FAA Investigates American Flyers

[SFM]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0311020421nov02,1,1068995.story

FAA report rips DuPage flight school
Records falsified to pass students, investigator finds



By Jon Hilkevitch
Tribune transportation reporter
Published November 2, 2003

A DuPage County-based flight school, one of the largest in the country, has
falsified training records and issued pilot licenses to students who failed
written exams and final cockpit "check rides," according to a Federal
Aviation Administration report.

American Flyers Inc., which is headquartered at DuPage Airport in West
Chicago and has 14 other facilities nationwide, "abuses its authority and
constitutes an immediate threat to the public health and safety," said the
FAA's report.

The report, obtained by the Tribune, was written by a local inspector. The
FAA regional office is reviewing the investigation, which is still
considered open.

The flight school, which is contesting the FAA's findings, denied any
violations that would compromise safety.

The FAA report alleged more than 50 violations involving students awarded
private pilot licenses or commercial pilot licenses at American Flyers
schools at DuPage and Palwaukee Municipal Airport in Wheeling, as well as in
Ft. Worth and Addison, Texas; Morristown, N.J.; and Islip and White Plains
in N.Y.

The findings raise questions about the oversight of flight schools, which
are producing a growing number of the nation's airline pilots.

Until the downsizing of the military, 70 percent of airline pilots came from
the armed forces and 30 percent from general aviation.

The numbers are now reversed. And the FAA, concentrating most of its
resources on monitoring safety in the airline industry, has cut back its
oversight of general aviation.

The FAA investigation of American Flyers identified former personnel at the
school who signed statements saying "they have direct experience in seeing
.... the manipulating of scores of those taking and failing knowledge tests."

Donald Harrington, American Flyers chairman, said the company may be
responsible for paperwork violations. But he blamed the company's problems
on "an overzealous, rogue FAA inspector."

"I am not going to say some of his allegations were not accurate. We are not
perfect, and we did not do all of our paperwork perfectly," said Harrington,
who is principal owner of the school, established more than 60 years ago.

"But it's totally impossible to change a failing grade to a passing grade,"
Harrington said.

"It just didn't happen. Our personnel have no vested interest in cheating."

No terrorism links

The investigation did not focus on possible terrorism links and uncovered
none, an official said.

The FAA probe alleged American Flyers provided incomplete training to
clients, manipulated records and allowed ill-prepared students to pass
flight exams.

American Flyers is one of a limited number of schools permitted to give its
students exams, an authority granted in the early 1990s.

Allowing a school to train, test and issue pilot licenses, officially called
airman certificates, has raised conflict of interest concerns by some.

Students who go to schools without that authority are tested by FAA
examiners or independent pilot examiners.

The FAA report gives several detailed descriptions of how the school
allegedly advanced unqualified student pilots.

A 40-year-old female flight student from Homewood received a private pilot
license from American Flyers on Feb. 17, 2002, even though the school's
assistant chief instructor who gave the test found the student's performance
unsatisfactory, the FAA report said.

Before the test, David Huser, American Flyers' vice president, instructed
the school's assistant chief instructor to pass the student "regardless of
the outcome," according to the FAA probe.

The student failed the test. But the instructor did as told and passed her,
according to the FAA investigation, which was based on statements of
American Flyers employees and students, as well as documents.

A source at the school said American Flyers' officials feared the woman
would stop paying for lessons if she failed.

"She was getting frustrated over her lack of progress in getting her private
[license] and threatened to pull out of the school," the source said.

Asked about the student's case Friday, Huser said: "I wouldn't have any
comment on that. There is no allegation to that effect that has been brought
to my attention or the company's attention."

No attendance records

In some cases, American Flyers students were given credit for courses for
which no attendance records existed, according to the investigation.

At the American Flyers' facility in Houston, there was no record that 30
students who took written tests attended required courses, the FAA found.

A similar failure to document required coursework for 23 students was found
at the school's DuPage center, the report said. "Issuing airmen certificates
after incomplete training calls into question the entire educational and
evaluation process," the report said. "American Flyers has, essentially, a
cash-for-license system."

During the summer of 2002, American Flyers graduated six flight instructor
applicants, although their training records show they did not complete
course requirements, the FAA report said.

In at least some cases, the students were not aware of the irregularities
until being contacted by the FAA.

"My particular class was awesome, though I saw other people who were not as
happy," said Scott Lystrup of Altoona, Wis.

Lystrup, 39, a lobster wholesaler, said he is not flying or instructing full
time now.

Lystrup said he first learned about problems with his training at American
Flyers after he received the second of two instructor ratings from the
school and the FAA contacted him asking for a copy of his logbook.

"Obviously I was very concerned because the FAA inspector said he was
checking into discrepancies," Lystrup said, adding he didn't hear again from
the FAA.

The FAA's flight standards district office at DuPage Airport conducted the
investigation. The FAA's regional office is now reviewing it.

"This is an open review, which means final decisions have not been made,"
said FAA spokeswoman Elizabeth Isham Cory.

Possible action against American Flyers includes fines, elimination of the
school's in-house testing authority, or even revocation of its operating
licenses.

The inspector general's office in the U.S. Department of Transportation has
entered the American Flyers investigation, in part to ensure the FAA probe
remains on track, according to a source.

Designated pilot examiners who tested American Flyers students cooperated
with the FAA investigation.

"All of us out here have been providing example after example to the FAA
investigators," said an examiner who requested anonymity.

"We got into this because the quality of American Flyers applicants has been
poor."

Another examiner said school officials summoned examiners to a meeting and
"screamed bloody murder about us being unfair. But the reality is that a lot
of American Flyers students, who pay premium prices, come out of there
thinking, `I am just great.' If you have someone who is bad and doesn't know
they are bad--like an inability to deal with wind or poor skills flying
instrument [landing] approaches--they generate a whole new series of
problems for everyone else."

After learning of the investigation, American Flyers complained to FAA
headquarters.

"We went to Washington and asked some friends at the FAA to intervene on our
side," Harrington said.

He said he made the request because the FAA inspector overseeing the school
was not treating the school fairly and was citing it for unwarranted
violations.

At American Flyers' request, the FAA took the inspector, Denis Caravella,
off the investigation in August after nine months of work and appointed
another inspector.

The move came only weeks after Luanne Wills-Merrell, manager of the FAA's
DuPage office, wrote to Harrington on July 25: "This office has received
information which leads us to believe that knowledge testing and practical
testing conducted by American Flyers Inc. ... may have been compromised."

Integrity concerns cited

David Hanley, who directs the FAA's flight standards offices in the Great
Lakes region, wrote to Harrington a week earlier citing "ongoing concerns
about the integrity of your written testing process."

Many of the cases the FAA investigated involved people working toward flight
instructor ratings that would enable them to teach beginners to fly.

Other American Flyers students were working toward their advanced pilot
licenses in the hope of landing jobs with airlines or corporations that
operate a fleet of planes.

