Settle an arguement

[lykaon78]

Invoice for services is $45
Invoice clearly lists $30 late fee

Is the late fee excessive?

I argue it is excessive (normal invoice is $110, this was a prorated amount). It is 66 percent of the total bill.
Wife argues it is clearly posted and wouldn't be an issue if the bill was on time.

Who is right?

 

[kranky]

Not excessive if the amount was disclosed.

 

[zerocool84]

Not excessive if the amount was disclosed.

This

Don't be late

 

[JJChicken]

Yes it is excessive. Take it to the Consumer Protection Authorities.

 

[spidey07]

A late fee is to avoid costing the company a lot of money because you don't pay. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

How much of a penalty would you demand if your employer didn't pay you for a month, but yet you performed your work?

My guess is you'd want more than 30 bucks because of what that would cost you indirectly.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

I voted "Yes", and you're both right.

 

[lxskllr]

It's excessive. Just because it's posted, it doesn't make it right.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Your wife is right. It is clearly posted. If you don't like their terms, take your business elsewhere.

 

[F1N3ST]

Uh, wow? I can't believe the tools voting yes.

 

[spidey07]

Uh, wow? I can't believe the tools voting yes.

Why do you think you can not pay me and not be penalized for services rendered? You want the late fee or do you want your kneecaps? Now WHERE'S MY MONEY!

 

[BoomerD]

It's excessive. Just because it's posted, it doesn't make it right.

I see it from a different perspective.

Is it excessive? Yes, but perhaps intentionally so.

Making late fees excessive should be a good way to entice people to pay on time...as long as they're informed of said late fees BEFORE incurring the obligation, no foul.

 

[lxskllr]

I see it from a different perspective.

Is it excessive? Yes, but perhaps intentionally so.

Making late fees excessive should be a good way to entice people to pay on time...as long as they're informed of said late fees BEFORE incurring the obligation, no foul.

What if they charged that percentage on a mortgage payment? It's only a modest $1,320 for being 6 days late on a $2,000 payment. Of course that was posted in the fine print, so it's all cool....

 

[F1N3ST]

What if they charged that percentage on a mortgage payment? It's only a modest $1,320 for being 6 days late on a $2,000 payment. Of course that was posted in the fine print, so it's all cool....

Uh, it's called a flat fee.

It's like a returned check fee. Seriously. Flat rate.

Are you simple?

 

[spidey07]

What if they charged that percentage on a mortgage payment? It's only a modest $1,320 for being 6 days late on a $2,000 payment. Of course that was posted in the fine print, so it's all cool....

Perfectly fine. Don't be late.

Also as boomer suggested, it's not about the percentage. It's about making it enough to penalize and recoup lost revenue. The company has bills to pay as well.

 

[lxskllr]

Uh, it's called a flat fee.

It's like a returned check fee. Seriously. Flat rate.

Are you simple?

What the fuck difference does that make jackass? If you accidentally short your check by 10¢, it's ok to charge $30?

 

[boomhower]

Don't get services you can't pay for and it's not an issue. Problem not found.

 

[911paramedic]

If you are a penny over your limit on a CC you will get hit with a $30-45 fee, period. Like others said, that fee is so they can make as much as possible off of your ass.

(I fixed what people were saying btw.)

 

[Malak]

Late payment on my mortgage isn't even that much, so yeah it is pretty excessive. Everyone that says otherwise just wants to be a jerk.

 

[mmntech]

It's excessive. There's such a thing as usury laws.

 

[F1N3ST]

What the fuck difference does that make jackass? If you accidentally short your check by 10¢, it's ok to charge $30?

That's how shit works. Why? Why not.

 

[StageLeft]

Yes it is. Disclosed or not it's excessive.

 

[JJChicken]

It's excessive. There's such a thing as usury laws.

This. Suprised so many clueless people on OT today.

 

[StageLeft]

This. Suprised so many clueless people on OT today.

It's OT this is part and parcel.

I personally love youngsters coming in all high and mighty with "It's the law and it's clear, obey it!" like barely-moralized juveniles. Plenty of laws and guidelines and rules are rubbish and should be broken.

 

[spidey07]

It's OT this is part and parcel.

I personally love youngsters coming in all high and mighty with "It's the law and it's clear, obey it!" like barely-moralized juveniles. Plenty of laws and guidelines and rules are rubbish and should be broken.

Yes, until that is your money you owed you're fine with stealing. You are STEALING from me by not paying me for my services and work already performed.

Don't you get it? I MUST PENALIZE stealing of my services otherwise everybody would think it's OK to steal my labor. Your late payment is costing me money and I will get that money from you.

 

[JJChicken]

Yes, until that is your money you owed you're fine with stealing. You are STEALING from me by not paying me for my services and work already performed.

Don't you get it? I MUST PENALIZE stealing of my services otherwise everybody would think it's OK to steal my labor. Your late payment is costing me money and I will get that money from you.

There are consumer protection laws out there. I don't know about the US, but in Australia, excessive late fees can be brought to court via the ACCC.

If you have ever studied any contract law, you will know that unreasonable terms can get voided.

Unfair Terms

Unfair terms legisalation is relatively recent in Australia; to date, only Victoria has comprehensive unfair terms legislation in its Fair Trading Act 1999. That Act renders unfair terms in consumer contracts void (s 32Y). A term is unfair if 'contrary to the requirements of good faith and in all the circumstances, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract to the detriment of the consumer' (s 32W).