Sneaky BT

ejmaztec

Due to all of the crazy billing fiascos that I've heard about with BT, mostly on here, I've never ever authorised them to get paid by direct debit. Imagine my delight and surprise to find out that the feckers have grabbed the funds from my bank account, using of all things - a direct debit!

They've obviously used the details that were required when I first signed up with them. Since then, they've always asked me if I want to pay by dd and I've always said a categorical "No". I always pay them with a credit card.

There's me thinking that you needed a balaclava and a sawn-off shot-gun to get someone else's money out of a bank. I'll be asking my bank about "authorisation" on Monday morning. :mad:

IsThatSo?

The bank should have spotted there was no authorisation and returned it. What day did the dd go through your account? If they send it back it wouldn't show till the next working day, so if it went through Friday it wouldn't show as being reversed on your account until Monday. Contact them anyway though, just to be sure.

ejmaztec

They sneaked it in on the 27th, according to online banking - there'll be bloodshed on Monday.

IsThatSo?

I was with BT years ago, and I swear if they were the last ISP/phone provider on earth I would use pidgeons instead :mad: Their CS is apalling, their billing is even worse. Crooks..........................after two years of trying to get my money back I just gave up, it was exhausting. It was about £50 so didn't bankrupt me, but all the same if they do it often enough how much do they make by scamming customers???

ejmaztec

IsThatSo? wrote: »

I was with BT years ago, and I swear if they were the last ISP/phone provider on earth I would use pidgeons instead :mad: Their CS is apalling, their billing is even worse. Crooks..........................after two years of trying to get my money back I just gave up, it was exhausting. It was about £50 so didn't bankrupt me, but all the same if they do it often enough how much do they make by scamming customers???

So far I've been on white-knuckle rides with Eircom, Greencom, not to mention the current shower. There can't be many left, so pigeons it is.

Nody

IsThatSo? wrote: »

I was with BT years ago, and I swear if they were the last ISP/phone provider on earth I would use pidgeons instead :mad: Their CS is apalling, their billing is even worse. Crooks..........................after two years of trying to get my money back I just gave up, it was exhausting. It was about £50 so didn't bankrupt me, but all the same if they do it often enough how much do they make by scamming customers???

Had a friend who worked for BT billing support for a while (UK) and the stories you'd hear. My all time favourite one was the policy for billing disputes. First apologize, then offer the last invoice refunded, then two invoices etc. and at all times try to not give all the money back.

Of course their sales department would also be a shower of lying thieves promising that if they went on broadband their dial up (BT Anytime?) would automatically be cancelled (which was not the case). Then the billing department would have to deal with the disputes requesting two+ years of refund (at 15.99 GBP per month!). Any request had to be sent in writing and then start the whole offering of partial refunds only. If refused the customer had to send in yet ANOTHER letter requesting full refund, which would take more time etc. The response would then be three months refund, then six, then nine etc. until the customer got frustrated enough to accept a partial refund only to actually get the money.

Sizzler

ejmaztec wrote: »

Due to all of the crazy billing fiascos that I've heard about with BT, mostly on here, I've never ever authorised them to get paid by direct debit. Imagine my delight and surprise to find out that the feckers have grabbed the funds from my bank account, using of all things - a direct debit!

They've obviously used the details that were required when I first signed up with them. Since then, they've always asked me if I want to pay by dd and I've always said a categorical "No". I always pay them with a credit card.

There's me thinking that you needed a balaclava and a sawn-off shot-gun to get someone else's money out of a bank. I'll be asking my bank about "authorisation" on Monday morning. :mad:

I sympathize with you that you feel so aggrieved they had the audacity to take a DD from you OP but am I the only person on here that thinks it strange that you gave them your DD details when signing up, what did you think they were going to do with them,keep them for posterity? If you didnt want this to happen you shouldnt have supplied them.

amcalester

IsThatSo? wrote: »

The bank should have spotted there was no authorisation and returned it. What day did the dd go through your account? If they send it back it wouldn't show till the next working day, so if it went through Friday it wouldn't show as being reversed on your account until Monday. Contact them anyway though, just to be sure.

Thats not really true.

BT are more than likely on the Direct Debit Plus Scheme, this basicly means that once BT request the payment then the bank have to release the funds. The scheme is operated on a trust basis, the Bank trusts that BT are entitled to set up a direct debit. If you, The OP, feel that they have taken the funds from your account without proper permission then under the scheme if you contact your bank and say that the direct debit was unauthorised then the Bank must refund the money and contact BT. If BT then prove to the Bank that they were entitled to the money then the bank will deduct the money from your account.

ejmaztec

Sizzler wrote: »

I sympathize with you that you feel so aggrieved they had the audacity to take a DD from you OP but am I the only person on here that thinks it strange that you gave them your DD details when signing up, what did you think they were going to do with them,keep them for posterity? If you didnt want this to happen you shouldnt have supplied them.

