BT Billing, its happened again.

eircomtribunal

Referring to the last four posts: I am loosing you.

A direct debit payment, that is not authorised by you, has to be and will be reimbursed by your bank on your request.

I don't see what more you can ask for.
I am confident, that, should your bank renege on this basic rule of the DD system (and I take note that in some instances mentioned in several posts some banks seemed to have done so) and you notify either IPSO or the Financial Services Regulator, the bank would be properly informed about the ground rules and the basic rule of DD would get honoured.

I assume that with credit card payments, the customer is not in such a fortunate position, as with the DD system.
In Germany credit cards have big acceptance problems, as the angst-driven, penny-pinching Germans prefer the safe DD (=Bankeinzug) system, which works on the same principle as the Irish one.

The Irish DD system works overwhelmingly perfectly with massive numbers.
If you have documented claims, where the DD system was misused, ask IPSO to investigate the instances with your bank. Or document the instances to the Financial Services Regulator, which is an active regulator, other than the impostors in ComReg.

BT or any other registered originator would be stupid to deliberately try to misuse the system. (And I am not saying that BT does not act stupidly to have failed so far to iron out the quirks in their systems.)

The data protection commissioner will not waste time with it.

P.

Foxwood

eircomtribunal wrote:

I assume that with credit card payments, the customer is not in such a fortunate position, as with the DD system.

Not in my experience. If you challenge a credit card charge, your credit card issuer won't pay the "charger" until they demonstrate that the charge is valid. It seems to offer much better protection for the user than the DD system.

vibe666

eircomt, i don't doubt you know what you're talking about, you seem to know quite a lot about it all, but saying that they can't do this sort of thing doesn't change the fact that they have, are and will continue to do it.

there's plenty of posts on boards.ie about people getting shafted by them, and taking that on a % of the population that use boards.ie i'd say it's pretty widespread at this stage.

the problem is that nobody cares.

you go to your bank and complain and they tell you they can do nothing and you must contact the DD issuer.

you go to them (BT in this case) and you get through toa phone monkey who will not put you through to complaints.

you ring complaints directly and the number doesn't work, you email them and nobody answers, you email managers and nobody answers, you call managers having trawled through posts here looking for contact details and nobody answers.

finally you get so fed up you call comreg and nobody answers or returns your call until the 3rd time you email them, and they tell you you need to go through the normal complaints process with your providor and once you have a complaint number from them and have exhausted all avenues of that procedure you can contact comreg again with your complaint reference number and they will contact BT with it.

NOBODY CARES.

Sapele

eircomtribunal wrote:

For this reason no DD originator would try to take money, if he was not absolutely sure that the customer was willing to pay this money.

But there are some DD originators who really do not care if they make a mistake, either through using billing systems that do not work properly, or the fact that they know no sanction will be administered to them. Actually, how could they be sanctioned if nobody is complaining to anybody except boards members and banks. I understand what you say, once a DD is properly cancelled in writing to the bank, an unauthorised payment will always be refunded under the direct debit guarantee. As somebody mentioned maybe a copy of this guarantee should be circulated on DD signups so that more people could quote it.

eircomtribunal wrote:

Fully automated systems are able to detect incoming debits where the mandate has been cancelled and will reject the debit no matter what transaction code the originator has used

I'm only quoting this because it seems strange if most banks use these fully automated systems, then why does there seem to be a lot of tales of money being taken from cancelled DD's? Particularly from certain companies, (cough cough) In my case the bank manager could not guarantee another payment would not be taken, BUT she did not emphasis that since I had now cancelled the DD in writing that if it was taken I was guaranteed to have it refunded. She actually should have been quoting me the DD guarantee, since it is the payer’s bank that signs up to it. If this major bank uses the fully automated system mentioned, then she should have been able to give the guarantee that our system will not let a cancelled mandate through, no matter what.

I think I've learned a lot about the DD system from this thread and feel that we should be firmer with our banks when it comes to DD's. The DD system does guarantee you your money back from an unauthorised DD, but it doesn't seem to encourage companies to use the system responsibly, as most companies do, but as we know, some don't !

dub45

It is easy to declare that the dd system works - it is only when things go wrong that you realise to your cost (both financially and timewise) that in practise it doesnt!

malachy47

I have been reading through these messages understanding the frustration and grief that many have experienced. And a thought occured to me.

This relatively new pro-consumer device called Small Claims Court. Yes, there is a limit to award amounts, but that would not be the issue. You'd get a legally binding order staying nefarious companies from touching your account.

Hell, with that if they continued you could sue for serious punatative damages were they to continue.

And the beauty of it is that they could not afford to send a senior person from Abbeyleix to Ballywhereever, armed with all documentation, history and facts to defend the company position.

All you do is show up and state your case. You win by default with a no-show.

Repeat that everywhere, and these eejits will modify their practices...or go bust. Up to them.

Now, as I said..it's just a thought. For example, is Small Claims just individuals rather than entities? I don't know. But worth looking into!

Sponge Bob

you must go to the SCC nearest BT HQ I'm afraid. You will bill them all your expenses and the days holiday of course.

Mileage is about €0.90c a mile for a 1.6l car etc . If all the Kerry cases were scheduled for the same day one could 'share' etc etc

Foxwood

Sponge Bob wrote:

you must go to the SCC nearest BT HQ I'm afraid. You will bill them all your expenses and the days holiday of course.

Mileage is about €0.90c a mile for a 1.6l car etc . If all the Kerry cases were scheduled for the same day one could 'share' etc etc

Why BT? Take your bank to the SCC for taking money out of your accout after you have notified them that the DD was cancelled!

