Ntl Non Direct Debit Charges

[dont push me]

Ho okonski its den again

 

thank you for the quick reply....(better than you know who..ends with ell)

 

i'll give it a whorl... nothing to lose cos on the brink of ditching anyway.

 

den

[tim2718281]

Seems a reasonable charge to me. DD is automated so costs them a lot less; they levy this charge to cover the extra admin involved in handling manual payments (and also the charges they pay for taking card payments which will be higher than DD). I can't see this being held as unfair.

 

T-Mobile charge me £3 a month for this and I have no reason to complain.

 

It is not reasonable for them to charge an amount different from that advertised.

 

It's fine for them to give a discount from the advertised price if you do pay by DD, or to advertise two prices with equal prominence - one for payment by DD and one for payment by other methods.

 

But what they do is advertise one price, then try to charge extra isf you pay using legal tender.

 

Tim

[buzby]

But what they do is advertise one price, then try to charge extra isf you pay using legal tender.

Tim

 

I'm surprised this issue hasn't been made a serious consumer issue and ruled against by the OFT. Also, whilst there may be discrepancies by using differnet payment methods, lets not forget previously retails could NOT charge more for a CC transaction than a cash payment. A case in point is DD payments do not cost the recipient any more than a BACS (Home Banking) transfer which is now more prevelant than it has ever been, yet as a payment method the firms ignore it at all costs. Sky even told me they couldn't accept my BACS payment as they were 'closing their bank account'!

[direct2000]

Recent reports indicate that as part of a wide range of price changes and service renaming, NTL:Telewest will be increasing the amount they charge customers for not paying by direct debit to £5 from 1st Feb.

 

The reasoning given on their website says:

"There are large costs to manage non-Direct Debit payments each month and unfortunately, we cannot cover all of these costs. This is quite a standard charge for non-Direct Debit payment. It's much easier to pay by Direct Debit and you'll save money each month. To find out how to pay by Direct Debit, please call our customer services team on 0845 454 0000 or 150 for free on your ntl:Telewest phone."

 

Full details of the price changes are available on the NTL:Telewest website

[meagain]

"There are large costs to manage non-Direct Debit payments each month and unfortunately' date=' we cannot cover all of these costs.[/quote']

 

Unfortunately, their costs are their responsibility, and nothing to do with their customers, as a requirement for payment method is not in the contract.

[buzby]

Absolutely, and further to these fees being used as a 'penalty' the company - whatever it is calling itself - would have to prove to a court that the charges were 'fair and reasobable'. Since they have never done this, and would lose the argument if the did so - it is simply a device to extract more money from customers who do not have the ability to assert themselves.

[buzby]

And from 1st February, the non DDM fee has been raised from £4pm to £5 for all you ex-NTL Telwest subscribers, welcome to Virgin Media, who want to extract even more money from you.

 

Complaining on my usual quarterly basis, I was today advised my account would be credited with £15.00, however if I ask for it next quarter it may be refused. No problem said I, I'd terminate unless Virgin could show that it really did cost them £60pa to process my 12 payments that plop into their bank account each month (under my control).

[tim2718281]

I think that, instead of charging more than the advertised price for customers who do not pay by DD they should give a discount from the advertised price to customers who do.

 

(And is it legal for a company to charge more than the advertised price? I thought extra charges had to be displayed "prominently" - essentially, in the same size type as the lower price)

 

Tim

[Movingon]

I think that, instead of charging more than the advertised price for customers who do not pay by DD they should give a discount from the advertised price to customers who do.

 

(And is it legal for a company to charge more than the advertised price? I thought extra charges had to be displayed "prominently" - essentially, in the same size type as the lower price)

 

Tim

 

Companies often do word it this way - it doesn't change the basic legal fact that it is a penalty charge. They're using a technique called "Cloaking the penalty". They're penalising people who don't pay by Direct Debit by NOT giving them a discount. It's unlawful - ESPECIALLY as those people COULD use Standing Orders or direct credit to pay it, which methods cost them NOTHING extra to administer...

[meagain]

It's unlawful - ESPECIALLY as those people COULD use Standing Orders or direct credit to pay it, which methods cost them NOTHING extra to administer...

 

Indeed, particularly as in the case of a standing order, any manual intervention involved will be on the customer's part, not theirs.

[wheresmyhairgone]

hi

 

i,m a bit late on this thread. but here,s my thought,s on why they prefer dd payments.

 

is it not true that if you default on a dd payment they charge you a penalty same as banks.

 

i think the banks and company,s push for dd payments because both partys charge you if you miss a payment.

 

it,s a sad fact that these company,s and bank,s want customers to miss the odd payment if we didn,t thier profits would be halved.

 

best thing is we are then classed as bad customers when it comes to credit ect. when in fact we are their best customers.

 

bank = £30 easy money

ntl = £30 easy money

[buzby]

No, the charges are the icing on the cake. The original reasoning is that their customers are cretins, and cannot be trusted toi pay their bills on time. By establishing a mechanism to cut out the middleman (you), they can simply take as much as they want, and when they want it, and this helps their bottom line.