Yes, I'm a bit silly expecting businesses not to take money from me without my authorisation. I don't think it strange at all that a business would request bank details just to prove that you're not a bad risk. Do you also find it strange that if you give a cheque to someone, there are enough details on the cheque to enable them to set up a direct debit, or a standing order? The bigger a business is, the less notice a bank takes of the paperwork landing in the branch.

IsThatSo?

amcalester wrote: »

Thats not really true.

BT are more than likely on the Direct Debit Plus Scheme, this basicly means that once BT request the payment then the bank have to release the funds. The scheme is operated on a trust basis, the Bank trusts that BT are entitled to set up a direct debit. If you, The OP, feel that they have taken the funds from your account without proper permission then under the scheme if you contact your bank and say that the direct debit was unauthorised then the Bank must refund the money and contact BT. If BT then prove to the Bank that they were entitled to the money then the bank will deduct the money from your account.

Yes, it is true. When a person signs a DD form they also sign an authorisation form for the bank. Its a seperate bit on the form addressed to your bank. The bank then receives this, checks the signature and keeps the authorisation on file. When the DD arrives it its flagged as a new DD and then the bank go and check that they have the authorisation on file If they find the form with the correct reference number then they allow the DD to process, if not then they return it to the originator (in this case BT).

This does rely on human competency of course. Therefore, if BT had account details, yes they could request funds under the DD scheme. If the authorisations were being checked by a staff member with a hangover then yes, it might slip through (not saying this is exactly what happened, just a for instance!!).

Anyway, even if there was an authorisation on file a person is entitled to dispute it, see DD indemnity claim scheme.

ejmaztec

IsThatSo? wrote: »

Yes, it is true. When a person signs a DD form they also sign an authorisation form for the bank. Its a seperate bit on the form addressed to your bank. The bank then receives this, checks the signature and keeps the authorisation on file. When the DD arrives it its flagged as a new DD and then the bank go and check that they have the authorisation on file If they find the form with the correct reference number then they allow the DD to process, if not then they return it to the originator (in this case BT).

This does rely on human competency of course. Therefore, if BT had account details, yes they could request funds under the DD scheme. If the authorisations were being checked by a staff member with a hangover then yes, it might slip through (not saying this is exactly what happened, just a for instance!!).

Anyway, even if there was an authorisation on file a person is entitled to dispute it, see DD indemnity claim scheme.

Of course, there's also supposed to be a dd set-up fee, which also didn't happen in my case.

amcalester

IsThatSo? wrote: »

Yes, it is true. When a person signs a DD form they also sign an authorisation form for the bank. Its a seperate bit on the form addressed to your bank. The bank then receives this, checks the signature and keeps the authorisation on file. When the DD arrives it its flagged as a new DD and then the bank go and check that they have the authorisation on file If they find the form with the correct reference number then they allow the DD to process, if not then they return it to the originator (in this case BT).

This does rely on human competency of course. Therefore, if BT had account details, yes they could request funds under the DD scheme. If the authorisations were being checked by a staff member with a hangover then yes, it might slip through (not saying this is exactly what happened, just a for instance!!).

The Direct Debit Plus scheme is a paperless scheme which means that no mandate needs to be filled out therefore the bank never receive a signed mandate to check the signatures. Its all done electronicly and the bank dont actually set anything up.

This is only true for the larger companies and they have to meet strict requirement set out by www.ipso.ie in order to do this.

So if you give your account details to most large companies, like BT, Eircom, O2, Meteor, Vodafone, ESB, Bord Gais etc etc they can do this and the first the bank will know about it is when the customer rings up to complain.

Best thing to do is call your bank and say it was unauthorised and they should refund the money because you are covered by the Indeminty then send a letter or email to BT.

Sizzler

ejmaztec wrote: »

Yes, I'm a bit silly expecting businesses not to take money from me without my authorisation. I don't think it strange at all that a business would request bank details just to prove that you're not a bad risk. Do you also find it strange that if you give a cheque to someone, there are enough details on the cheque to enable them to set up a direct debit, or a standing order? The bigger a business is, the less notice a bank takes of the paperwork landing in the branch.

Again, I refer back to my original point. You gave them your details, what would you reasonably expect?Seriously?You should never have supplied them in the first instance. Did you think they were going to ring you and ask you if it was OK to debit your account? Or write you a nice letter?

ejmaztec wrote: »

Of course, there's also supposed to be a dd set-up fee, which also didn't happen in my case.

