Who of you financial guys did start the habit that when you receive an invoice and you make a bank transfer for it, you let the receiving party pay the bank transfer cost? Are you aware that this is not quite legal? When I invoice amount X, I want to receive amount X and not X minus transfer costs. It a) triggers administrative costs on our side and b) is simply not correct. Companies that have that practice probably rely on the fact that such missing amounts (in the area of 12 to 15 USD) are too small to initiate an action on it. Imagine how much a large company can save with this method, which is factually illegal.
Actually I have this mentioned as part of the terms and conditions when somebody submits a registration form. Therefore such practice is actually a breach of contract. In the future I will expand this paragraph and mention that failure to transfer the invoiced amount will result in an additional invoice, covering the missing amount plus an administrative fee of CHF 100. Let's see if that does the job.
2 comments:
No comment required. Stands to reason that if you invoice 20 beans then 20 beans is what you should receive. Not sure that the world works that way, however; look at Visa etc as money handling: you invoice X, customer pays X, Visa take 5% and you get 95%. If you want to receive X then you need to invoice X/0.95 which will yield 95%.
Credit Cards are a different ballpark. As a provider of a service you actually accept the terms of the credit card company when you sign up to allow payments by credit card. But transfers are not the same. I never signed up to receive less than I invoice and as I said, in our case it is even mentioned on the registration form, which is a binding contract.
Post a Comment