And? This can be done entirely at my leisure, whereas calling my supplier has to be done within specified hours. I`m sitting here listening to an audiobook that I`ve been meaning to get through, so replying to these posts doesn`t take up any of my time.
So it`s curious that I value my time is it?
So how would you get this £25 in interest from a significantly smaller sum then, given the interest rates available at the moment?
I think my figures before showed that it`s about 42p a month interest lost from what i`m doing. How can you call your time valuable, if you`re prepared to spend more than 2 minutes on the phone chasing this money up?
Did you even read that paragraph? Did you understand it? The point was that if someone where to win the lottery, it gives them accss to more money than they could ever save up in their lifetime, making it reasonable for people to play the lottery if they conclude that the potential pay-off is worth the loss of a few quid a week.
Which is the EXACT arguement people use for paying the lottery - their opinion of the risk/return is such that they feel it worthwhile to play. You can`t say it`s ok for you to make that decision, while rejecting someone elses ability to make the same decision.
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 09:54:21 -0000 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" wrote this:-
The last time I visited one of the houses in the family there happened to be a letter from one of these companies open on the kitchen worktop. The first sentence said something like, "we increased your direct debit without telling you."
Personally these suppliers get paid when I send them a cheque. Recently I have had to tell them twice that they have charged me too little, despite their proud boast that their computers are "highly accurate" in their estimates.
Given that situation, it surprises me even more that you would want to lend them money.
On the contrary. You haven't understood basic principles of business. It's far better to be in control of the situation and the money under discussion than for the other party to be in that position.
That's very nice, I've done similar in the past.. However, the time involved isn't free. You may get your money back and your fees, but will you get loss of earnings back? I don't believe so unless you are demonstrably in an occupation where you bill your time by the hour.
However, it misses the fundamental point of doing business. It's far, far better to be in a situation where you owe the supplier money and they have to come to you to ask for it or if need be, take legal action.
Did I say it was anything more?
Absolutely, which is why you will note that I said that I do this only twice a year. I also said that the sums involved do make it interesting financially.
I completely agree, which is why I only give attention to things where I can make more money than it costs. A two minute phone call to a supplier to agree payments for a year is certainly worth £25.
There isn't a standard.
Not at all. However, having identified that you have loaned the supplier money, it's surprising that you haven't made a 1 minute phone call to them to change the payment. You've already done 95% of the work to figure that out.
a) By making it part of a much larger pot in an account with longer access terms and taking small amounts out to a buffering account in advance of needing it.
b) By having the much larger pot in the name of someone who pays little or no tax.
I'm not. The amount involved for me is considerably more and no more than 2 minutes are involved.
Certainly, on both counts.
I'll tell you what. I can arrange for them to pay the same amount of money into my account. I'll invest it and keep the interest. The result for them, in terms of probabilities is virtually the same, plus I can spend the proceeds much more usefully than the government manages to do.
Except that it is not the same decision.
A buildings and contents policy is to provide money in the event of a disaster such as the house burning down. Some people are fortunate enough to be able to recover from such an eventuality - i.e. they have sufficient assets to cover the loss and will not be without a roof over their head. They can therefore afford to take a view on the situation and choose not to insure their property and posessions. For most people, this is not the case.
Spending money on the Lottery is quite a different proposition. There is not a loss under discussion but a gain.
If someone has the choice between spending £x00 pounds a year on the Lottery vs. insuring their house and posessions, are you suggesting that they should spend it on the Lottery?
Very kind of them. Most people are stupid enough to let them do it as well.
How quaint.
Why on earth would anybody do that?
Let them come and read the meter, *then* have the discussion about the payment.
Well that's your choice but a potential defect other than the at least 6% premium is that you carry all the risk of your cheque going missing in the post, or statistically more likely, unprocessed in the recepient's admin system.
With DD I carry none of the processing risk and there is potentially an audit trail for any failure.
Jim A
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 14:04:08 +0000 someone who may be Andy Hall wrote this:-
Nothing wrong with being "quaint".
I have my reasons.
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 14:48:23 GMT someone who may be "Jim Alexander" wrote this:-
That depends who one trades with.
Currently there is at least a 6% premium for pay on bill billing from the cheapest (social) tariff supplier compared with the cheapest monthly direct debit tariff (including social tariffs)
Jim A
Should I give you my PayPal account number as well?
I was going to ask if those were the exact words then I saw the 'somethiing like' element ... :-)
Mary
You trust PayPal? I'm surprised.
If it's sending me money.......
Easily clawed back with any c*ck and bull story..
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 16:25:14 -0000 someone who may be "Mary Fisher" wrote this:-
Those are almost exactly the words as I remember them, but not quite.
Easy come, easy go.... :-)
Ok then, your newsreader makes your postings look ridiculous with alternating line lengths - is that better?
Does "par figure" mean what they tell you, or can you set it below their recommendation? (I'll see if the Npower website has anything similar.)
I told the bank I had notified the supplier in writing that I disputed the amount and would be using the DD guarantee to recall excessive charges. That was good enough for my bank --- why shouldn't it be?
Anyway, why should a unilaterally imposed overestimate qualify as a properly notified amount?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.