would be good.

 

Read through most of your thread, I found it quite compelling reading. You obviously know you stuff.

 

Look forward to hearing from you

Simon

[buzby]

Did you read post 15? If not please have a look and let me know what you think.

 

Yes, if you keep the 'penalty' issue out of the equation, it's a straight matter for the court, Sky are charging for a service they do not provide.

 

did you use the Bank action letters in your case with them (adapted appropriately)? I am going to go for all my £4's back and wondered if the S.A.R request in the library would be a good move. Any help on this one would be good.

 

No, because they weren't really appropriate - feel free to modify my court statement of claim (in the earlier Sky Subscriber Services thread), which outlines the Invoice complaint and states the grievance. As there will only be a refusal by Sky to negotiate, you then create your statement of claim using the same terminology.

 

As for the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request), SKY have a pro-forma letter for this, and it will be sent to you (if you ask) as part of your final LBA. They'll probably want £10 from you, so state that if they charge you this, you'll just add that amount to the claim

[Simon7685]

Hi Raymond

 

Thanks very much for that, it is realy appreatiated. I will post on here ongoing details of what is going on.

 

Simon

[buzby]

I can't wait! (Honestly!)