Sponge Bob

although there is an argument that your local branch ignored your instruction and should pay again I fear its a trip to Dublin to the SCC nearest Bank HQ, in fact BoI and BT would have the same SCC in D2

sue both of them and double your expenses tally

Foxwood

Sponge Bob wrote:

although there is an argument that your local branch ignored your instruction and should pay again I fear its a trip to Dublin to the SCC nearest Bank HQ, in fact BoI and BT would have the same SCC in D2

sue both of them and double your expenses tally

They have to come to your local SCC, you don't have to go to theirs - that would make a nonsense of the system.

http://www.oasis.gov.ie/justice/small_claims_court/small_claims_court.html

Sponge Bob

I'm not entirely sure about that I believe its the SCC (District Court) where the respondents HQ or registered Office is based . Otherwise Ryanair would be top of Aer Aranns airmiles table

Foxwood

Sponge Bob wrote:

I'm not entirely sure about that I believe its the SCC (District Court) where the respondents HQ or registered Office is based .

From oasis.gov.ie:
Where to apply
The Small Claims procedure is provided through your local District Court.

From [url]www.courts.ie:[/url]
Consider carefully before deciding to make a small claim but remember that the procedure is there to help you to make your small claim with a minimum of procedural red tape and at little cost.

Sponge Bob

hmm, I am not sure its that simple.

I think you may submit the form (claim) locally but the hearing could be in a different location

it is simple in the sense that you can just present the evidence yourself in plain english and not have lawyers and ****e and hanging around .

vibe666

yet again the point is being missed with regard to the DD's being presented to the banks.

the bank is not at fault the way things stand at present.

when you cancel a DD from BT with your bank, BT do not re-present the same DD, but a brand new one with their fantastic time saving paperless DD system.

nobody has signed this new DD, nobody has ever even seen it as best i can tell. it just whizzes through the ether from one computer to another and lo and behold you lose some cash and BT gain some.

eircomtribunal

vibe666 wrote:

yet again the point is being missed with regard to the DD's being presented to the banks.

the bank is not at fault the way things stand at present.

when you cancel a DD from BT with your bank, BT do not re-present the same DD, but a brand new one with their fantastic time saving paperless DD system.

nobody has signed this new DD, nobody has ever even seen it as best i can tell. it just whizzes through the ether from one computer to another and lo and behold you lose some cash and BT gain some.

Ah, ffs will you stop. You go to your bank, tell your bank not to pay out this unauthorised DD, or reimburse this unauthorised DD. That is where the buck stops.
As an originator, if I had your bank account nr and bank branch number, I could put in a first DD request and draw money from your account. If I did so, or if my muddled up accounting system would do so, you would not have to deal with me. You just told your bank to reimburse you. Full stop. Your bank will deal with me as the originator, will ask me for your consent and other things.
Just get over the fact that, according to anecdotal evidence on boards, some bank did not play to the rules.
P.

shoegirl

eircomtribunal wrote:

Don't be stupid. Nothing is more damaging to BT than the gremlins in their billing system. BT certainly have billing issues, they know that and I know that they certainly try to iron them out.
In my experience they are dealing with and resolving the individual cases. While it is a hassle (I know it from my own experience. As chance would have it we just got a BT bill last week over € -0.01 and we aren't BT customers since a long time.) for the individual – and the anger is voiced in the posts – I have seldom seen that posters acknowledged when the issues were resolved.

If I could avail of BT's loss-leader broadband offer (broadband for an extra tenner per month above the line rental), I would do so anytime.

P.

I am an ex BT customer and no matter how cheap they are I would never buy anything from them again. I had the non-billing issue about 2 years ago though fortunately it was on dialup so I wasn't landed with a huge bill when they did get things right eventually.

However the problems started again after I cancelled (by which time I had moved to BB). Even though it was technically cheaper to put eveything through BT i stayed with my existing telephony company out of fear of the billing problem. I was right. A month after I cancelled they took another 2 months payment out of my account. I have cancelled the DD but have been battling for my money back ever since.

Last time I spoke to them I was told a cheque was sent on 21st July. By 1st August I didn't receive this cheque but according to BT this can take "3 weeks" to arrive. Now the postal service in Ireland has deteriorated a lot in recent years but not to such an extent that a letter posted in Dublin takes 3 weeks to get to Cork! I will give them 3 weeks and once thats happened I will take my case straight to Comreg.

NEVER EVER EVER again. I don't care how cheap they are or how good the BB service is, I am never going with BT again.

shoegirl

Scruff wrote:

Could a class action law suit be taken against them or some sort of legal action that would give them really bad publicity and force them to sort out there horrendous billing system??

Especially in the case where someone has ceased to be a customer and BT continue to take money from their account. Is this not stealing or at the very least gross negligence and dereliction of duty to honour a cessation request???

When I complained about BT continuing to take DDs (its only happened once but reading this thread its sounding quite disturbing as it looks as if just cancelling the DD may not even be enough to stop it happening again) after cancelling my account, I was told by customer services that nobody had closed the billing account. The service was stopped, however they didn't stop billing me, seems like the wild west is alive and well and living in BT somewhere.

Strangely enough I went for an interview 5 years ago for the data centre that hosts the billing computer system. Didn't get the job though.

Q_Ball

A quick update on this:

BT sent us a letter. They reviewed our bills for the last two years and discovered we were being charged for a call bar on a voive service that we weren't subscribed to. As a gesture of goodwill, they reduced the outstanding balance to €300. Gotta say that is a fair bit of goodwill and personally I'm chuffed.

So a big thanks to all that pm'd me advice and a big thanks to surveys for raising the issue with BT

All the best,

Darren