Taking a Stand on Service Charges

[Cake Monster]

On a slightly different tack.

I was informed by  my Bank that I had to change my 4 Digit PIN Code to a 6 Digit PIN Code.

This I duly done the other day, and was astonished to find that the charge for this " Service " offered by the Bank was only 599 Baht !

[4MyEgo]

45 minutes ago, stevenl said:

I think it much more honest to only charge the people using the debit card for that use, and not others. Debit cards and credit cards occur the same charge to the merchant BTW, so making a distinction there does not make sense.

 

But this is going off topic.

 

Agree with the rest of your post.

Let's agree to disagree, you see to me, if visa for example charge the owner of a business a fee for the convenience of me using my own money at his business via a debit card, then that in my honest opinion, is not my problem, think of it this way, if I wanted his product and didn't have the cash, would he miss out, sheeeet yeh, so it's morso for his business then it is for me.

 

You see the way I see it is, the owner acknowledges that in this day and age people prefer not to carry cash, so to keep up with the changing environs, they will have to get with the times and provide a service to keep customers coming in with options, e.g. visa debit being one of them.

 

The above said, if visa charges them, and then the owner wants to then pass that on to me, then why the hell not charge me for his rent, electricity, staff etc etc.

 

To stay competitive in business, you have to absorb costs, now if that means add into the bill as the big department stores do, so be it, but I for one will NEVER pay, knowingly a surcharge for my own money coming out of my account because visa offers that service for a business owners convenience, as much as it is for me, it's the same as a surcharge, tell me up front and you can kiss my business goodbye, factoring it in, is a different way of doing business as opposed to adding it on and passing it back onto me.

 

You don't see hotels breaking down things like visa card fees, cleaner fees etc etc do you, it's all factored into the price.

 

Just the other day I was going to purchase some plane tickets for an upcoming overseas trip, the fare seemed cheap enough, well know carried, but the bait was placed and when I looked at the total bill with all of the add ons that weren't there originally, i.e. after I hit the drop down box to see why the extra costs, I said fark off, and went with another carrier, albeit, it cost me a little extra, although it is a better airline and it was the same price from the beginning to the end.

 

Just my way of thinking, call it principals or whatever.   

Edited January 5, 2020 by 4MyEgo

[Salerno]

3 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

why the hell not charge me for his rent, electricity, staff etc etc.

He does.

 

4 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

You don't see hotels breaking down things like visa card fees, cleaner fees etc etc do you, it's all factored into the price.

Plenty of them charge extra if using a card.

[Alotoftravel]

sorry 

Edited January 5, 2020 by Alotoftravel

[CharlieH]

8 minutes ago, Alotoftravel said:

Scott,

can you share the names of the restaurants you currently avoid that has service charge: perhaps we can start a list 

NOT permitted under forum rules.

Please do not name names.

[jackdd]

18 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

The above said, if visa charges them, and then the owner wants to then pass that on to me, then why the hell not charge me for his rent, electricity, staff etc etc.

Because visa only charges him if the customers pays using a visa card. If somebody pays cash the shop doesn't have to pay this fee. So it's only fair that the person who causes this extra charge pays for it.

But the rent, electricity, staff etc. is the same for each and every customer, so there is no point in listing this extra. Just like the service charge in a restaurant. Unless of course there were restaurants where i can choose between self service and getting served, and the 10% would only be charged to people who opt for the service option, then it would make sense to seperate this charge.

[holy cow cm]

We don’t tip if there is a service charge. End of story for normal service. But, if the service is exceptional we will quietly hand the server a folded baht tip to her hand so she gets it. But most cases Thai service is just middle of the road. No service charge will get a tip rated from crappy to middle to excellent. Why on earth would this bother you? If you feel that way then eat on the street

Edited January 5, 2020 by holy cow cm

[4MyEgo]

19 minutes ago, Salerno said:

He does.

 

Plenty of them charge extra if using a card.

But the point is it's not broken down, is it.

 

Not the ones I stay at, each to their own, if you want to pay the charge, go for it, I prefer it factored into the cost for whatever it is I am buying or renting.

[scottiddled]

3 hours ago, meand said:

It was visible to you on the menu. You mentioned you saw it. Moreover, your premise was "it is not on the menu, so it is not fair/legal". But, it was on the menu. You defeated yourself in your opening statement. 

