Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
SAYNOTO0870.COM

<---- Back to main website

 
Home Help Search Login Register

Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = GNs (Read 24,010 times)
derrick
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,124
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #15 - Sep 13th, 2008 at 12:58pm
 
Keith wrote on Sep 12th, 2008 at 7:46pm:
You are covered using a Credit Card by law provided the amount is between £100 and £30,000.

Debit cards are not covered, but Visa has its own arrangement and in fact there is no lower limit to it. As I understand it you have to make a claim within 120 days. It is called Visa Chargeback. You should not assume Mastercard debit cards are covered as there is no legal requirement and Maestro do not provide this cover.

Apparently if you do make a claim under Visa Chargeback most banks will not have a clue what you are talking about and you have to persist to get them to take action (usual call centre lack of training). They are obliged to act upon your request under their agreement with Vista



You are correct Keith, see these two pages from Working Lunch; -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/working_lunch/4260806.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/working_lunch/7593369.stm
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #16 - Sep 13th, 2008 at 1:14pm
 
I have just booked two very expensive transactions where the credit card fee would have been £44 per transaction but the debit card transaction was nil using my Visa Debit card based on the above knowledge.  And yes it is for travel so protecting against the possibility of loss due to insolvency is now rather important.

I recently also acquired a Visa Electron card from the Co-op to use to buy Ryanair or Easyjet flights as they charge nothing for Visa Electron but do charge for Visa Debit cards.  I would be interested to know if Visa Electron also benefits from this payment protection.  I suspect that it may not do and may be considered as equivalent to elecronic cash.  That is probably why Ryanair prefer it as it avoids the possibility of chargeback disputes.  But if so then why don't they also give preferred no card fee status to Maestro payments?
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 13th, 2008 at 1:14pm by NGMsGhost »  

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
sherbert
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,011
Gender: male
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #17 - Sep 13th, 2008 at 1:31pm
 
I did not think that banks charged suppliers if a debit card was used. I know they charge up to 5% if a credit card is, hence the charge being passed on to the customer. I have never been charged for using my Visa debit card, me smells something fishy going on with your transaction with Ryanair and Easyjet. Shocked
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #18 - Sep 13th, 2008 at 2:25pm
 
sherbert wrote on Sep 13th, 2008 at 1:31pm:
I did not think that banks charged suppliers if a debit card was used. I know they charge up to 5% if a credit card is, hence the charge being passed on to the customer. I have never been charged for using my Visa debit card, me smells something fishy going on with your transaction with Ryanair and Easyjet. Shocked


Typical merchant credit card charges to large retailers are 2% of the transaction value unless the transaction value is very small.  There is usually a minimum fee they are charged for a transaction (eg 20p) regardless of size and that is why some retailers do not like card payments for very low value transactions, especially under £5.

As to debit cards the banks do charge the merchant a fee but for taking them but it is usually a fixed amount like 20p per transaction and/or a very low percentage (eg 0.1%) on larger value transactions.  The reason for the difference is the money is coming straight out of the customer's bank account (or at least within 3 working days maximum and often same day now) and there is no payment delay of up to 56 days.  Also there is less credit risk as bank accounts are credit scored for overdraft a lot more accurately than many of the more reckless credit card issuers tend to do.

The reason why Ryanair now charge £8 return for debit cards per passenger is simple.  Namely they are trying to get round the EU rules that say all airport fees and taxes must be quoted up front.  However as they can argue that they charge no fee for Visa Electron they can say they can't quote the fees including card charges up front.  I believe that eventually the EU or OFT will mandate that they have to ask how you are going to pay for the flight before you look it up and get a price quote so the price quote then includes the card charges.  There will then be no point in levying these hidden fare charges as debit card charges that do not reflect the transaction cost.  More reputable companies like Thomson (part of the German TUI) just add 2% to the transaction value if you use a credit card and do not have a minimum fee.  This is fair enough as they actually pay 2% extra for credit card use.

As to Visa Electron and Ryanair not making a card charge while they do for Visa Debit this is principally because almost no one had a Visa Electron card and the card type is physically separate from Visa Debit so can be identified by them on their system.  As a result almost no one could then avoid their £8 card charge.  Of course a lot of people (myself included) are now acquiring Visa Electron cards (Co-Op Cashminder which you can apply for on the phone in 10 minutes with no ID needed seems the best bet as you can pay cash or a cheque in to it at any Post Office or Sub Post Office or using your online bank account via BACS) so in due course Ryanair are likely to bring in a charge for Visa Electron.  When the EU and trading standards finally rules that levying card charges that do not reflect actual costs is a scam then no doubt Ryanair will be forced to increase their headline fares and/or futher increase the baggage charge or check in charge (although again they may have a problem with that if they try to charge more than physical check in or handling baggage actually costs them plus a reasonable profit margin).

