Passports: HOME | EUROPE | AMERICAS, AUSTRALIA and OCEANIA | ASIA | AFRICA | OTHER DOCUMENTS
National Anthems:[ www.national-anthems.net ] ++
Travel:[ Europe ] [ Asia ] [ USA-Canada ] [ Latin-America ] [ Africa ] [ Australia ] [ more ]
[ Australia legal ] [ U.K. legal ] [ U.S. visa ] [ Immigration ] [ Marriage based U.S visa ]



Subject: Re: BT's contract trick on direct debit fee Posted on: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:20:50 +0100


"Roger Mills" wrote in message
news:63kqh6F11do76U1@mid.individual.net...
> In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
> Jethro wrote:
>
>>
>> In this case, I suspect any court action will hinge on whether it's
>> fair for BT to charge for non DD payments. I have a sneaking suspicion
>> that the court will find it *is* fair, as BT will be able to
>> demonstrate it costs them x pence a cheque, compared with y pence a
>> Direct Debit.
>>
>
> I suspect that this is a cunning plan to get round that! If this
> 'separate' company charges BT £4.50 to process a cheque, then that's the
> cost to BT of processing a cheque - so they will claim that it is "fair"
> to pay the cost on to the customer. But who benefits from this 'charge' -
> the banks? No - this separate company, which just happens to part of BT.
> IANAL, but it seems to me that the courts may well still rule that to be
> unfair.

And what's the legal basis that you think this charge needs to be fair?

ITYF that there isn't one. Unlike (the claims about) Bank Charges, this
charge is most definately a charge for a service which a customer can easily
avoid.

tim