Landmark Court case may see end to unfair bill charges - Page 2

**Mick** · 29-03-2008, 14:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by lostandconfused

If BT could argue that £4.50 per bill is fair, then it seems reasonable that VM could argue that £5 is fair too.

How? BT charge £4.50 a quarter thats £18 per year. The £5 per month levied by Virgin Media is nothing short of day light robbery. £60 a year!!! Why is there different charges, why does it cost one company £42 less than the other?

bomb #21 · 29-03-2008, 14:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

How? BT charge £4.50 a quarter thats £18 per year. The £5 per month levied by Virgin Media is nothing short of day light robbery. £60 a year!!! Why is there different charges, why does it cost one company £42 less than the other?

Because Virgin has to incur the extra cost 12 times a year -- BT only 4.

Lost makes a fair point (altho' it's still a rip-off

)

Virgin could cut their costs by moving to quarterly billing -- & the same day that happens, Satan skates to work.

foreverwar · 29-03-2008, 15:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomb #21

Because Virgin has to incur the extra cost 12 times a year -- BT only 4.

Lost makes a fair point (altho' it's still a rip-off

)

Virgin could cut their costs by moving to quarterly billing -- & the same day that happens, Satan skates to work.

But services are billed in advance (calls and On-Demand in arrears) - would you be willing to pay three month services in advance?

rogermevans · 29-03-2008, 15:31

cant see that being the end of it

still think this could be won somewhere down the appeal line

BenMcr · 29-03-2008, 15:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverwar

But services are billed in advance (calls and On-Demand in arrears) - would you be willing to pay three month services in advance?

I can't see Virgin willing to risk 3 months worth of on-demand events and phone calls not being paid

Some Virgin customers seem to have enough trouble paying for one months lot

lostandconfused · 29-03-2008, 17:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

How? BT charge £4.50 a quarter thats £18 per year. The £5 per month levied by Virgin Media is nothing short of day light robbery. £60 a year!!! Why is there different charges, why does it cost one company £42 less than the other?

No, BT charge £4.50 a bill it just so happens they bill quarterly. I havent seen the cost associated with paying by non DD, and im assuming you havent either?

However I think its reasonable to suggest that they are fixed costs, such as a minimum charge per transaction from paypoint etc. If BT can justify £4.50 then its reasonable to assume VM could justify £5, or if not they would only have to reduce it by 50p.

Personally I think its fair to charge a payment if the customers chosen method of payment costs the company money provided the charge is only to cover the costs and not to make profit.

But seeing as no one has access to this information to my knowledge then it is all speculation.

**Mick** · 29-03-2008, 18:09

The charges are purely to meet profit margins - nothing more, nothing less. There is nothing fair about these charges at all - like the lawyer said, it says on a 10 pound note, 'I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of ten pounds’, not ten pounds plus a £1.50 handling fee.”

WHISTLED · 29-03-2008, 18:20

Quote:

I havent seen the cost associated with paying by non DD, and im assuming you havent either?

I have and it aint £5.

But the £5 isnt to pay the payment processing costs, its because customers who pay DD pay on time every time in theory.. When not on DD there are additional costs to a business - Reminders, collections staff, care staff etc.

There is a profit in the charges though, a good one.

lostandconfused · 29-03-2008, 18:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

The charges are purely to meet profit margins - nothing more, nothing less. There is nothing fair about these charges at all -

You have evidence of this then? If so then you should make it available, as i said in my post they should only be used to cover the costs involved

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

like the lawyer said, it says on a 10 pound note, 'I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of ten pounds’, not ten pounds plus a £1.50 handling fee .”

True, but your not paying VM directly , your paying a third party such as paypoint, who also need to make a profit, or a bank who will incur costs when processing cash or a cheque.

**Mick** · 29-03-2008, 18:27

Still a rip off and unfair charge either way.

BenMcr · 29-03-2008, 19:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mick

Still a rip off and unfair charge either way.

Of course the alternative is Virgin withdraw all other payment methods apart from Direct Debit (and possibly credit card), like some companies do at the moment.

Then they could stop charging the handling fee as they wouldn't have the expense of cheque handling and having to chase late payments

be broadband, who I'm with, up till recently would ONLY accept card payment. No D/D, no cheque/paypoint etc.

I'm pretty sure Sky don't use the paypoint system or bank giros. and if you pay them by cheque you get charged £4 per month

frogstamper · 29-03-2008, 19:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Of course the alternative is Virgin withdraw all other payment methods apart from Direct Debit (and possibly credit card), like some companies do at the moment.

Then they could stop charging the handling fee as they wouldn't have the expense of cheque handling and having to chase late payments

be broadband, who I'm with, up till recently would ONLY accept card payment. No D/D, no cheque/paypoint etc.

I'm pretty sure Sky don't use the paypoint system or bank giros. and if you pay them by cheque you get charged £4 per month

Im sure thats on the way Ben, as already you have to pay for your BB by DD, its just a matter of time.

BenMcr · 29-03-2008, 19:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by frogstamper

Im sure thats on the way Ben, as already you have to pay for your BB by DD, its just a matter of time.

Acutally that was an ntl decision. From May once the billing migration completes that won't be the case.

However what it does mean is those customers who either pay by debit/credit card, or who phone up and pay it monthly over the phone and who don't currently get a non-dd charge, will start getting one. Same as everyone else.

bomb #21 · 29-03-2008, 22:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by frogstamper

Im sure thats on the way Ben, as already you have to pay for your BB by DD, its just a matter of time.

I don't.

saabmania2 · 30-03-2008, 08:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by frogstamper

Im sure thats on the way Ben, as already you have to pay for your BB by DD, its just a matter of time.

i don't either i pay by debit or credit card over the phone and i don't pay any extra for it

but then again i havn't had a correct bill for 7 months but that's another matter lol