What? A DD set up fee? Levied by who exactly? Never heard of such a thing!

amcalester wrote: »

The Direct Debit Plus scheme is a paperless scheme which means that no mandate needs to be filled out therefore the bank never receive a signed mandate to check the signatures. Its all done electronicly and the bank dont actually set anything up.

This is only true for the larger companies and they have to meet strict requirement set out by www.ipso.ie in order to do this.

So if you give your account details to most large companies, like BT, Eircom, O2, Meteor, Vodafone, ESB, Bord Gais etc etc they can do this and the first the bank will know about it is when the customer rings up to complain.

Best thing to do is call your bank and say it was unauthorised and they should refund the money because you are covered by the Indeminty then send a letter or email to BT.

And the first thing the bank will do is ask if the OP gave BT his/her DD details to which the answer is yes. They will then invariably send them back to BT to take it up with them directly as there is no evidence to say they have acted in bad faith, its not as if the OP cancelled the DD with the bank and they debited the account after that instruction was canx.

ejmaztec

Sizzler wrote: »

Again, I refer back to my original point. You gave them your details, what would you reasonably expect?Seriously?You should never have supplied them in the first instance. Did you think they were going to ring you and ask you if it was OK to debit your account? Or write you a nice letter?

What? A DD set up fee? Levied by who exactly? Never heard of such a thing!

And the first thing the bank will do is ask if the OP gave BT his/her DD details to which the answer is yes. They will then invariably send them back to BT to take it up with them directly as there is no evidence to say they have acted in bad faith, its not as if the OP cancelled the DD with the bank and they debited the account after that instruction was canx.

I'll ignore your totally ott reaction, but will point out that over the decades, in my profession, I've seen hundreds of dd set-up fees on bank statements, both here and in the UK.

If you think it acceptable for a third party to take money from you without authorisation, then good luck with that. :rolleyes:

parsi

I've never seen a DD setup fee. Seen (and paid) plenty of Standing Order setup fees.

ejmaztec

If you look at the pdf file on the following link, you'll see that the SO and DD fees are the same amount €3.43 each.

http://www.bankofireland.ie/html/gws/business/run_your_business/fees_charges/index.html

Sizzler

ejmaztec wrote: »

If you think it acceptable for a third party to take money from you without authorisation, then good luck with that. :rolleyes:

So why did you give them your bank details

ejmaztec wrote: »

If you look at the pdf file on the following link, you'll see that the SO and DD fees are the same amount €3.43 each.

http://www.bankofireland.ie/html/gws/business/run_your_business/fees_charges/index.html

So you have a business account? You're posting in the wrong thread then, this is consumer issues :rolleyes:

ejmaztec

Sizzler wrote: »

So why did you give them your bank details

So you have a business account? You're posting in the wrong thread then, this is consumer issues :rolleyes:

You have obviously got a bee in your bonnet and it really is a waste of my time trying to communicate with one who will not be told.

Read my posts and you will see how they got my bank account details.

The fees are payable on both business and private accounts. There may be terms and conditions whereby graduate accounts etc have no fees, but in general the charges are payable.

I post a simple item re BT and it turns into WW3 - ridiculous!

foggy_lad

simply ask your bank to refund the direct debit and make it clear to them in writing that you will not accept anymore direct debits from bt or you will close your account and move to a more competent bank

IsThatSo?

ejmaztec wrote: »

I post a simple item re BT and it turns into WW3 - ridiculous!

You are right. This isn't about the DD scheme or fees, its about the fact that BT took funds from your account without authorisation to do so. The rest is just details. Contact your bank, get the funds back and make a complaint to Comreg (if thats the correct governing body). This crowd will keep doing this, you won't be alone with this problem.

Good luck. Let us know how you get on

ejmaztec

IsThatSo? wrote: »

You are right. This isn't about the DD scheme or fees, its about the fact that BT took funds from your account without authorisation to do so. The rest is just details. Contact your bank, get the funds back and make a complaint to Comreg (if thats the correct governing body). This crowd will keep doing this, you won't be alone with this problem.

Good luck. Let us know how you get on

Nice to know that the voice of reason prevails.

Sizzler

ejmaztec wrote: »

You have obviously got a bee in your bonnet and it really is a waste of my time trying to communicate with one who will not be told.

Read my posts and you will see how they got my bank account details.

The fees are payable on both business and private accounts. There may be terms and conditions whereby graduate accounts etc have no fees, but in general the charges are payable.

I post a simple item re BT and it turns into WW3 - ridiculous!

You mean this one?

ejmaztec wrote: »

They've obviously used the details that were required when I first signed up with them. Since then, they've always asked me if I want to pay by dd and I've always said a categorical "No". I always pay them with a credit card.