Let's recap. Service charges are inherently deceptive, as they mean that the price listed is not the actual price. In Thailand, to legitimately engage in this already dubious practice, the government requires that "the service charge, and the rate, should be clearly stated on the menu or announced by a sign at the counter or out in front of the restaurant, so that customers are aware of this additional cost." Restaurant in question avoids clear statement disclosing the charge, putting only one reference on the back page of the menu, where a more-meticulous-than-usual consumer who is actually keeping an eye open for a service charge disclosure doesn't see it. Restaurant admits that it's not clear, apologizes, and says that it's transitioning to a new menu that will make the charge clear.

 

...And you side with the restaurant.

 

Remind me never to hire you as my attorney.

 

3 hours ago, meand said:

Wait. And please, stop the presses! I do think I understand now.

 

You mean, a company, as they were communicating a price increase (or some other negative form of information), put the info in fine print somewhere! Wow! How dare they. Facebook and Instagram would never do that and give themselves say onerous rights to use your videos and photos. Utility companies would never put a price hike in fine print somewhere where you wont look on your old invoices. This stuff simply does not happen in everyday life. 

 

This is just shocking behavior that i simply do not see in everyday life. I am outraged. 

 

But wait, op's argument is even better. Using the power company, he complains they did not inform him on the invoice. But they did! So, not only is this everyday behavior, and in fact business 101 and the way corporations communicate negative info, but they also did in fact inform him, which was his gripe to begin with. Tough world it is. 

This has gone from bad argumentation into the realm of the absurd. I'm not going to defend deceptive corporate disclosures, etc. If you want to, feel free to do so. It's where you've positioned yourself: on the side of obfuscation based on the rationale that it's part of "everyday life." And then you play the role of critic of argument? Please. You're out of your depth.

 

For starters, it's not "everyday life." Insufficient/deceptive disclosures are pushed back on all the time. If a corporation tacked on an undisclosed surcharge not authorized by law, a consumer could refuse to pay it. In other industries, governments have intervened to regulate and even ban such nonsense. If an airline or travel company tried to engage in "drip pricing"--quoting you one price then tacking on additional charges at the end, they'd be fined in the U.S. And that's not half as bad as a restaurant, where you've already ordered and consumed the product.

 

I'll agree with you on one point: I think you understand just fine. You just choose to troll.

 

 

Edited January 5, 2020 by scottiddled

[4MyEgo]

3 minutes ago, jackdd said:

Because visa only charges him if the customers pays using a visa card. If somebody pays cash the shop doesn't have to pay this fee. So it's only fair that the person who causes this extra charge pays for it.

But the rent, electricity, staff etc. is the same for each and every customer, so there is no point in listing this extra. Just like the service charge in a restaurant. Unless of course there were restaurants where i can choose between self service and getting served, and the 10% would only be charged to people who opt for the service option, then it would make sense to seperate this charge.

Tell that to most people paying by cash at the larger department stores, paying by cash no different by paying by card, 6, 2, 1, half dozen the other.

 

It's a far simpler math in my opinion and doesn't rub people up in the wrong way.

 

Your beer is 100 baht sir, paying by card, that's 105 baht, just make it 105 baht, the same way GST is applied, everyone gets bent over regardless, and there is less fuss.

[4MyEgo]

36 minutes ago, Cake Monster said:

On a slightly different tack.

I was informed by  my Bank that I had to change my 4 Digit PIN Code to a 6 Digit PIN Code.

This I duly done the other day, and was astonished to find that the charge for this " Service " offered by the Bank was only 599 Baht !

I wouldn't pay it, I changed and wasn't charged a fee, sounds dubious to me.

[jastheace]

2 hours ago, Salerno said:

They don't 

some cars do, most bikes do.????

[jackdd]

35 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

Tell that to most people paying by cash at the larger department stores, paying by cash no different by paying by card, 6, 2, 1, half dozen the other.

 

It's a far simpler math in my opinion and doesn't rub people up in the wrong way.

 

Your beer is 100 baht sir, paying by card, that's 105 baht, just make it 105 baht, the same way GST is applied, everyone gets bent over regardless, and there is less fuss.

Percentage wise these big department stores pay way less fees than a small shop for processing credit card payments.

The big shops also have to factor in cash handling fees. They have to invest in safety measures for the hundred thousands or millions of baht they collect each day, need security, pay for security to transport the cash to the bank, and so on. A small shop doesn't need this, he just puts the money in his pocket, and once in a while takes it to the bank himself.