In any event I would certainly recommend anyone to get hold of a Visa Electron card in case they think it is likely they may fly with Ryanair or Easyjet at some point in the future or in case other tour operators or low cost airlines go down the only Visa Electron is fee free route.
Back to top
 

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
derrick
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,124
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #19 - Sep 13th, 2008 at 3:22pm
 
NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 13th, 2008 at 1:14pm:
I have just booked two very expensive transactions where the credit card fee would have been £44 per transaction but the debit card transaction was nil using my Visa Debit card based on the above knowledge.


Did you know that as long as the goods/service cost between £100-30000, it does not matter how much you cahrge to your CC, you will still be covered under Section 75 for the full amount?

eg; - goods/service cost £1000, retailer wants to charge 3% for CC use equaling £30, put £5 on CC, retailers  CC charge 15pence, pay the rest however you like and the CC company is still liable for the full amount under section 75 if retailer goes belly up or you have some other problem.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
bbb_uk
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,041
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #20 - Sep 14th, 2008 at 9:21am
 
NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 13th, 2008 at 2:25pm:
The reason why Ryanair now charge £8 return for debit cards per passenger is simple.  Namely they are trying to get round the EU rules that say all airport fees and taxes must be quoted up front.  However as they can argue that they charge no fee for Visa Electron they can say they can't quote the fees including card charges up front...
I believe that is probably true.  However, in adverts where ASA has jurisdiction, I believe ASA would rule that such a fee had to be included simply because majority would be subject to the charge.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
bbb_uk
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,041
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #21 - Sep 14th, 2008 at 10:39am
 
I wonder if the CAA are making money from their 0870?

I realise and understand that a geographical possibly couldn't cope with the demand, a 03x number would be very costly but why not an 0845?  Most 0845 providers dont charge for incoming calls received.

The problem is that the number was originally allocated to BT so unless it's been ported then that's why the CAA didn't use an 0845 as BT generally charge for calls received.  0870 is generally free and may mean the CAA get a small percentage of the revenue BT gets from the calls.

However, due to bespoke pricing by BT then it's hard to say for sure.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
derrick
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,124
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #22 - Sep 14th, 2008 at 1:14pm
 
bbb_uk wrote on Sep 14th, 2008 at 10:39am:
I realise and understand that a geographical possibly couldn't cope with the demand,


Of course they can, although there may be a charge for incoming calls, as with 03 but maybe cheaper, I think it may depend on call volume as to how much the charge would be.

See these companies forexamples,(BT can also do it but choose not to advertise the fact, as it will probably not be as lucrative as 084/087),: -



TTNC  http://www.ttnc.co.uk/about/about-us.do                  

http://www.ttnc.co.uk/numbers/local-area-codes.do

NumberStore  http://www.numberstore.com/about-us.asp


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #23 - Sep 14th, 2008 at 11:04pm
 
bbb_uk wrote on Sep 14th, 2008 at 10:39am:
I wonder if the CAA are making money from their 0870?


Almost certainly they are.  Although they will no doubt choose to see it as "defraying the costs of providing staff to man the phone lines". Angry

Quote:
I realise and understand that a geographical possibly couldn't cope with the demand


Since when was that?  Large John Lewis stores like John Lewis Oxford St seem to have no trouble running the whole thing off a switchboard with a geographic phone number.  Also voip telephony can be offered using geographic phone numbers.  I find it very alarming indeed that any moderator of the sayno0870.com website would make the assertion that "a geographical possibly couldn't cope with the demand".  Also don't forget the Foreign & Commonwearlth Office who run a large and complex telephone system using solely geographic phone numbers.

Quote:
a 03x number would be very costly


No it wouldn't.  If one shops around the incoming call charges can be very low indeed and much lower than 0800, especially if a large number of incoming minutes per month are purchased in bulk on an annual contract.

I can't imagine why you seem to have suddenly changed sides to that of the 084/7 apologists bbb_uk?  Have you received a brown envelope in the post containing a large cheque or something?

Quote:
but why not an 0845?  Most 0845 providers dont charge for incoming calls received.