 

Me? I only trust my wife and family, and as such nobody gets free reign to dip into my bank account when they think fit - leaving me to beg for MY money back because 'the computer' made a mistake.

 

When the firm gives me a reciprocal arrangement with their bank account, I'll seriously consider it.

[tim2718281]

The problem is that banks will not accept an instruction to pay a direct debit for a fixed amount on a fixed day of the month.

 

For example, I have broadband, and the cost is £25 per month, payable on a fixed date.

 

If I could instruct the bank to pay the ISP's DD request of £25 on or within a week of that date, it would be fine; to me, the DD would appear the same as a standing order, but the bank and ISP would gain whatever processing efficiency they they get from DD.

 

But banks will not accept DD instructions for a fixed amount within a short range of dates.

 

Tim

[buzby]

The problem is that banks will not accept an instruction to pay a direct debit for a fixed amount on a fixed day of the month.Tim

 

They will accept and work with what they are provided with. I have a DDM form that provides for this (printed 1992). The drive for 'Unspecified Amounts' & 'Unspecified Dates' was driven by the originators, not the banks, and the British public rolled over....

[Stillborn Crisps]

Hmmm... guys, I need some help. I just got put through to the retentions center, and said I wanted to leave because of the £5 charges, and they were about to let me do it.

 

I explained I was unhappy, I'd been a customer for nearly £10 years, that the £5 is an unfair penalty and that it costs them little or no more to process a standing order than a DD payment.

 

All I could get out of the guy was 'no, we don't want to lose you as a customer over £25 but if you set up DD payments then it wouldn't happen'.

 

He would not budge, he said he couldn't refund because the charge would keep going on. He said if I went anywhere else I'd face the same charge (I couldn't think of one that didn't to counter this argument )

 

In the end I had to back out and say I'd think about it and phone monday with my decision to leave or not.

 

What should I do?? Seriously pd off!

[buzby]

You'll find a template letter to send them (modified from the one used by TV's 'Watchdog' you can send. You can call back and say you have reviewed X number of bills from the company and having identified a number of errors that would have meant you would have been chasing refunds in your own time, you feel now is not a good time to effectively surrender your financial independence to them, which you are sure they can appreciate. As such, you are fully aware they can and do waive this charge for customers - ostensibly to let them set up a DDM, but is used to provide respite from these fees.

 

FWIW, I do not pay these fees, and I call each quarter to have the £15 refunded in ADVANCE of the fee being charged.

[Stillborn Crisps]

I know you manage to do that every quarter - that's why I thought it'd be a breeze but I could not get them to do it - I even asked 'this is the retentions dept isn't it?' at one point coz I thought I must've got through to one of the usual deadheads, and he chuckled and said 'yes, it's crazy isn't it. But the company won't allow us to refund the charges.'

 

Where is this letter? It looked like you were about to link to it or say where it was, but chopped your text. Are Watchdog on to this as well then?

 

I saw your letter to your MP about this matter. Think I might do a similar thing this weekend.

[Im_getting_frustrated_now]

Hi

 

I noticed last week that since Virgin Media have taken over NTL they have an added paragraph on the back of the bill claiming that for non direct debit payments they will make a charge of £5. I have compared this to previous NTL bills and this paragraph is missing - Also, I cannot find it anywhere on my original NTL contract. Bizarre how they've slipped that one in!

[indebtstudent]

Ask them how much it costs for you to send the money, online, directly into thier bank account. Then ask where the administration is.

 

Also the fact that lots of companies are doing something does not make it right or lawful.

 

I've been promised a full breakdown detailing how the charge is worked out. I'll not be holding my breath for that.

[Stillborn Crisps]

I did ask for that whilst on the phone, and they said they couldn't give breakdowns of costs out.

[tim2718281]

IANAL

 

Pay your bills by electronic transfer before they are due and keep records; keep a note of any charges.

 

In a few years time, when the total of the charges is a couple of hundred pounds, send them a letter requesting a refund of the charges on the grounds that because they are penalties for your breaking the contract, they are unlawful.

 

If they decline your request, sue them and have a judge decide whether they are lawful or not.

 

Tim

[Stillborn Crisps]

That was my long term back-up plan: Wait till the charges total an amount that wouldn't be seen as a frivolous claim in the small claims court and then send them bank charge style letters. What would such an unfrivolous amount be though? Is £60 (a year's worth) too low?

 

And I was kinda hoping for something a bit more immediate though. :-/

[buzby]

There is no cost difference in cost via BACS/Home Banking and DD - only who has control - and that is not a cash value. I've now heard from the DTI in response to my MP's letter, and I'll be uploading it to the relevant thread shortly.

[indebtstudent]

Well others have got refunds, I didn't get any joy, I might call again. I put a letter in but NTL were always swamped so I don't hold out much hope.

 

Oh and I'm still awaiting the breakdown of the charge they promised and a copy of thier T & C's.

[Stillborn Crisps]

Well others have got refunds...

 

Are there any threads of these refunds you could link me to?