So for the big stores, credit card and cash probably cost about the same, which is the main reason they don't charge extra.

For small shops credit card payments cost more, so they charge extra.

 

Making it the same price for everybody is of course easier, and makes perfect sense for a charge which is charged for everybody, like the service charge in restaurants. But a card processing fee isn't incurred by everybody, so it's fair that it's only paid by the person incurring it.

Edited January 5, 2020 by jackdd

[scottiddled]

4 hours ago, evadgib said:

A service charge IS a tip or at least that is how I have always considered it & the law seemed to confirm same.

The law doesn't confirm anything of the sort. There's no requirement that a service charge is given to the staff. A service charge isn't voluntary. Also, your tip doesn't get hit with VAT; a service charge does. 

 

4 hours ago, Just Weird said:

In this case, the additional charges are shown on the menu in the same size font as the description of the menu items.

 

http://jamieoliverkitchen-th.com/downloads/jok_bkk_mainmenu.pdf

Thanks for posting that. I'm not sure that link is the exact same menu, but it might be. For the sake of argument, let's assume that it is. 

 

It's not a clear disclosure. It's on the back cover of the menu, buried under social media stuff and tucked into the back half of a sentence. In the U.S. we have a useful standard for evaluating things when it's hard to draw a bright line. It was advanced by Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart in a case involving (of all things) hard-core pornography. His standard: "I'll know it when I see it."

 

I'm a pretty thorough reader. I didn't get where I am in life without being able to pull out details and analyze texts. If I'm out at a restaurant and I'm curious about a service charge, but I don't see the disclosure, it's not a clear disclosure. I think jackdd's take on this is pretty good, too. But YMMV and you can feel free to advocate for any and all forms of disclosure, including microscopic print in a dead language, if you'd like. 

 

3 hours ago, jackdd said:

The restaurant is luring customers with low prices. Quite a few people here come from countries where this practice would be illegal, to those people it's quite annoying.

If somebody is coming from a country like the USA where prices are also not all inclusive, then this might not be perceived as annoying.

Well said.

Edited January 5, 2020 by scottiddled

[DannyCarlton]

3 hours ago, Moonlover said:

Service charge is for the staff, not for the business.

Naive in the extreme.

[DannyCarlton]

3 hours ago, meand said:

I hope you will forgive me when I say I do not believe every "good place (restaurant)" in Thailand gives their employees 100% of the service fees they charge. 

Or pretty much anywhere else.

[scottiddled]

35 minutes ago, 4MyEgo said:

Tell that to most people paying by cash at the larger department stores, paying by cash no different by paying by card, 6, 2, 1, half dozen the other.

 

It's a far simpler math in my opinion and doesn't rub people up in the wrong way.

 

Your beer is 100 baht sir, paying by card, that's 105 baht, just make it 105 baht, the same way GST is applied, everyone gets bent over regardless, and there is less fuss.

I'll respectfully disagree with you here, even though it might seem counterintuitive given my opposition to service charges.

 

I'm OK with different prices for different forms of payment. I get that it can be frustrating, but this is something directly correllated with the business' cost of taking your payment. 

 

For a long time, I resisted going cashless. The different restaurants and bars would handle credit cards differently, which was confusing. But that confusion was understandable. Whether it was a minimum amount required for a card (i.e. they'll pay the processing fee because at least you spent enough), a cash discount off the menu price, or a surcharge for using a card, as long as it was properly disclosed, I had no issue with it. I actually preferred going to places that had at least one of these policies, since I knew they were passing along the cost of credit card processing to those who actually triggered that cost.

 

The banks don't like this. They support laws, regulations, and/or terms in processing agreements that limit merchants' ability to use two-tiered pricing. They talk a big game about the benefits of a cashless society (and some of their points are valid), but the bottom line is that once they achieve their goal of equilizing prices, they truly have "bent over" everyone, regardless of whether you are taking advantage of paying with a card.

 

So the prices are raised for everyone just to accomodate some. 

 

I still think it's a good idea to more fairly distribute those costs, but I get that (most) merchants have moved on. I eventually did, too, and started taking advantage of credit/debit card reward programs, churning, etc. At least that way I feel like I'm getting something back for the higher prices I pay.

 

 

[evadgib]

12 minutes ago, scottiddled said:

The law doesn't confirm anything of the sort. There's no requirement that a service charge is given to the staff.

Whether or not it's set in stone is anyone's guess, particularly in Thailand, but the board might find THIS useful.

