Card transactions by proxy
lists at internetpolicyagency.com
Tue Apr 5 13:40:39 BST 2011
In article <183534E5-99E3-4810-96C9-32E0B9D53FA6 at batten.eu.org>, Ian
Batten <igb at batten.eu.org> writes
>I've operated DDs for more than twenty years, and we have about forty
>set up on our respective bank accounts, not one of which has ever given
>any trouble (it's not been forty for twenty years, but it's probably
>averaged 20: 400 direct-debit years). From where I'm stood, our
>occasional use of cheques (and it is occasional, now we do things like
>paying for school meals online) is a far greater risk to us than DDs.
The main DD "risk" as I see (and experience) it is that [particularly
utility] companies take payments I'd rather they hadn't.
But there's the DD guarantee, I hear people say. However, that's for
"mistakes". And apparently cancels the DD arrangement, so you've got
the extra hassle of setting it up again.
For example, I received an estimated bill that is approximately double
what it should have been. And immediately sent a customer reading to the
supplier's website. Which they seem to have ignored. Does that qualify
as a "mistake", required to trigger the DD guarantee? In this case I
didn't bother claiming, because overpaying for energy is usually OK, and
prices are only going upwards.
But the principle remains, that you lose control of the money and all
the initiative is with the customer to chase up 'errors and omissions'.
More information about the ukcrypto