On July 22, 2002, Senga A. Butts of River Forest received a commercial pilot
license from the flight school's Palwaukee facility in Wheeling.

He received the license despite a finding by an assistant chief instructor
that his performance was unsatisfactory, the investigation found.

The instructor's logbook contained the comment "no way" in describing Butts'
failing performance, according to the report.

The FAA review uncovered the situation and Butts, then 27, received
additional instruction.

He eventually earned his commercial pilot license.

"I was eventually found to be proficient, but the FAA wanted me retested
because the wrong person signed my logbook," he said.

Butts said the foul-up caused him to undergo unnecessary stress and he
blamed American Flyers.

"I thought the training I received from American Flyers was good, but the
school really dropped the ball with the paperwork they messed up on," he
said.

"When it came for them to find my records, they miraculously disappeared."

Some independent flight examiners said allowing a flight school to test its
own students creates a conflict of interest.

"There is obviously an inside interest when a staff member administers the
test," said E. Allan Englehardt, a designated pilot examiner and a Boeing
777 captain for United Airlines.

Harrington said his school is one of the few approved by the FAA to examine
its students.

"It's uncommon because you have to earn it by maintaining unbelievable
record-keeping systems and impeccable airplanes," he said.



--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Scott F. Migaldi, K9PO
MI-150972
PP-ASEL

Are you a PADI Instructor or DM? Then join the PADI
Instructor Yahoo Group at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PADI-Instructors/join
-----------------------------------
Catch the wave!
www.hamwave.com


**"A long time ago being crazy meant something, nowadays everyone is
crazy" -- Charles Manson**
-------------------------------------

[Maule Driver]

I wrote the following after my American Flyer experience some time ago:

Subject: Re: American Flyers
From: Bill W - MauleDriver
Date: Thu Jun 13 13:58:29 2002
My experience 7 years ago wasn't good. They only thing they do well is bill
you. They overbill if possible. Don't ever require a refund because that
will take time. Plenty of planes and CFIs but optimized for cash yield and
little else.
"Helen Woods" > wrote in message
...
> Anyone have any experience with American Flyers in FL? I'm looking for
> someplace to finish my instrument and do a commercial rating. I'm at
> wits end with broken planes, hard to find instructors, etc. at the local
> FBO.
>
> Helen

[C J Campbell]

When I was not progressing on my instrument rating at Sierra Academy, I went
to American Flyers to see if I would benefit from a different approach (so
to speak).

The instructor did not have a hood for me to wear, yet she claimed to be
giving me instrument instruction. We flew several approaches. She
demonstrated complete lack of understanding on how to fly an NDB approach.
She talked so much that we missed several radio calls. She did not know that
when flying a localizer approach that the CDI will work no matter what the
OBS is set to; she thought the CDI was broken!

I expected better of a CFII, so I stayed with SA and finished there. Since
SA was milking me (big time), I switched to AllATPs for the rest of my
ratings. AllATPs did exactly what was promised, no more and no less -- which
meant a lot of time spent on self study. AllATPs got me to the point where I
could pass the check ride, but that was about it. There is something to be
said for this approach, but the graduate has to understand that he has a lot
of work ahead of him. I believe that the depth of instrument training at SA
continues to benefit me to this day. The practical experience of AllATPs
long, multi-day cross country multi-engine training is equally valuable.

If I could construct a custom course, it would be a combination of SA's
ground schools with ATP's flying experience.

[Tom S.]

"Maule Driver" > wrote in message
. com...
> I wrote the following after my American Flyer experience some time ago:
>
> Subject: Re: American Flyers
> From: Bill W - MauleDriver
> Date: Thu Jun 13 13:58:29 2002
> My experience 7 years ago wasn't good. They only thing they do well is
bill
> you. They overbill if possible. Don't ever require a refund because that
> will take time.

That sounds like most every American company I've dealt with in the last ten
years -- Customer Service is open from 9:00 AM until 4:00PM, but the
Collections Dept. is open from 5:00 AM until midnight. Typical operation
when an MBA is running the show :~)

[Maule Driver]

"Tom S." > wrote in message
> > My experience 7 years ago wasn't good. They only thing they do well is
> bill
> > you. They overbill if possible. Don't ever require a refund because that
> > will take time.
>
> That sounds like most every American company I've dealt with in the last
ten
> years -- Customer Service is open from 9:00 AM until 4:00PM, but the
> Collections Dept. is open from 5:00 AM until midnight. Typical operation
> when an MBA is running the show :~)
>
Thanks for commiserating but perhaps too broad a brush. Everything about
American Flyers smelled like "produce revenue while providing the absolute
mininum in service and value". Started with a manual with out of date FARs
and 10th generation unreadable copies. Three different CFIs on 3 trips
despite assurances of a single instructor. Ended when I finished with an
overpayment for unused flight time. Whatever the process was for getting a
refund, no one there could do it and surely it would require me to return
home and do it over the phone. 10 days minimum! When I made it clear that
I wasn't walking out the door without it and started to enlist other
students to help me figure out what was going on, a refund was made. There
was nothing in dispute.... just BS.

Anyway, making money is a fine thing -- I admire it. Making money by giving
people a high quality product/service, the way the want it, is most
admirable. ATP Inc. clearly knows how to close a sale and collect a bill.
But they offer a quality package of instructional services in quality planes
with well trained instructors working well designed sylabi (whatever). What
they sell is not for everyone and every situation but it is clearly
described, delivered as promised, and done with flexibility within a tightly
controlled program. I gladly pay for that.

I went into American Flyers (Florida) with a positive expectation but caught
the stench within 10 mins. Should have trusted my instincts. I have no
problem dissing them and hope the FAA takes them down. Sometimes 'market
forces' aren't enough.

[Roy Smith]

Maule Driver > wrote:
> Everything about American Flyers smelled like "produce revenue while
> providing the absolute mininum in service and value".

I only have one experience with AF. They took over the flight school
ops from Westair at White Plains a couple of years ago (I'm not sure
why, but I suspect what was going on was the airport squezed Westair
on rent when they tore down Westair's old building and put up a fancy
new one). I took a couple of hours of in their simulator.

When I paid my bill, I was astounded when they tacked on a few extra
bucks to cover credit card transaction fees! It wasn't a whole lot of
money, but I've never heard of anybody ever doing anything like that.
I didn't even think it was legal.

[Larry Dighera]

On 4 Nov 2003 11:38:52 -0500, (Roy Smith) wrote in
Message-Id: >:

>When I paid my bill, I was astounded when they tacked on a few extra
>bucks to cover credit card transaction fees! It wasn't a whole lot of
>money, but I've never heard of anybody ever doing anything like that.
>I didn't even think it was legal.