Edited January 5, 2020 by evadgib

[DannyCarlton]

1 hour ago, Golden Triangle said:

On a trip to the US of A many many years ago I used to use the restaurant and bar at the hotel I was staying in, I'd had a few beers at the bar and a meal whilst watching the Pelicans diving for fish, I paid my bill and wandered off to my room, when I went back to the restaurant the following evening the same waitress was on duty and served me, it didn't take her long to address the lack of tip issue

You have no obligation to give a tip. You aren't responsible for paying the staff, the restaurant is. If the waitress has a problem with not recieving enough salary, she should take it up with the manager not the customers. Incredibly rude.

 

No way I would have tolerated that from a waitress. I'd have stood up, urinated in the pelican pond and walked.

[Just Weird]

13 minutes ago, scottiddled said:

But YMMV and you can feel free to advocate for any and all forms of disclosure, including microscopic print in a dead language, if you'd like. 

What's that supposed to mean?  I'm not advocating anything, just pointing out that the disclosure was there in normal font, the same size font as was used in the description of the food on the menu, not "microscopic print".  It was also in English, not in "a dead language"

[scottiddled]

Quote

Scott,

can you share the names of the restaurants you currently avoid that has service charge: perhaps we can start a list 

Yeah, as Charlie notes, it probably goes against the forum rules. I'm not really sure a list of restaurants with service charges is even feasible, as it would easily get into the tens of thousands. I've thought about maybe doing something with a blog I have in the developmental stages, but that would have more to do with farang-hostile businesses/policies.

 

If anything, I might consider some kind of list of businesses with excessive charges or particularly deceptive (i.e. concealed) charges. But it couldn't go on these forums. 

 

This thread was more about the general concept.

[scottiddled]

Just trying to figure out where (if anywhere) you'd draw the line. 

 

I've made it pretty clear that I think the service charge, however disclosed (or not disclosed) is an annoying/deceptive practice. But if it's going to infest Thai dining culture, it at least has to be clearly disclosed. Generally that's going to involve some combination of a sign at the front, a disclosure on the front of the menu, or a disclosure on each menu page. In the example I cited, none of those things happened.

 

I get what you're pointing out, and the point of my point is trying to get you to point out where your threshold is. Why are you pointing out that it's the same "normal font" and "size" if it's on the back of the menu with no food items, unless you think this is a reasonable disclosure? And if you think it's a reasonable disclosure, when does it become unreasonable? 

20 minutes ago, scottiddled said:

I'm a pretty thorough reader. I didn't get where I am in life without being able to pull out details and analyze texts. If I'm out at a restaurant and I'm curious about a service charge, but I don't see the disclosure, it's not a clear disclosure. I think jackdd's take on this is pretty good, too. But YMMV and you can feel free to advocate for any and all forms of disclosure, including microscopic print in a dead language, if you'd like. 

3 minutes ago, Just Weird said:

What's that supposed to mean?  I'm not advocating anything, just pointing out that the disclosure was there in normal font, the same size font as was used in the description of the food on the menu, not "microscopic print".  It was also in English, not in "a dead language"

[DannyCarlton]

2 hours ago, varun said:

Don't really see what the cheap charlies are bitching about.
If you don't like service charges at restaurants, cook at home.

Much easier to use restaurants that display the full price on the menu, not try to hide 17% of the price, as in a large majority of restaurants in Thailand. Not one restaurant that I regularly use displays prices ex VAT and service charge.

[tropo]

4 hours ago, stevenl said:

No, you have to recalculate. I'll help you, the VAT is also calculated over the service charge. nSo as I said " All in all almost 20% extra. ".

LOL.... talk about splitting hairs. The extra 0.7% you're claiming doesn't bring it much closer to 20%. The extra 0.7% wouldn't/shouldn't hurt too many people.

 

I pay 10% service charge quite often in many shopping mall restaurants and don't give a sh*t about it. I factor the cost into the meal and decide if I think it is worth it. I don't tip when I have to pay the 10%. I don't care who gets it or not. Many of these restaurants are huge and well established chains, so making a stand is not going to help. Life is stressful enough without get worked up about things you cannot change. If it bothers one, find a restaurant that doesn't charge it - there are many choices.

[scottiddled]

6 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

Much easier to use restaurants that display the full price on the menu, not try to hide 17% of the price, as in a large majority of restaurants in Thailand. Not one restaurant that I regularly use displays prices ex VAT and service charge.