If you wanted to pay by CC then why did you give them your DD details? They would happily have taken the CC option as well you know, so it really doesnt make sense that you gave them one but wanted to pay by the other Would you have kicked up such a stink if you gave them your CC details and told them you wanted to pay by DD every month and they charged your CC instead?

foggy_lad wrote: »

simply ask your bank to refund the direct debit and make it clear to them in writing that you will not accept anymore direct debits from bt or you will close your account and move to a more competent bank

Its not the banks fault FFS. The OP gave BT his DD details under the DD plus scheme, he never told the bank that he didnt want to accept DD's on his account, they arent mind readers. They have now charged his account and he is pefectly entitled to exercise his right to cancel the DD but the argument of "I never said they could charge my account" will be hard fought as the OP supplied the details willingly.

IsThatSo? wrote: »

make a complaint to Comreg (if thats the correct governing body). This crowd will keep doing this, you won't be alone with this problem.

Good luck. Let us know how you get on

Yeah good luck with that is right :rolleyes:

ejmaztec

Sizzler wrote: »

You mean this one?


If you wanted to pay by CC then why did you give them your DD details? They would happily have taken the CC option as well you know, so it really doesnt make sense that you gave them one but wanted to pay by the other Would you have kicked up such a stink if you gave them your CC details and told them you wanted to pay by DD every month and they charged your CC instead?
Its not the banks fault FFS. The OP gave BT his DD details under the DD plus scheme, he never told the bank that he didnt want to accept DD's on his account, they arent mind readers. They have now charged his account and he is pefectly entitled to exercise his right to cancel the DD but the argument of "I never said they could charge my account" will be hard fought as the OP supplied the details willingly.

Yeah good luck with that is right :rolleyes:

I never mentioned DD plus, you're just making it up as you go along

Sizzler

ejmaztec wrote: »

I never mentioned DD plus, you're just making it up as you go along

No, I think you are son.

You didnt have to mention it,all DD's are operated under DD plus and have been for some years.

Whoopsies.

ejmaztec

Sizzler wrote: »

No, I think you are son.

You didnt have to mention it,all DD's are operated under DD plus and have been for some years.

Whoopsies.

You must be extremely old if you think that I'm your son. Can I put you on my Christmas card list for giving me an entertaining weekend? :P

Mr E

Jesus lads, get a room.

ejmaztec

Mr E wrote: »

Jesus lads, get a room.

I don't think there's one big enough.

amcalester

Sizzler wrote: »

No, I think you are son.

You didnt have to mention it,all DD's are operated under DD plus and have been for some years.

Whoopsies.

All DD's arent operated under DD+ only some are.
ICDS mortgages arent, MBNA Credit Cards arent, Halifax mortgages arent, First Active Mortgages arent, UB Mortgages arent, Deaf childrens accociation arent (I could go on).

The criteria for operating under DD+ are different to a regular DD. And just because the OP gave BT his account details doesn't mean they are entitled to set up a DD.

To set up a DD on a customers account the company that is operating under DD+ can take instructions in writing or over the phone, this is to make it easier on both the customer and the company. But the authorisation must be explicit and merely supplying account details is not sufficient authorisation.

Sizzler

ejmaztec wrote: »

Can I put you on my Christmas card list for giving me an entertaining weekend? :P

No but you can give the money to someone who deserves it more, Vincent De Paul or FOCUS Ireland please

amcalester wrote: »

All DD's arent operated under DD+ only some are.
ICDS mortgages arent, MBNA Credit Cards arent, Halifax mortgages arent, First Active Mortgages arent, UB Mortgages arent, Deaf childrens accociation arent (I could go on).

Yes you could go on, but you would be wasting your time as BT arent one of these.

amcalester wrote: »

The criteria for operating under DD+ are different to a regular DD. And just because the OP gave BT his account details doesn't mean they are entitled to set up a DD.

True to a point. To be fair we dont have the full story here either, ie when the details were supplied. Was it 3 months ago, 3 years ago. The odds are BT will state that the details were supplied by the OP and hence they were set up on his account as this was deemed to be the intended payment method (contract refers). The fact that the OP made one / few payments to them merely overwrote the default payment method at the time which was DD. I think this will be found to be the case. What probably happened here was as soon as the OP saw a bill or realised there was money due they paid by CC hence there was nothing on their system to collect by DD, the last payment was obviously missed, hence the DD. Quite clear to me.

Anyway, hope the OP gets their money back if thats what keeps them happy but a bit more appreciation to the root cause of how this situation happened should be appreciated.

ejmaztec

Sizzler wrote: »

the last payment was obviously missed, hence the DD. Quite clear to me.

Nope.

Sizzler

ejmaztec wrote: »

Nope.

So you were double billed?