"New customers signing-up to BT will no longer be able to take advantage of the provider’s £1.25 online-billing discount.

This means that new customers signing up to BT (www.bt.com) will now pay £12.79 a month for their line rental when they pay via direct debit.

But BT assured existing customers who had already signed-up to paperless billing that they would be able to keep their £1.25 monthly discount.

A spokesman for the provider said: “From September 1, 2010, BT will no longer offer a £1.25 discount for customers who choose paper-free billing. Customers who chose this option before September 1 will continue to receive a discount. "

http://www.homephonechoices.co.uk/bt-drops-paperless-billing-discount-010910.htm..."

Trenod wrote on Sep 23^rd, 2010 at 4:56pm:

This raises an interesting point: What is considered to be a "stealth increase"? And, as such, should these increases be banned solely because they are done by stealth?

This is not an increase for existing customers; it is just that new customers can no longer get a discount for paper-free billing. I have therefore decided not to move it to the other thread, as that applies to existing subscribers.

castleinc wrote on Nov 1^st, 2010 at 7:05pm:


Which, of course, is exactly what BT wants you to do. And, of course, you can only take the Line Rental Saver option if you pay by direct debit. A bit of a problem if, like me, you distrust electronic payments - especially those on a recurring cycle, which make me feel as though my bank account is not my own.

On the back of all their phone bill envelopes, BT now has this message in large print: "The majority of our customers pay their bills by direct debit. Why? Because it's easier that way."

Erm, no BT - it's because you BULLY them into doing it that way by putting penalty charges on them if they do not. You slimy, manipulative, self-serving pigs. Making the paperless discount exclusive to direct debit customers is just another bully-boy tactic (sorry, *incentive*) to make people do things YOUR way, for YOUR convenience. To hell with anyone who thinks and feels differently!

I believe the Post Office is the only telephone provider that does not charge a premium for paying by cash, cheque or one-off bank transfer. It's just a shame they don't offer an 'Anytime' calling plan; though at least their off-peak time still starts at *6pm*, making them the ideal choice for people who work Monday to Friday, nine to five - the standard working day. All the other providers just follow whatever BT does like pathetic little sheep. Is this the kind of "choice" that "competition" was supposed to bring?

Yes, yes, I know it's all legal and above board. But that doesn't make it morally right. Can you imagine the uproar there would be if the banks all started charging us for sending our statements by post? And yet that's exactly what BT and other utility companies have been doing for the past few years with their bills, *and* at grossly inflated prices. £1.25 for two lousy sheets of A4 (the first of which is filled with the same generic rubbish every month)? I ask you!!! If they're as concerned for the environment as they always say they are, they should stop using computers and discourage the rest of us from using them. Computers, especially the monitors, use a HUGE amount of power. So downloading documents from the internet (and often printing out a hard copy for oneself) is no more 'green' than receiving them by post. As long as the paper is recycled, I can't see what the problem is. Pushing everything online is done out of convenience to the company, not to the customer - same with direct debit payments. I would have more respect for BT if they just admitted that they prefer direct debit because it makes life easier for them by ensuring that everyone pays on time and by giving them a steady, guaranteed income. As it is, they pretend that it's all for the customer's benefit, which is complete and utter RUBBISH.

If they want to charge a 'payment processing fee' for cash or cheque payments, fair enough. But they have no right to call it that for a one-off bank transfer, which is still an *electronic* payment. Nor should they charge the same amount (£1.50) for all three payment methods. Figures from the banks are hard to come by, but I believe a cheque costs about £1 to process, and cash probably about half that. Indeed, BT's surcharge for cheque payments *was* £1 three years ago. So what is that extra 50p? Pure profit, that's what. But where is it going? BT won't say, which shows how secretive and non-transparent they are with their customers. I believe it would be much fairer for them to operate these charges on a sliding scale - e.g. £1 for the most expensive payment method of cheque or postal order, 50p for cash payment and 25p for a wire transfer (which doesn't actually cost BT anything to collect, but if they *must* have a surcharge for non-direct debit payment at least that would be a reasonable amount - as long as that particular one is called a charge and not a 'payment processing fee').

Hard to believe that BT's paper bill discount was only 25p three years ago (when did it jump to £1.25?!), and their direct debit discount was only £1. They and other utility companies must be raking in a fortune from these penalty charges, which sadly usually hit the elderly or other vulnerable people (who dislike using or are unable to use technology) the hardest.