Since 1984, when a Truth in Lending law ban on surcharges expired,
some states have enacted laws prohibiting surcharges; see States
That Prohibit Credit Card Surcharges:

http://www.gofso.com/Premium/LE/06_le_ic/fg/fg-merchants.html#MORE:B

[Maule Driver]

"Roy Smith" >
> > Everything about American Flyers smelled like "produce revenue while
> > providing the absolute mininum in service and value".
>
> I only have one experience with AF....
>
> When I paid my bill, I was astounded when they tacked on a few extra
> bucks to cover credit card transaction fees! It wasn't a whole lot of
> money, but I've never heard of anybody ever doing anything like that.
> I didn't even think it was legal.
That's funny. That may have been the reason I paid by check and found it so
hard to get a refund. I *never* pay by check. But given a transaction fee,
I would.

You know, I can't quite justify calling them scumbags....

[MRQB]

It is against visa/mastercard rules call visa/master card file a complaint
if you have proof send them the recipe with the surcharge they will credit
you back for it. i will not deal with any company that dose a surcharge for
taking credit card and if i find one that is charging i report them ASAP. i
take credit cards in my business i pay 0.9% + $0.10 per transaction that is
a min cost that will get me another customer that wants to use a credit card
and it also is a business cost witch at tax time helps.



"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> Maule Driver > wrote:
> > Everything about American Flyers smelled like "produce revenue while
> > providing the absolute mininum in service and value".
>
> I only have one experience with AF. They took over the flight school
> ops from Westair at White Plains a couple of years ago (I'm not sure
> why, but I suspect what was going on was the airport squezed Westair
> on rent when they tore down Westair's old building and put up a fancy
> new one). I took a couple of hours of in their simulator.
>
> When I paid my bill, I was astounded when they tacked on a few extra
> bucks to cover credit card transaction fees! It wasn't a whole lot of
> money, but I've never heard of anybody ever doing anything like that.
> I didn't even think it was legal.

[Rosspilot]

I take credit card payments all the time and can say with certainty that both
Mastercard and Visa prohibit their participating merchants from charging more
for using the credit card. It may not be illegal, but it violates the
merchant's contractual obligation to MC and Visa.
www.Rosspilot.com

[Ron Natalie]

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message ...

> When I paid my bill, I was astounded when they tacked on a few extra
> bucks to cover credit card transaction fees! It wasn't a whole lot of
> money, but I've never heard of anybody ever doing anything like that.
> I didn't even think it was legal.

Whether they can pass on the credit card fees depends on what state you're
in. It's legal here (Virginia) but not in California.

[Peter Duniho]

"Rosspilot" > wrote in message
...
> I take credit card payments all the time and can say with certainty that
both
> Mastercard and Visa prohibit their participating merchants from charging
more
> for using the credit card. It may not be illegal, but it violates the
> merchant's contractual obligation to MC and Visa.

Unfortunately, either not all merchants are bound by that requirement, or
not all merchants abide by that requirement. There is no shortage of
retailers who DO charge more for credit card purchases.

[G.R. Patterson III]

MRQB wrote:
>
> i will not deal with any company that dose a surcharge for
> taking credit card and if i find one that is charging i report them ASAP.

Really? And in your opinion, what is the difference between that and a discount
for paying by cash or check?

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

[Gig Giacona]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Rosspilot" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I take credit card payments all the time and can say with certainty that
> both
> > Mastercard and Visa prohibit their participating merchants from charging
> more
> > for using the credit card. It may not be illegal, but it violates the
> > merchant's contractual obligation to MC and Visa.
>
> Unfortunately, either not all merchants are bound by that requirement, or
> not all merchants abide by that requirement. There is no shortage of
> retailers who DO charge more for credit card purchases.
>
>

Then you really should tell your card provider. They will often refund you
the fees and get very ****y with the merchant.

[Maule Driver]

"G.R. Patterson III" > > >
> > i will not deal with any company that dose a surcharge for
> > taking credit card and if i find one that is charging i report them
ASAP.
>
> Really? And in your opinion, what is the difference between that and a
discount
> for paying by cash or check?
>
None except better salesmanship.

[Peter Gottlieb]

I asked that when I heard about that rule and the rep told me it was not
permissible to charge different amounts for cash vs. credit, so either way
was in violation of their agreement.

It is still done all the time; just about all ultra discount internet
electronics junk outfits do it. Perhaps the card issuers don't bother going
after merchants for that.

I am surprised that a supposedly reputable company tries that, it is
terrible customer relations.

After American Flyers took over Westair's training I was in the market for
training towards my instrument rating and decided to go to AF for my BFR. I
did it in just about the minimum required time for air and ground work and
the bill was a tad over $400. A friend had a nearly identical experience
with them so that must be what they charge for BFRs. Perhaps that was a
good thing, though, as that made me decide not to go there for my instrument
training.

Peter



"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> MRQB wrote:
> >
> > i will not deal with any company that dose a surcharge for
> > taking credit card and if i find one that is charging i report them
ASAP.
>
> Really? And in your opinion, what is the difference between that and a
discount
> for paying by cash or check?
>
> George Patterson
> If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money
prolonging
> the problem.

[John Galban]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message >...
> "Roy Smith" > wrote in message ...
>
> > When I paid my bill, I was astounded when they tacked on a few extra
> > bucks to cover credit card transaction fees! It wasn't a whole lot of
> > money, but I've never heard of anybody ever doing anything like that.
> > I didn't even think it was legal.
>
> Whether they can pass on the credit card fees depends on what state you're
> in. It's legal here (Virginia) but not in California.

That's interesting. Just about every FBO I ever visit offers a
lower "cash" price for the purchase of fuel (some even in California).
Is that the same thing as passing on credit card fees?

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Dave Stadt]

"Peter Gottlieb" > wrote in message
t...
> I asked that when I heard about that rule and the rep told me it was not
> permissible to charge different amounts for cash vs. credit, so either way
> was in violation of their agreement.
>
> It is still done all the time; just about all ultra discount internet
> electronics junk outfits do it. Perhaps the card issuers don't bother
going
> after merchants for that.
>
> I am surprised that a supposedly reputable company tries that, it is
> terrible customer relations.
>
> After American Flyers took over Westair's training I was in the market for
> training towards my instrument rating and decided to go to AF for my BFR.
I
> did it in just about the minimum required time for air and ground work and
> the bill was a tad over $400. A friend had a nearly identical experience
> with them so that must be what they charge for BFRs. Perhaps that was a
> good thing, though, as that made me decide not to go there for my
instrument
> training.
>
> Peter

$400 for an hour of flight time and two hours of CFI time? That's beyond
absured.

[Roy Smith]

(John Galban) wrote:
> That's interesting. Just about every FBO I ever visit offers a
> lower "cash" price for the purchase of fuel (some even in California).
> Is that the same thing as passing on credit card fees?

