Ntl Non Direct Debit Charges

[meagain]

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.

 

As far as I'm aware, that must mean it take approximately 40 minutes to do the admin. Anyway, ntl don't do "manual payments" - if you pay by card, you go through their automated system, and I can't see them paying the computer £6/hr. We already know the approximate cost of the card payment is less than 50p (IKEA is good for something), and the marginal cost to NTL for processing lots of card payments is probably less than this again. In my mind, it's still a penalty for not paying by Direct Debit (I would pay by Direct Debit if I could trust them to bill me correctly in the first place!), and I've deducted it from my settlement offer to them.

[meagain]

It may not work though if they have phrased it as they give you a £4 discount if you pay by DD - that way you are not being charged for not using DD

 

Unfortunately, that's rather like telling someone that if they drop their complaint you'll allow them to continue without having their lights punched out. I can't see why it would make a difference - there is a difference in the amounts charged that does not reflect the difference in cost of processing, and is not reflected in a difference in the level of service provided. Hence, the difference must constitute a penalty for not using their preferred method of payment.

 

On my business account, the difference is 50p per transaction.

 

... which is not exactly £4, is it?

[meagain]

Well its quite a bit different its kinda like a photo developing place saying if you want your photos processed by 4pm thats £5 if done by next week its £3.

 

That's different. That's an actual difference in the level of service provided. You pay the extra £2 because you want to pick up your photos after work instead of waiting. It's rather different to having to pay the extra £2 because you want to use your card. Because of the charges levied by various places we know what a reasonable charge for paying by card or cheque is, and we know it's not £4. If you use a card for a transation under £5/10 in your local Spar, you might end up paying 50p. IKEA IIRC charges something like 50-75p (I forget the actual figure) for credit card purchases. Even my local pizza delivery will take a cheque for 50p.

 

There's no actual difference in the service when you pay by DD or card (apart from having to sit through their automated telephone system to do the payment - and I'd not expect to have to pay to put myself through extra trouble).

 

It's arguably a penalty for paying by their preferred method, because the difference is considerably more than the marginal costs to them. If they were willing to disclose the actual cost of processing 1000 DDs and then the cost of making 1000 payments, I'd be happy to pay 1/1000 of the difference - but they won't, so I'm not. It's paying for the privilege of paying - as I mentioned, a doorman could argue that he is letting you leave the premises without a punch in the face, whereas a better interpretation is that it is a veiled threat of battery. The important part is that it can be argued either way, so if you already have an issue with them (late payment fees, service charges because they failed to move you out, etc.) then it's worth going for.

[meagain]

Payment by DD is fully automated. Once it has been input, there is no further human intervention until or unless it changes.

 

But that doesn't reflect in the level of service I receive.

 

Payment by cheque involves human interaction to open, read, credit and pass the cheque for processing by the bank. The people employed to do this would not be employed if nobody paid by cheque. They have a significant cost to NTL. NTL's bank make a transaction scharge per cheque.

 

The total cost may be significant, but given they probably have a considerable number of customers who haven't yet been bullied into using DD, the marginal cost is more than likely insignificant.

 

I have never attempted to pay by card over the 'phone, but I wiuld assume that at some point you talk to a human being.

 

You would think so, but you don't. It's an automated system. Maybe human intervention is required at the end to sign off the transaction, but this can be done in bulk by the cheque handlers at the end of the day.

 

So the extra cost of not using DD are significantly more than the transaction charges levied by the banks.

 

The total cost (i.e. the overall cost of the extra people, and the transaction charges) might be, but the marginal cost (i.e. the cost of n+1 over n) will be minimal.

[meagain]

Why bullied? I pay by DD because it is much more convenient and cheaper.

 

I would pay by DD if they would get my bills right in the first place

[meagain]

I think you will find that what they actually say....is that they give you a discount for paying by direct debits!

 

Unfortunately, that is not how it is reflected on your bill. It is not "DIRECT DEBIT DISCOUNT £4.00CR", you get "NON DIRECT DEBIT HANDLNG FEE £4.00", therefore their argument that it's a discount goes out the window. As for being a service charge, SOGASA says it must be "reasonable", but payment isn't a service they provide us, it's a service we provide to them. Therefore, it is a penalty for not wanting to be bullied into allowing them direct access to your bank account. It would be a very different story if (1) the DDG was actually respected (2) they got the billing right in the first place.

[meagain]

ANYBODY who finds any justification in this tax should not be on this board, because they do not support the choice of the consumer, and they are gullible enough to believe the poor logic of companies which are violating the right of choice in their customers.

 

Strong words, and showing a hostility that we usually don't like around here. I can see a justification - it costs them more to handle non-DD payments. My objection is not entirely with the principle, but with the amount. £48 over the course of a year is not a fair price to pay for payment not using Direct Debit. £24, as it was, was pushing it somewhat. A fee of £1 per month would however seem reasonable for some methods of payment, especially cheques - for most transactions, they can consolidate to recude their costs, but their bank will charge them for each cheque paid in, to the sum of around 40-50p. £1 for cheque payments seems reasonable to cover that and contribute to staffing costs.

 

Every time I spoke to NTL staff they told me all of the other companies are doing this too. I asked them if they had ever tried telling a police officer that they were not the only ones speeding on the motorway, and that there are others going faster. At that time NTL people had a long pause, then transferred me to somebody else.

 

If you're caught for speeding several times in succession, it is a perfectly reasonable argument to suggest you're being picked on. I cut this line off by instead using murder as the example (since a mass-murderer can hardly complain of discrimination).

 

in the absence of any real legal defence of our position, the best response seems to be to ring the company and tell them you want to be disconnected. That still works.

 

There is a legal basis - UTCCR says they cannot penalise you to a disproportionate amount, and SOGASA says that any service they provide must come at a "fair and reasonable" price. That is if they try the old line that accepting your payment is a service they provide - if it were a service, we could just get everything for free by insisting on not making use of this additional service.

[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.

[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.