Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Cell Phones and Smartphones
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-30-2011, 03:15 PM
 
Location: Yeah
3,164 posts, read 6,703,575 times
Reputation: 911

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
Charging for something that costs them extra (like processing a paper check or having a live human take your payment over the phone) is one thing. Charging someone for using their card to pay you online is a bit ridiculous. It requires no more effort on their part than automatic credit card payments.

LOL, well, they're not charging it now, so I guess there's no reason to complain anymore
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-30-2011, 03:25 PM
 
2,279 posts, read 3,973,533 times
Reputation: 1669
They were just testing the waters. Verizon has screwed me before, so this does not surprise me. They rely on their customer's ignorance of their systems to profit. I tried adjusting my text message plan through their "convenient" online system and it screwed my bill up big time. Instead of just charging me for the difference of the new plan, they used a procedure of refunding/recharging, which resulted in a whole slew of overage fees that should not have been applied to my account. It caused such a headache and they didn't even take all of the overage fees off. Go figure.

It seems like banks and wireless providers are the only types of companies that thrive on screwing over their customers. If I went to REI or Target and bought something that I didn't like, I can go back there to return w/o a receipt and they will do everything in their power to make me happy. Companies like BoA and Verizon rarely go above and beyond the call to make their customers happy.

Companies like Verizon can do this because you have very few options in wireless providers. We almost lost T-Mobile to ATT, so that would have made things a whole lot worse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2011, 11:13 AM
 
Location: Maryland's 6th District.
8,357 posts, read 25,240,720 times
Reputation: 6541
Quote:
Originally Posted by JasonF View Post
Charging for something that costs them extra (like processing a paper check or having a live human take your payment over the phone) is one thing. Charging someone for using their card to pay you online is a bit ridiculous. It requires no more effort on their part than automatic credit card payments.
You are correct, but the idea was to coerce costumers into using the system that guarantees on-time payment in full.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2011, 12:31 PM
 
Location: Metro Washington DC
15,432 posts, read 25,814,526 times
Reputation: 10450
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottrpriester View Post
LOL, well, they're not charging it now, so I guess there's no reason to complain anymore
Well, we're going to find a reason anyways!

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2011, 05:20 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
16,787 posts, read 49,068,148 times
Reputation: 9478
Credit card companies charge merchants 3-4% of the cost of each credit card transaction. I learned this recently when I decided to try using the online bill payment option for my County property taxes. They refuse to eat the credit card charge, so they wanted me to pay them $104 extra to cover it. I gladly canceled the transaction and sent them a paper check.

This is why so many companies try to push you to take out one of their credit cards, because then they don't have to pay fees on the transactions when you use it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-31-2011, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Downtown Harrisburg
1,434 posts, read 3,922,748 times
Reputation: 1017
Quote:
Originally Posted by CptnRn View Post
Credit card companies charge merchants 3-4% of the cost of each credit card transaction. I learned this recently when I decided to try using the online bill payment option for my County property taxes. They refuse to eat the credit card charge, so they wanted me to pay them $104 extra to cover it. I gladly canceled the transaction and sent them a paper check.
You've hit the nail on the head. For small businesses, transaction rates are typically around 2% - 4% plus another $.25 - $.50 per transaction. So if you're making a $100 payment, the business will see somewhere between $95.50 and $97.75. Obviously a high-volume customer like Verizon pays a lot less, while a small pizza shop pays about these rates.

As for charging customers to use credit cards, that's actually a violation of Visa / Mastercard's Master Agreement. No merchant can nail you with a surcharge for paying by credit card unless they apply that same surcharge to every form of payment. No matter what the merchant says, they are wrong. Period. No two ways about it.

Checkout Fees | Personal | Visa USA | Personal | Visa USA (http://usa.visa.com/personal/using_visa/checkout_fees/index.html - broken link)

Mastercard is the same. American Express doesn't expressly prohibit charging a surcharge, but their terms state that AmEx customers must be treated exactly the same as V/MC customers -- and since THEY can't be charged a surcharge, neither can AmEx companies.

There are two ways around this.

The first is to reverse the idea. Rather than charge a fee for credit card payments, issue a discount for cash payments. It sounds ridiculous, but that's the agreement. There are some standards as to how it must be presented to the customer (the highest price must be advertised, with the discount revealed to the customer upon inquiry or purchase), but that's it. Pretty ridiculous, right?

The second is to call it something else. You're not paying a credit card fee, you're paying a "convenience surcharge". This means that you're paying for the "convenience" of paying online. This is perfectly in accordance with the terms of the Master Agreement, as long as you also apply the fee to people paying by check. And you can get around THAT by simply not accepting check payments over the website. But as long as you don't apply the fee to people paying in person, it stands.

This second practice sounds like what Verizon was trying to pull. Since they weren't charging customers who paid in the store or who made automatic payments, it probably didn't violate their card processing terms. They were arguing that customers would be charged for the "convenience" of making a one-time payment.

Sneaky and deceptive? You bet.

Illegal? Possibly. Ten states have laws banning payment surcharges. Connecticut has a very nice one, banning surcharges of any kind for all payment types. You pay the advertised price (plus tax), period, no matter what, when, where, or how. But for the remaining states (and probably most of those ten), definitely not.

The worst part about the credit card surcharge thing is that even if you catch a merchant doing it, the issue becomes a civil matter between the merchant and their card processor. You can't get your money back just because the merchant charged you an extra $2 for paying by credit card, since the merchant didn't violate any agreement with you -- only with their payment gateway. The merchant can get in some pretty hot water (especially smaller merchants like convenience stores and restaurants / bars), but you're still out your $2.

I knew this wouldn't stand. If it did, I would have gone into the local Verizon store and paid my bill $1 at a time by credit card. Verizon probably gets a pretty low rate thanks to their volume, so at 2% plus $.30 per transaction (I'm on a rewards card, the most expensive kind to process), they'd get about 68 cents for every dollar I paid. So for my $95 bill, they'd only get around $65.

If everyone did that, then the policy would have been reversed pretty quick.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2014, 11:58 PM
 
1,017 posts, read 1,812,334 times
Reputation: 461
I agree that there trying to get more people to sighn up for auto pay. why so they can take the money out early and bank off the intrest. that's what happened last time I sighned up for auto pay there were taking the money out early. so I opened up a different accout for the auto pay account and I didn't deposit the money until the night before they was supposed to with draw it
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-04-2014, 10:03 PM
 
1,017 posts, read 1,812,334 times
Reputation: 461
that's why I left em they nickel and dime you to death. and there customer service totally sucks now!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Cell Phones and Smartphones
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:25 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top