I agree with you, but here's something to quibble about.

 

Is VAT part of the price? I'd argue it isn't. Semantics, I know.

 

I have no issue with a business not including VAT in their advertised price. I get their motivation to not list a higher price when that money isn't even going to them, especially if a competitor might not list a "NET" price. Most people are used to grappling with added taxes. So while I think it's kind of cool when a menu price is "NET," I get why it doesn't always happen.

 

Hell, I'd really like to see a restaurant list prices and then have a disclosure like this: "Price listed includes VAT and a 10% service charge which is distributed directly to the employees." I'd go out of my way to eat at a place like that (if the disclosure was honest).

 

 

[Number 6]

Sorry the service charge is BS. It's already incorporated into the price, this is just an extra scam no matter the country. Before it never existed here, nor tipping. 

 

The cost of the meal should include everything the proprietor factors in including profit. Am I so dim to think that they have reduced the cost if my meal by 10% and then broken it out into another line item to help me understand the cost of the meal? Of course not.

 

I won't eat anywhere with a stupid service charge or tip. Even VAT. Of course if you're one on the 90% of farang here that don't like and or can't eat Thai then you're stuck. Maybe can open addl thread on how *Thailand* is getting so expensive to live.

 

Service charge is a total scam.

 

Edited January 5, 2020 by Number 6

[DannyCarlton]

5 minutes ago, scottiddled said:

I agree with you, but here's something to quibble about.

 

Is VAT part of the price? I'd argue it isn't. Semantics, I know.

 

I have no issue with a business not including VAT in their advertised price. I get their motivation to not list a higher price when that money isn't even going to them, especially if a competitor might not list a "NET" price. Most people are used to grappling with added taxes. So while I think it's kind of cool when a menu price is "NET," I get why it doesn't always happen.

 

Hell, I'd really like to see a restaurant list prices and then have a disclosure like this: "Price listed includes VAT and a 10% service charge which is distributed directly to the employees." I'd go out of my way to eat at a place like that (if the disclosure was honest).

 

 

Most restaurants in Thailand (and the UK) display prices but make no mention of VAT or service charge. Not an issue. Not my problem if I don't get charged it.

[Number 6]

5 minutes ago, scottiddled said:

I agree with you, but here's something to quibble about.

 

Is VAT part of the price? I'd argue it isn't. Semantics, I know.

 

I have no issue with a business not including VAT in their advertised price. I get their motivation to not list a higher price when that money isn't even going to them, especially if a competitor might not list a "NET" price. Most people are used to grappling with added taxes. So while I think it's kind of cool when a menu price is "NET," I get why it doesn't always happen.

 

Hell, I'd really like to see a restaurant list prices and then have a disclosure like this: "Price listed includes VAT and a 10% service charge which is distributed directly to the employees." I'd go out of my way to eat at a place like that (if the disclosure was honest).

 

 

In US I'd expect tax not to be included. Here I'd expect it not to be included in restaurant food as well. But here's something I'd not considered until I read your post.

 

Everything, I mean everything in Thailand is quoted or priced vat included. Except restaurant meals. So...imo this is shifty and sketchy as well. The meal should have vat included. Pure and simple

[DannyCarlton]

8 minutes ago, scottiddled said:

I agree with you, but here's something to quibble about.

 

Is VAT part of the price? I'd argue it isn't. Semantics, I know.

 

I have no issue with a business not including VAT in their advertised price. I get their motivation to not list a higher price when that money isn't even going to them, especially if a competitor might not list a "NET" price. Most people are used to grappling with added taxes. So while I think it's kind of cool when a menu price is "NET," I get why it doesn't always happen.

 

Hell, I'd really like to see a restaurant list prices and then have a disclosure like this: "Price listed includes VAT and a 10% service charge which is distributed directly to the employees." I'd go out of my way to eat at a place like that (if the disclosure was honest).

 

 

The only thing I want is that the price of a meal displayed on the menu is the price I'm charged for that meal. Not really interested in examining the restaurant's accounts.

[DannyCarlton]

1 minute ago, Number 6 said:

In US I'd expect tax not to be included. Here I'd expect it not to be included in restaurant food as well. But here's something I'd not considered until I read your post.

 

Everything, I mean everything in Thailand is quoted or priced vat included. Except restaurant meals. So...imo this is shifty and sketchy as well. The meal should have vat included. Pure and simple

Most do.