The immorality of paying to pay
published: Tuesday | August 1, 2006

The Editor, Sir:

To pay a fee for settling a utility bill is indeed immoral. It is immoral because our obligation to the provider of the service should be to pay for the cost of that service received; nothing more. The collection of the money for the service is the entrepreneurial responsibility of the seller of the service. To pay for paying, is the same as paying for buying. Why should I be charged a fee for buying a product?

Costs

When companies sell their accounts receivable to collection agencies, they discount the value, so that the collector is paid for the risk and effort of collecting. Now the producer/provider of the good or service could factor the cost of collecting into the selling price of the product, but that would not be a part of the cost of production, or the cost of doing business. It would clearly be a dishonest charge, going straight to the bottom line of the profit and loss account.

If a service provider employs someone to receive the money representing the cost of its service, plus profit, that provider should pay for the cost of collecting from its own pocket; not from the pocket of the consumer. Simply put, the utility providers are purchasing the service of the 'collecting' agencies, and should 'foot' their own bills.

I am, etc.,

HARVEY G. WILLIS

valspaja@infochan.com.