Man in dispute with broadband provider

[MarrickG]

HE HAD arranged for his Internet broadband bill to be automatically charged to his credit card every month.

The arrangement, known as the recurring bill payment programme, worked fine until he had a billing dispute with his broadband provider last month. Mr Lim Heng Seng, 31, who works in healthcare, then called his bank, DBS, and asked them to cancel the billing arrangement.

Imagine his surprise when he was told that he was not allowed to do so. Instead, it was the billing organisation - in this case, his broadband provider - that had the authority to stop the arrangement.

Said Mr Lim: "I was the one who authorised my broadband provider to charge my bill to my credit card.

"But why is it that my bank does not allow me to cancel this arrangement?

"In principle, I should be empowered to cancel the standing instruction any time that I wish because it is my credit card."

He added that the bank would not suffer any loss because he was the one who would be liable for the charges he incurred with his broadband provider.

When contacted, DBS said the agreement to set up and terminate a recurring bill payment is directly between the customer and the billing organisation.

DBS senior vice-president and head of cards and unsecured loans Ms Ooi Huey Tyng said: "DBS' role is that of a payment enabler, acting on a customer's instructions to make payments to the approved billing organisation."

When a customer provides a retailer with his credit card details so that his bill can be charged to it, the process does not involve the bank directly as the arrangement is between the customer and the retailer.

"Hence, the bank has no jurisdiction to commence or terminate any billing arrangement between a customer and a billing organisation," said Ms Ooi.

Other banks like OCBC and UOB have the same policy.

Ms Alice Goh, head of credit cards at OCBC Bank, said: "The bank merely acts as a third party to assist with the payment."

But DBS said that a customer can cancel his credit card in order to stop further payments. Mr Lim said he called his broadband provider for three days to try and resolve the billing dispute, but could not reach them.

In the end, Mr Lim accepted the solution of cancelling his credit card and applying for a new one.

He said: "Yet even if this solves the problem, it doesn't solve it in the right way.

"I previously authorised a retailer to charge my credit card, but what if the relationship between myself and the company later changes?

"I would be unable to cancel my billing arrangement without the retailer's agreement."

Mr Lim also said that a DBS staff offered a "solution" of lowering his credit limit, thus reducing the total amount he could be charged without his consent.

But he declined to do so.

 

[Teo Kok Eng]

Mr Lim also said that a DBS staff offered a "solution" of lowering his credit limit, thus reducing the total amount he could be charged without his consent.

How can that be seen as a solution? The customer may not be able to spend on other purchases when the credit limit exceeded ??

 

[Cestbon]

How can that be seen as a solution? The customer may not be able to spend on other purchases when the credit limit exceeded ??

That why called Dumb Bloody Stupid - always give stupid ideas or comment.

 

[fukyuman]

I think DBS is right this time. Lets say you decide to subsribe to online xxx services using your credit card. You just cannot go to DBS and tell them to terminate billing you make with the porn supplier (which for illustration sake, happens to be Leong Sam). You can only do so in case of fraud. The best is just to change the credit card number so Leong Sam cannot bill you.

 

[bic_cherry]

The Dangers of Credit Card use, agreements today.

Man in dispute with broadband provider
Recurring bill payment programme evokes dispute between customer and broadband provider. -TNP
Wed, Aug 18, 2010
The New Paper; By Nat Rudarakanchana
HE HAD arranged for his Internet broadband bill to be automatically charged to his credit card every month.
The arrangement, known as the recurring bill payment programme, worked fine until he had a billing dispute with his broadband provider last month. Mr Lim Heng Seng, 31, who works in healthcare, then called his bank, DBS, and asked them to cancel the billing arrangement.
Imagine his surprise when he was told that he was not allowed to do so. Instead, it was the billing organisation - in this case, his broadband provider - that had the authority to stop the arrangement....

In the end, Mr Lim accepted the solution of cancelling his credit card and applying for a new one.
He said: "Yet even if this solves the problem, it doesn't solve it in the right way.
"I previously authorised a retailer to charge my credit card, but what if the relationship between myself and the company later changes?
"I would be unable to cancel my billing arrangement without the retailer's agreement."
Mr Lim also said that a DBS staff offered a "solution" of lowering his credit limit, thus reducing the total amount he could be charged without his consent.
But he declined to do so.
...

AiYa,
Dis news report is so misleading.
"Imagine his surprise when he was told that he was not allowed to do so. "
It is a skewed-picture as the bank advises, that "he was not allowed to do so", but rather that the bank avoids intervention since the original agreement lied between the retailer (merchant) and the customer.
The bank should have encouraged Mr Lim to continue to further negotiate with his Telco, maybe listen and even provide some friendly advice/ direction to CASE/ the small claims tribunal- without which, any other solution is simply belligerent or evasive and liable to result in prolonged legal tussles, unhelpful to both.

The bank itself however, maintains the easy option of honoring regardless, ANY and every payment request from merchants able to show some proof of the card member's 'agreement-to-pay'-- (except I guess for blatantly fraudulent retailers- on police 'black lists')- the bank chooses to continue acknowledging ALL charges to the card account based upon a 'valid' payment agreement shown by the merchant.

This is perhaps because banks are just too focused on churning money- cos EVERY transaction yields the bank a fee of ~3+% (retailer pays) so being too attentive to a customer's request to "cancel agreement" isn't in the bank's financial interest.

That said, it isn't known if the new cards issued by DBS would yield higher annual fees, cancellation charges etc- it would be good if the bank did go out of its way to assist the customer in need.

As highlighted above- "Yet even if this solves the problem, it doesn't solve it in the right way."- reflects the emotionless world of fast money and 'quick' service that we now live in now, where 'might is right' and the 'dollar is king'.

This is all a very sad proof of how human relations in today's society have given way to the narrow demands of financial gain and administrative ease at the 'drop of the hat'.

Where proper procedure and due diligence is passe.

This is a sad truth for humanity today.

 

[twinseeker]

Tom instructed Dick to collect payment from Harry in future (to which, Tom will settle payment with Harry separately)
Dick went to Harry to collect payment that was due from Tom.
Harry pays Dick the payment that was due from Tom.

For months, Dick has continually collected payment from Harry, due from Tom.

Tom suddenly decides to stop this cyclic payment system, and told Harry to stop paying anything to Dick (without informing Dick of the changes in plans). To which Harry refuses. Tom barks like a dog & goes to the press to say that Harry is not being cooperative.

The solution is very clear cut, he can just go to the broadband service provider to terminate the credit card giro thing.

 

[Watchman]

Cut the card and take all money out and bank with another bank !

Something else other than DBS the keling bank of Singapore !

 

[Teo Kok Eng]

The solution is very clear cut, he can just go to the broadband service provider to terminate the credit card giro thing.

That is true. The fact that he didn't it means he is trying to be sneaky with the broadband provider.

 

[twinseeker]

That is true. The fact that he didn't it means he is trying to be sneaky with the broadband provider.

in summary, he owes the broadband service provider too much outstanding, which is why he's shy to even approach them.