The difference is representation. I had no idea I was going to be
paying a "transaction fee" until they handed me the credit slip to sign.
The sign on the wall says (figuratively), "Simulator: $100/hr, including
instructor. We accept Visa and Mastercard" (don't hold me to the actual
dollar amount, I don't remember exactly). At the end of the session,
the tach on the sim shows I used (for example) 1.5 hours, so I expect to
pay $150. I also expect to pay sales tax on top of that, even though
the sign doesn't say "plus tax".

If they hand me a charge slip for $150 sim time plus $5 "transaction
fee" plus tax, they've misrepresented the cost to me at the time I was
able to make an informed decision as to whether I wanted to buy what
they were selling. I've been cheated out of $5.

On the other hand, if they say to me at settlement time, "We offer a $5
discount if you pay by check", there's no deception (at least none that
harms me). I can decide I want to save the $5 and write them a check,
or I can just hand them my credit card and get the deal I was expecting.
If I didn't have my checkbook with me, I might be annoyed that I'm
missing out on an opportunity to save $5, but at least I'm not paying
any more than I contracted for.

It's possible they're violating the terms of their agreement with the
credit company, but that's no skin off my back.

[Tom Fleischman]

In article >, Peter
Gottlieb > wrote:

> I asked that when I heard about that rule and the rep told me it was not
> permissible to charge different amounts for cash vs. credit, so either way
> was in violation of their agreement.

What about all the gas stations that have a cash price and a credit
price?

I haven't seen as much of that in the past couple of years, but it was
common practice at most gas stations up until just recently.

[aaronw]

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 11:23:45 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote:

>Unfortunately, either not all merchants are bound by that requirement, or
>not all merchants abide by that requirement. There is no shortage of
>retailers who DO charge more for credit card purchases.

If you read the prices carefully, most places will say 'cash discount'
instead of 'credit surcharge'.

This is how they get around that ruling. The price is the stated
price, but if the customer happens to pay you cash, then if you decide
to charge them 5% less, that's your deal.

If they *actually* come out and say '2% more for credit card
purchases' they are almost certainly in violation of their merchant
agreement.

aw

[Peter Duniho]

"aaronw" > wrote in message
...
> This is how they get around that ruling. The price is the stated
> price, but if the customer happens to pay you cash, then if you decide
> to charge them 5% less, that's your deal.

My understanding is that the rules do not differentiate between the two
situations. If customers are granted a lower price for not using a credit
card, that's in violation of the merchant agreement. No matter how it's
worded.

Pete

[MRQB]

If it is $100.00 an hour and you have 1.50 hours should be $150.00 and if
they give you a $5.00 cash discount should be $145.00 most reputable
business when figuring their profit add in the credit card fees in to their
expenses so that they can recoup their fees or they will just use it as a
business expense and get the tax benefits. on the other hand you get the
company's that like to make more profit from a transaction fee of $5.00 on a
$100.00 transaction costs them $2.20 + $0.40 = $2.60 they are making $2.40
then since it is a transaction fee they can still claim the $2.60 on their
taxes as a expense as they can say the fee is for something else rather than
credit card surcharge. now times that by 10 to 1000 transaction fees a day
then by 365.

Yes credit card merchant service will cancel any merchant that is charging a
surcharge unless that surcharge/fee is for all types of payment including
cash. it don't matter who the merchant account is through
Visa/Mastercard/Amex/ All of them state in their contract with you that is
if you have a surcharge it must apply to all forums of payment and any
violation of this could result in termination of contract and future
merchant services, charge back and or legal action. Yes some states may
allow it but Visa/Mastercard/Amex/ do not. Novus/Discover Allow it in my
contract.

If American Flyers gets probed hard enough from one federal agency they may
get probed by another that may expose the double dipping. I have merchant
accounts and have had legal council about applying a surcharge but decided
the tax benefits are a bit better than passing the costs on to the consumer.
But enough business talk lets get back to the fun stuff Flying.

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
> (John Galban) wrote:
> > That's interesting. Just about every FBO I ever visit offers a
> > lower "cash" price for the purchase of fuel (some even in California).
> > Is that the same thing as passing on credit card fees?
>
> The difference is representation. I had no idea I was going to be
> paying a "transaction fee" until they handed me the credit slip to sign.
> The sign on the wall says (figuratively), "Simulator: $100/hr, including
> instructor. We accept Visa and Mastercard" (don't hold me to the actual
> dollar amount, I don't remember exactly). At the end of the session,
> the tach on the sim shows I used (for example) 1.5 hours, so I expect to
> pay $150. I also expect to pay sales tax on top of that, even though
> the sign doesn't say "plus tax".
>
> If they hand me a charge slip for $150 sim time plus $5 "transaction
> fee" plus tax, they've misrepresented the cost to me at the time I was
> able to make an informed decision as to whether I wanted to buy what
> they were selling. I've been cheated out of $5.
>
> On the other hand, if they say to me at settlement time, "We offer a $5
> discount if you pay by check", there's no deception (at least none that
> harms me). I can decide I want to save the $5 and write them a check,
> or I can just hand them my credit card and get the deal I was expecting.
> If I didn't have my checkbook with me, I might be annoyed that I'm
> missing out on an opportunity to save $5, but at least I'm not paying
> any more than I contracted for.
>
> It's possible they're violating the terms of their agreement with the
> credit company, but that's no skin off my back.

[Ron Natalie]

"Roy Smith" > wrote in message ...

> If they hand me a charge slip for $150 sim time plus $5 "transaction
> fee" plus tax, they've misrepresented the cost to me at the time I was
> able to make an informed decision as to whether I wanted to buy what
> they were selling. I've been cheated out of $5.

This is precisely the reason for the law (when it was still a federal law).

[Ron Natalie]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...

> What about all the gas stations that have a cash price and a credit
> price?
>
> I haven't seen as much of that in the past couple of years, but it was
> common practice at most gas stations up until just recently

I haven't seen such a thing in decades and I've lived and travelled
through many states. I remember it briefly in the early eighties and
the stations allowed you to avoid it by using "their" credit card and
I had a bunch of gas cards as a result. I terminated all of them when
they went back to taking VISA/MC for the same price. Most of the
OIL cards now are logo'd VISA/MC/AMEX cards now anyhow.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Ron Natalie wrote:
>
> I haven't seen such a thing in decades and I've lived and travelled
> through many states.

Well, it isn't exactly a gas station, but Old Bridge airport gives a ten cent
per gallon discount if you pay with cash, check, or a Phillips card. There are
two prices posted on the pump.

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

[Peter R.]

Peter Gottlieb ) wrote:

>
> It is still done all the time; just about all ultra discount internet
> electronics junk outfits do it.

No doubt they do this so the unsuspecting consumer has no recourse after
s/he receives their order, assuming that even happens.

Stay far away from those e-tailers, or at least look here first:

www.resellerratings.com

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

[Tom S.]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
> I haven't seen such a thing in decades and I've lived and travelled
> through many states. I remember it briefly in the early eighties and
> the stations allowed you to avoid it by using "their" credit card and
> I had a bunch of gas cards as a result. I terminated all of them when
> they went back to taking VISA/MC for the same price. Most of the
> OIL cards now are logo'd VISA/MC/AMEX cards now anyhow.
>
When Debit cards came out a few years back, many merchants were charging
about 25 cents for DEBIT transactions until it was widely pointed out that a
debit transaction cost much less (one cent) than processing a paper check.

The AM/PM gas stations (ARCO) around here kept the practice in place for
about two years after the other merchants went to doing it free. I stopped
going to those stations and don't know if they STILL do it.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
> rthlink.net...
>
> > What about all the gas stations that have a cash price and a credit
> > price?
> >
> > I haven't seen as much of that in the past couple of years, but it was
> > common practice at most gas stations up until just recently
>
> I haven't seen such a thing in decades and I've lived and travelled
> through many states. I remember it briefly in the early eighties and
> the stations allowed you to avoid it by using "their" credit card and
> I had a bunch of gas cards as a result. I terminated all of them when
> they went back to taking VISA/MC for the same price. Most of the
> OIL cards now are logo'd VISA/MC/AMEX cards now anyhow.

Diesel is nearly always double (cash/credit) priced at truck stops in
California.
>

[Kevin McCue]

There was just a class action settlement on check/debit cards. The
merchants "won" (acutally the lawyers got money) the merchants can now stop
taking those Visa/Mastercard debit/check cards. ARCO stations get around it
by not taking credit cards at all. They have ATM's where you can get cash to
feed the pumps.
As for my business, we take cards. When asked if we take credit cards,
our response is, "We prefer cash or check." I have made a few sales that
entered "negotiations" (aka Let's make a deal). When I have given a
discounted price I have insisted on cash or check. I'm sure you all like to
get paid 100% of what you have worked for, Merchants are no exception.

--
Kevin McCue
KRYN
'47 Luscombe 8E
Rans S-17 (for sale)




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Newps]

Kevin McCue wrote:
They have ATM's where you can get cash to
> feed the pumps.

At a buck and a half a transaction fee.

[Ron Natalie]

"Newps" > wrote in message news:E4dqb.115094$e01.418574@attbi_s02...
>
>
> Kevin McCue wrote:
> They have ATM's where you can get cash to
> > feed the pumps.
>
> At a buck and a half a transaction fee.
>
Of course, not an issue if you have a bank that rebates the ATM charges.

[Newps]

Ron Natalie wrote:
> "Newps" > wrote in message news:E4dqb.115094$e01.418574@attbi_s02...
>
>>
>>Kevin McCue wrote:
>>They have ATM's where you can get cash to
>>
>>>feed the pumps.
>>
>>At a buck and a half a transaction fee.
>>
>
> Of course, not an issue if you have a bank that rebates the ATM charges.
>

Must be an eastern thing, never heard of that.

[Ron Natalie]

"Newps" > wrote in message news:ygdqb.113585$Fm2.101748@attbi_s04...
>

>
> Must be an eastern thing, never heard of that.
>
Actually, it's an "internet bank" thing. Since these have no brick and mortar branches (and
hence ATM's), they will generally credit you the charges back for whatever ones you do use.

['Vejita' S. Cousin]

In article >, Roy Smith > wrote:
>When I paid my bill, I was astounded when they tacked on a few extra
>bucks to cover credit card transaction fees! It wasn't a whole lot of
>money, but I've never heard of anybody ever doing anything like that.
>I didn't even think it was legal.

It's done but not a common practice. The University of Washington
(where I'm a student) charges $4 processing fees for payments below $250
and a $20+ (forget exact amount) fee for credit card payments above that.
Most busniess eat the fees (ie. pass it along in hidden costs) for
processing and eqp. Some don't. It's crap either way thou...

['Vejita' S. Cousin]

In article >,
>When Debit cards came out a few years back, many merchants were charging
>about 25 cents for DEBIT transactions until it was widely pointed out that a
>debit transaction cost much less (one cent) than processing a paper check.
>
>The AM/PM gas stations (ARCO) around here kept the practice in place for
>about two years after the other merchants went to doing it free. I stopped
>going to those stations and don't know if they STILL do it.

I've always wondered why I can use my debit card w/o a service charge
any place EXCEPT a bank :) I can even get cash back, but there's no extra
fee. But if I go to a cash machine...

[Kevin McCue]

Compass Bank in AZ will rebate any bank's ATM fees.

--
Kevin McCue
KRYN
'47 Luscombe 8E
Rans S-17 (for sale)




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Doug]

Although I understand your frustration, I would throw in the towel and
get with the credit cards. Cash is going to be obsolete and so are
checks. Credit card and wire transfer are going to be King. It's just
the way it is, more convenient, faster for everyone. Your customer
loves them. It's what is happening.

"Kevin McCue" > wrote in message >...
> There was just a class action settlement on check/debit cards. The
> merchants "won" (acutally the lawyers got money) the merchants can now stop
> taking those Visa/Mastercard debit/check cards. ARCO stations get around it
> by not taking credit cards at all. They have ATM's where you can get cash to
> feed the pumps.
> As for my business, we take cards. When asked if we take credit cards,
> our response is, "We prefer cash or check." I have made a few sales that
> entered "negotiations" (aka Let's make a deal). When I have given a
> discounted price I have insisted on cash or check. I'm sure you all like to
> get paid 100% of what you have worked for, Merchants are no exception.
>
> --
> Kevin McCue
> KRYN
> '47 Luscombe 8E
> Rans S-17 (for sale)
>
>
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

[Wizard of Draws]

Doug wrote:
>
> Although I understand your frustration, I would throw in the towel and
> get with the credit cards. Cash is going to be obsolete and so are
> checks. Credit card and wire transfer are going to be King. It's just
> the way it is, more convenient, faster for everyone. Your customer
> loves them. It's what is happening.
>

Just like that 'paperless office' we keep hearing about, while
simultaneously being buried under an ever increasing avalanche of it?
Pardon the pun, but I don't buy it. <g>
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

"Cartoons with a Touch of Magic"
http://www.wizardofdraws.com
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

[Big John]

Roy

On many occasions I find that the seller sticks on the cost of getting
their money from the credit card companies.

Others just eat this service charge or adjust their price to include.
Normally runs a few % points but in long run adds up to a lot of money
especially if they are pricing with minimum profit (low markup).

American Express seems to be the most expensive and you will find many
firms not accepting AE credit cards for this reason..

Big John


On 4 Nov 2003 11:38:52 -0500, (Roy Smith) wrote:

>Maule Driver > wrote:
>> Everything about American Flyers smelled like "produce revenue while
>> providing the absolute mininum in service and value".
>
>I only have one experience with AF. They took over the flight school
>ops from Westair at White Plains a couple of years ago (I'm not sure
>why, but I suspect what was going on was the airport squezed Westair
>on rent when they tore down Westair's old building and put up a fancy
>new one). I took a couple of hours of in their simulator.
>
>When I paid my bill, I was astounded when they tacked on a few extra
>bucks to cover credit card transaction fees! It wasn't a whole lot of
>money, but I've never heard of anybody ever doing anything like that.
>I didn't even think it was legal.

[Big John]

Rosspilot

So what do you do?. Just add your cost of CC service to the posted
price? If someone comes in and pays cash then you make more profit?

Big John

On 04 Nov 2003 17:08:49 GMT, (Rosspilot)
wrote:

>I take credit card payments all the time and can say with certainty that both
>Mastercard and Visa prohibit their participating merchants from charging more
>for using the credit card. It may not be illegal, but it violates the
>merchant's contractual obligation to MC and Visa.
>www.Rosspilot.com
>

[Tom S.]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Newps" > wrote in message
news:ygdqb.113585$Fm2.101748@attbi_s04...
> >
>
> >
> > Must be an eastern thing, never heard of that.
> >
> Actually, it's an "internet bank" thing. Since these have no brick and
mortar branches (and
> hence ATM's), they will generally credit you the charges back for whatever
ones you do use.

Considering it costs about $100K for each ATM, plus periodic maintenance,
it's great business sense for the eBanks to use competitors machines (which
are in place, at great cost) and just refund the fees the ATM owner charges.
Their customers would have to use EACH SINGLE ATM machine 30,000 to 50,000
times to cover the cost of having their own.

[Tom S.]

"'Vejita' S. Cousin" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> >When Debit cards came out a few years back, many merchants were charging
> >about 25 cents for DEBIT transactions until it was widely pointed out
that a
> >debit transaction cost much less (one cent) than processing a paper
check.
> >
> >The AM/PM gas stations (ARCO) around here kept the practice in place for
> >about two years after the other merchants went to doing it free. I
stopped
> >going to those stations and don't know if they STILL do it.
>
> I've always wondered why I can use my debit card w/o a service charge
> any place EXCEPT a bank :) I can even get cash back, but there's no extra
> fee. But if I go to a cash machine...

Because the machines in place at merchants are paid for _by the merchant_.
The ATM machines you use from a competitor bank cost the competitor bank
around $100,000 to install and setup.

[Tom S.]

"Kevin McCue" > wrote in message
...
> Compass Bank in AZ will rebate any bank's ATM fees.
>
>
Because they own no machines outside their own locations (typically
Albertson's food stores).

[Captain Wubba]

"Tom S." > wrote in message >...
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >
> > "Newps" > wrote in message
> news:ygdqb.113585$Fm2.101748@attbi_s04...
> > >
>
> > >
> > > Must be an eastern thing, never heard of that.
> > >
> > Actually, it's an "internet bank" thing. Since these have no brick and
> mortar branches (and
> > hence ATM's), they will generally credit you the charges back for whatever
> ones you do use.
>
> Considering it costs about $100K for each ATM, plus periodic maintenance,
> it's great business sense for the eBanks to use competitors machines (which
> are in place, at great cost) and just refund the fees the ATM owner charges.
> Their customers would have to use EACH SINGLE ATM machine 30,000 to 50,000
> times to cover the cost of having their own.

Just a minor correction. It costs nowhere *near* $100,000 for an ATM.
Cash dispensers can cost as little as $10,000, while good full-service
ATMs can be had for $25,000. We just installed a new drive-through ATM
at one of our branches. Total costs for the ATM + installation came to
under $32,000. The ongoing costs are significant, but certainly not
outrageous. The breakeven numbers for cash dispensers in particular
are very low indeed.

Cheers,

Cap

[aaronw]

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 21:18:06 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote:

>My understanding is that the rules do not differentiate between the two
>situations. If customers are granted a lower price for not using a credit
>card, that's in violation of the merchant agreement. No matter how it's
>worded.

Quite possible - it had been a while since I looked at that, but
that's how I remember reading it 'somewhere', but I don't remember
where that was.

aw

[Ron Natalie]

"Tom S." > wrote in message ...

> Considering it costs about $100K for each ATM, plus periodic maintenance,
> it's great business sense for the eBanks to use competitors machines (which
> are in place, at great cost) and just refund the fees the ATM owner charges.
> Their customers would have to use EACH SINGLE ATM machine 30,000 to 50,000
> times to cover the cost of having their own.

The cost would also involve finding someplace to put it. Perhaps with some national
aliance with some place like 7-11 or Exxon stations could do it, but otherwise they'd
have to real scramble to arrange with people to allow them to install these things.

By the way, I only paid $20 for my ATM, and I think I bid too high.

[Rosspilot]

>Rosspilot
>
>So what do you do?. Just add your cost of CC service to the posted
>price? If someone comes in and pays cash then you make more profit?

Exactly. I look at several things . . . first,
the margins on what I sell are sufficient to absorb the small percentage taken
by the CC company. Second, it is safe to assume that if you don't accept the
card, some customers might not buy anything at all. THAT cuts the profit
significantly <G>.
Third, the cost of accepting CC is more than offset by the immediacy of getting
paid. No reminders letters, statements, waiting for 30 days, etc. The money
is in my operating account within a day.


www.Rosspilot.com

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Doug wrote:

> Although I understand your frustration, I would throw in the towel and
> get with the credit cards. Cash is going to be obsolete and so are
> checks. Credit card and wire transfer are going to be King. It's just
> the way it is, more convenient, faster for everyone. Your customer loves
> them. It's what is happening.

Maybe customers wouldn't love them as much if they knew how much they add
to the cost of their purchase. Credit card sales cost merchants a lot
more than most people realize. Of course, that comes out of the
merchant's pocket... but where do you think the merchant's money comes
from? All in all, cash is a much better deal for both customer &
merchant; the only ones who win when a credit card is used are those in
the business of issuing credit cards or processing transactions.

-Dan

[Peter Gottlieb]

> wrote in message
rg...
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003, Doug wrote:
>
> Maybe customers wouldn't love them as much if they knew how much they add
> to the cost of their purchase. Credit card sales cost merchants a lot
> more than most people realize. Of course, that comes out of the
> merchant's pocket... but where do you think the merchant's money comes
> from? All in all, cash is a much better deal for both customer &
> merchant; the only ones who win when a credit card is used are those in
> the business of issuing credit cards or processing transactions.

On significant purchases where I am going to use a credit card I ask if cash
would be preferrable and in 99.9% of the cases merchants say they prefer the
card.

[Maule Driver]

"Big John" > wrote in message
...
> American Express seems to be the most expensive and you will find many
> firms not accepting AE credit cards for this reason..
>
And consumers like me preferring to use AE. Why? My perception that they
offer the most protection against erroneous, disputed, and fraudulent
charges. But especially because of there willingness to resolve such
problems acting as an advocate of the consumer. This 'advocacy' may be true
in fact or simply perception on my part but that's why I use AE.

[Tom S.]

"Captain Wubba" > wrote in message
om...
> > Considering it costs about $100K for each ATM, plus periodic
maintenance,
> > it's great business sense for the eBanks to use competitors machines
(which
> > are in place, at great cost) and just refund the fees the ATM owner
charges.
> > Their customers would have to use EACH SINGLE ATM machine 30,000 to
50,000
> > times to cover the cost of having their own.
>
> Just a minor correction. It costs nowhere *near* $100,000 for an ATM.
> Cash dispensers can cost as little as $10,000, while good full-service
> ATMs can be had for $25,000.

Sorry...I was using early 1990's numbers. I'm sure the price has declined
since much of the early costs were often for the secure network which is now
ubiquitous.

[Tom S.]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Tom S." > wrote in message
...
>
> > Considering it costs about $100K for each ATM, plus periodic
maintenance,
> > it's great business sense for the eBanks to use competitors machines
(which
> > are in place, at great cost) and just refund the fees the ATM owner
charges.
> > Their customers would have to use EACH SINGLE ATM machine 30,000 to
50,000
> > times to cover the cost of having their own.
>
> The cost would also involve finding someplace to put it. Perhaps with
some national
> aliance with some place like 7-11 or Exxon stations could do it, but
otherwise they'd
> have to real scramble to arrange with people to allow them to install
these things.
>
> By the way, I only paid $20 for my ATM, and I think I bid too high.

Does it burn your fingers?

[Ron Natalie]

"Tom S." > wrote in message ...
>

> >
> > By the way, I only paid $20 for my ATM, and I think I bid too high.
>
> Does it burn your fingers?
>
Nope, I obtained it legitmately. I picked it up at an RTC auction along with a
whole pile of office furniture.

[Peter Gottlieb]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Tom S." > wrote in message
...
> >
>
> > >
> > > By the way, I only paid $20 for my ATM, and I think I bid too high.
> >
> > Does it burn your fingers?
> >
> Nope, I obtained it legitmately. I picked it up at an RTC auction along
with a
> whole pile of office furniture.
>
>


The real cost is in moving it.

[Ron Natalie]

"Peter Gottlieb" > wrote in message et...


>
> The real cost is in moving it.
>
It had wheels. It wasn't anywhere near as heavy as the desk/credenza set I also
bought.

[Peter Duniho]

> wrote in message
rg...
> Maybe customers wouldn't love them as much if they knew how much they add
> to the cost of their purchase.

By "customers", you mean the same idiots that feed anywhere from $1.50 to
$3.00 or more to banks just for the privilege of saving those banks money?

Right. As if those customers really care.

That assumes, of course, that allowing credit cards is actually a net loss
for the merchant. Not a foregone conclusion at all, since many factors are
improved when a merchant allows credit cards, including reduced fraud and
more sales.

Pete

[Bob Gardner]

Out here in the wild and wooly, having a cash price and a credit price is
SOP.

Bob Gardner

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
> rthlink.net...
>
> > What about all the gas stations that have a cash price and a credit
> > price?
> >
> > I haven't seen as much of that in the past couple of years, but it was
> > common practice at most gas stations up until just recently
>
> I haven't seen such a thing in decades and I've lived and travelled
> through many states. I remember it briefly in the early eighties and
> the stations allowed you to avoid it by using "their" credit card and
> I had a bunch of gas cards as a result. I terminated all of them when
> they went back to taking VISA/MC for the same price. Most of the
> OIL cards now are logo'd VISA/MC/AMEX cards now anyhow.
>
>

[Robert Perkins]

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 20:21:07 -0600, Big John >
wrote:

>Rosspilot
>
>So what do you do?. Just add your cost of CC service to the posted
>price? If someone comes in and pays cash then you make more profit?

That's right, more or less. Likely it comes to less of a markup than
that, meaning the cash customer is penalized in general. But the
markup gets applied evenly, all around.

Just as a corrolary, you'll see that with cash arrangments at the
doctor's office, too. His list price for your physical exam might be
$100. If you pay cash, you'll get a discount, say $5. Neat, eh?

The insurance companies he deals with will pay him $48. Medicare will
pay him $25.

Cash price for my daughter's amoxicillin at the pharmacist? $53 (no
kidding!) My copay was $15, the insurance company chipped in another
$9, which the pharmacist might see before the next Ice Age glacier
rolls over his store. Hmm. $53 cash price/ $24 insurance price?

So, yes, if someone pays cash you *do* make more profit. On that item.
Congratulations, cash buyer: you just paid the administrative costs of
everyone else being on an aggregate guaranteed payment program.

On a much *much* larger scale, you see that kind of thing in the
disparity of drug prices between the U.S. and Canada.

Rob

--
[You] don't make your kids P.C.-proof by keeping them
ignorant, you do it by helping them learn how to
educate themselves.

-- Orson Scott Card

[Jessica F]

Ron Natalie wrote:

> "Roy Smith" > wrote in message ...
>
> > When I paid my bill, I was astounded when they tacked on a few extra
> > bucks to cover credit card transaction fees! It wasn't a whole lot of
> > money, but I've never heard of anybody ever doing anything like that.
> > I didn't even think it was legal.
>
> Whether they can pass on the credit card fees depends on what state you're
> in. It's legal here (Virginia) but not in California.

Regardless of what state you live in, both Mastercard and Visa prohibit surcharging.
(They do allow cash discounts subtracted from the price.) American Express prohibits
surcharging when other cards do (e.g. Mastercard or Visa). I believe Novus prohibits
it too, but am not sure.

By the way, they also prohibit minimum purchase amounts.

Mastercard and Visa DO enforce their merchant agreements, and will be happy to
investigate problems. You can contact them at their websites.

Mastercard Policy:
http://global.mastercard.com/my/consumer/cust_serv.html

Visa Policy:
http://usa.visa.com/media/business/ecomm_merch_guide.pdf

[Jessica F]

"'Vejita' S. Cousin" wrote:

> In article >, Roy Smith > wrote:
> >When I paid my bill, I was astounded when they tacked on a few extra
> >bucks to cover credit card transaction fees! It wasn't a whole lot of
> >money, but I've never heard of anybody ever doing anything like that.
> >I didn't even think it was legal.
>
> It's done but not a common practice. The University of Washington
> (where I'm a student) charges $4 processing fees for payments below $250
> and a $20+ (forget exact amount) fee for credit card payments above that.
> Most busniess eat the fees (ie. pass it along in hidden costs) for
> processing and eqp. Some don't. It's crap either way thou...

If they accept Visa or Mastercard, both would be VERY interested in hearing
this. It is a violation of their merchant agreements.

http://global.mastercard.com/my/consumer/cust_serv.html
http://usa.visa.com/media/business/ecomm_merch_guide.pdf

By the way, credit card fees generally range from 1-3 percent. The fees are less
if the card is presented and swiped in person and/or address verification is
used. Because PIN based debit transactions (online debit) cards have a very low
fixed fee (not based on price) stores hate when debit cards are used with a
signature (offline debit) as these use the credit card networks and have credit
card style fees involved. That is why supermarkets and the post office can give
you cash back at the register (and are happy to do so, because it reduces their
cash handling costs since they give it to you). Offline debit transactions have
very slightly less fees than pure credit cards, but the difference is
negligible.

This fee disparity is the genesis of the recently settled lawsuit between
Wal-mart, Sears, et al vs. Visa and Mastercard. As a result of the settlement,
the fees for offline debit are falling.

['Vejita' S. Cousin]

In article >, Jessica F > wrote:
>> It's done but not a common practice. The University of Washington
>> (where I'm a student) charges $4 processing fees for payments below $250
>> and a $20+ (forget exact amount) fee for credit card payments above that.
>> Most busniess eat the fees (ie. pass it along in hidden costs) for
>> processing and eqp. Some don't. It's crap either way thou...
>
>If they accept Visa or Mastercard, both would be VERY interested in hearing
>this. It is a violation of their merchant agreements.

Take a look at:

http://www.washington.edu/students/ugrad/advising/demo/ccpay.html

I was mistaken thou, it's a $4 fee for payments less than $150, and a
_$40_ fee for payments above $150. As I said it's BS, I'm not sure if
it's illegal or not thou. I pay by check or cash :)

>http://global.mastercard.com/my/consumer/cust_serv.html
>http://usa.visa.com/media/business/ecomm_merch_guide.pdf

Might have to look into this some more. It wouldn't be the first time
the university has illegally charged for services/fees. There was an
'electiriity' fee per credit that got overturn just a few qtrs back...

[tscottme]

I was an employee of AF in Ft Lauderdale. I also trained their, on
their dime, for my IFR. I found the training was good, but you had to
insist on working with a bare minimum of instructors. Otherwise you
would never see the same face twice. Their flight record keeping was
thorough. But I was there long enough to see how they handled refunds
to students. This was especially clear in the case of what was called
"academy students". That was a program where students would pay for
training in a class, as opposed to individual training. The student
would get a break on the hourly cost of ground instruction and maybe
some fees. If a refund was required, they would go back and bill the
student at the individual rate and take every opportunity to tack on
fees of every description. Then they would point out that it would take
time to get a refund. It took as much time as the student allowed. If
you refused to take any answer about your refund but "cut a check
today", that's what happened. If you played along with their excuses,
your delay would take as long as it took for the student to reach "cut a
check today."

I left after a "Director", fancy name for salesman, told me that I had
to administer a computerized knowledge to a student when the student had
improper authorization for that test. As I recall, the foreign student
required an FAA knowledge test specifically for foreign students, while
his CFII has signed him off for a plain old IFR written. When the
Director told me I should just administer the test and let him worry
about it. I objected. He told me "you're just an intern, that's not
your decision. I left, and was fired.

I graduated Embry-Riddle just before starting at Flyers, and Flyers was
the only place I had seen that charged a higher hourly rate for a 172
than Riddle. The AF 172s were almost all high-time leasebacks. The
CFIs were paid under $10 per hour of work (mid 1990s) and a bit more for
flight hours, maybe $12. But they would use CFIs to paint halls, run
errands, wash the boss' car, shuttle students, and then lecture new CFIs
about maintaining a professional image and attitude.

I knew some really top notch people in that company, most were
short-term employees. I believe I went to company orientation with Dave
Huser, mentioned in the story.

--

Scott
--------
"So far, fewer troops have been killed by hostile fire since the end of
major combat in Iraq than civilians were murdered in Washington, D.C.,
last year (239 deaths in Iraq compared to 262 murders in D.C.). How many
years has it been since we declared the end of major U.S. combat
operations against Marion Barry's regime? How long before we just give
up and pull out of that hellish quagmire known as Washington, D.C.?" Ann
Coulter
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2003/110503.htm

[Tom S.]

"tscottme" > wrote in message
...
>
> I was an employee of AF in Ft Lauderdale. I also trained their, on
> their dime, for my IFR. I found the training was good, but you had to
> insist on working with a bare minimum of instructors. Otherwise you
> would never see the same face twice. Their flight record keeping was
> thorough.

The issue isn't keeping records of flights, but the granting of ratings and
licenses to people that are not competent.

[Maule Driver]

AF in Ft lauderdale is where I had my experiences too. I could 'smell' the
setup as you described it after spending 30 mins in the lobby. Plenty of
fine CFIs there but AF has little to do with that.

Anyone who asks me gets a "go somewhere else"
"tscottme" > wrote in message
...
>
> I was an employee of AF in Ft Lauderdale. I also trained their, on
> their dime, for my IFR. I found the training was good, but you had to
> insist on working with a bare minimum of instructors. Otherwise you
> would never see the same face twice. Their flight record keeping was
> thorough. But I was there long enough to see how they handled refunds
> to students. This was especially clear in the case of what was called
> "academy students". That was a program where students would pay for
> training in a class, as opposed to individual training. The student
> would get a break on the hourly cost of ground instruction and maybe
> some fees. If a refund was required, they would go back and bill the
> student at the individual rate and take every opportunity to tack on
> fees of every description. Then they would point out that it would take
> time to get a refund. It took as much time as the student allowed. If
> you refused to take any answer about your refund but "cut a check
> today", that's what happened. If you played along with their excuses,
> your delay would take as long as it took for the student to reach "cut a
> check today."
>
> I left after a "Director", fancy name for salesman, told me that I had
> to administer a computerized knowledge to a student when the student had
> improper authorization for that test. As I recall, the foreign student
> required an FAA knowledge test specifically for foreign students, while
> his CFII has signed him off for a plain old IFR written. When the
> Director told me I should just administer the test and let him worry
> about it. I objected. He told me "you're just an intern, that's not
> your decision. I left, and was fired.
>
> I graduated Embry-Riddle just before starting at Flyers, and Flyers was
> the only place I had seen that charged a higher hourly rate for a 172
> than Riddle. The AF 172s were almost all high-time leasebacks. The
> CFIs were paid under $10 per hour of work (mid 1990s) and a bit more for
> flight hours, maybe $12. But they would use CFIs to paint halls, run
> errands, wash the boss' car, shuttle students, and then lecture new CFIs
> about maintaining a professional image and attitude.
>
> I knew some really top notch people in that company, most were
> short-term employees. I believe I went to company orientation with Dave
> Huser, mentioned in the story.
>
> --
>
> Scott
> --------
> "So far, fewer troops have been killed by hostile fire since the end of
> major combat in Iraq than civilians were murdered in Washington, D.C.,
> last year (239 deaths in Iraq compared to 262 murders in D.C.). How many
> years has it been since we declared the end of major U.S. combat
> operations against Marion Barry's regime? How long before we just give
> up and pull out of that hellish quagmire known as Washington, D.C.?" Ann
> Coulter
> http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2003/110503.htm
>
>