Because 0845 are just as bad as 0870 in most cases.  Certainly they are just as bad from overseas and all UK mobile phones and they are also excluded from all landline inclusive minutes packages.  I really can't believe that you think you should be encouraging the use of an 0845 number on this website bbb_uk? Shocked Undecided

Quote:
The problem is that the number was originally allocated to BT so unless it's been ported then that's why the CAA didn't use an 0845 as BT generally charge for calls received.  0870 is generally free and may mean the CAA get a small percentage of the revenue BT gets from the calls.

0870 is generally free. Shocked


Another weasel worded statement usually made by the scam 0870 industry bbb.  It isn't free at all.  It is jolly expensive.

Whatever dangerous or hallucinogenic substances you may possibly have been taking lately bbb and even allowing for it being the weekend I think you should quit now before your turn in to a full card carrying apologist for the 084/7 number vending industry. Tongue Grin
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 14th, 2008 at 11:05pm by NGMsGhost »  

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
SilentCallsVictim
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


aka NHS.Patient, DH_fairtelecoms

Posts: 2,494
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #24 - Sep 15th, 2008 at 12:20am
 
Just to put the record straight, I believe that the 0870 number in question belongs to ATOL, although it is also being publicised by the CAA.

We can make whatever conjecture we wish in the absence of the relevant facts. The reason for adopting a 0870 number is not the point. The fact is that those who are suffering as a result of this situation are having to make a financial contribution towards the costs of resolving their difficulties.

Most people would see that alone as being a scandal, regardless of the motives and alternative options available to those responsible for it. Let them explain whether they are knaves or fools.
Back to top
 
WWW  
IP Logged
 
bbb_uk
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,041
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #25 - Sep 15th, 2008 at 6:54am
 
NGMsGhost wrote on Sep 14th, 2008 at 11:04pm:
Large John Lewis stores like John Lewis Oxford St seem to have no trouble running the whole thing off a switchboard with a geographic phone number.
So your saying John Lewis store would receive more calls at same time than the CAA/Atol will over this?  Last I checked it was more than a couple of thousands people affected by this which means most likely they all tried ringing as soon as they heard.

Quote:
Also voip telephony can be offered using geographic phone numbers.
Yes, they can but do they have a VoIP now because they obviously needed, I presume, a new number purely to take the number of calls they are going to get.

A GN number can really only cope with a certain amount of calls before one gets an engaged tone, or being able to be put through to one of multiple call centres.  How much this is really depends on how good their switchboard is.  I have assumed that due to the volume of calls they were expecting, the CAA/Atol asked expensive BT for a number that is more likely to cope with the demand.

I did notice that Atol didn't routinely use NGNs for normal everyday enquiries so the unexpected collapse of the UK's third biggest operator took it by complete surprise and hence they needed a new number quickly setup.

Quote:
No it wouldn't.  If one shops around the incoming call charges can be very low indeed and much lower than 0800, especially if a large number of incoming minutes per month are purchased in bulk on an annual contract.
An 03x number would be expensive and as they needed a number asap and only for a certain amount of time and I presume didnt anticipate such a large company going out of business then they never had time to shop around.

Quote:
I can't imagine why you seem to have suddenly changed sides to that of the 084/7 apologists bbb_uk?  Have you received a brown envelope in the post containing a large cheque or something?
Yes, same as certain other organisations of the government lol  Grin  Wink  Cheesy

I was trying to think of it logically from both sides and that is that the CAA/atol now have to pay for nearly everyone abroad to get home and refund the many, many, many thousands of people who had booked but not travelled with XL or one of their other sister companies.  Logic would dictate that this is going to cost hundreds of millions and I assume the £1/£2 we each all paid Atol wouldn't cover it on its own so to cut their own costs, having a number where they got charged for incoming calls received would just add to their already large bill.

Does the CAA/Atol come under FoI act?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
bbb_uk
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,041
Re: XL Leisure Collapse - 3 Out of 4 Nos Given = G
Reply #26 - Sep 17th, 2008 at 11:55am
 
Just got around to ringing Atol on their published (Contact Us page of their website) 020 7453 6700 claims line instead of the 0870 that they are trying to rip us off with.

Answered in under a minute following the prompts for XL group of companies option.

I have added this to the database but as it's only temporary I shall remove it in a few weeks time.

Of course there is still the number they quote for those ringing abroad: 02891 85 6547.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
(Moderators: DaveM, Dave, CJT-80, bbb_uk, Forum Admin)

Website and Content © 1999-2024 SAYNOTO0870.COM. All Rights Reserved. (DE)
Written permission is required to duplicate any of the content within this site.

WARNING: This is an open forum, posts are NOT endorsed by SAYNOTO0870.COM,
please exercise due caution when acting on any info from here.


SAYNOTO0870.COM » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.


Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge