Sky Television ‘seems happy to take advantage' of my trusting, elderly aunt
But it enters the realm of appalling if those people are older, and might be struggling to get on top of their day-to-day finances.
We have two stories connected to Sky Television that are strikingly similar, and involve family members seeking help for older people.
'I am writing on behalf of my elderly father-in-law,' begins a mail from a reader called Jacinta.
READ MORE
On October 30th last year, he had contacted Sky, as he was concerned about being charged a monthly fee of €120, she explains.
'He verbally agreed to a new monthly contract of €84.50 for six months and was told he should contact the company when that timeframe had elapsed to agree the next charges.'
She says that on February 19th the charge was €85.14, and on March 18th the charge was €87.50. She says there was 'no notification of an increase'.
[
Sky broadband blues: 'During the day, it stayed working. After 8pm, zilch'
Opens in new window
]
Then on April 16th 'the new charges were €105.80. This was within the six months period and there was absolutely no notification. On May 16th charges were €121 – an almost 50 per cent increase inside a few weeks with absolutely no notification."
'My father-in-law is in his 70s, and suffers chronic health, and talking at times on the phone can greatly exacerbate his breathing [problems]. It's not possible to email Sky, though you can call and be left usually up to 45 mins before you get to talk with someone and all that, apart from their charges. Sky can charge whatever they wish whenever they wish. Neither
Comreg
nor
CCPC
want to know as it's not their area.'
Then there is the story about a woman in her 80s who appears to be paying an awful lot for very little.
The story was shared with us by her nephew.
'I've an aunt in her late 80s who spent her life giving of herself to others,' begins the mail.
'She doesn't ask for much and uses TV to watch the news in her kitchen, and one other channel that's free on the internet. For quite some time she couldn't get Sky to work on the TV in the kitchen. I assumed it was because the TV was old, so I bought her a new one. The problem persists.'
Our reader asked her aunt how much she pays, and whether she had the account details. 'The
only
information she could find was on her bank account, and she became upset as she realised how much they were taking from her account every month (average €150-plus).
'I work abroad, so rarely get the opportunity to resolve problems for her, but the week before last, after a lot of searching, managed to get through to Sky by phone. They went through security with my aunt and, after a few minutes, the call disconnected.'
He says that he tried four times 'going through the same process, getting various levels of sympathy and assurances, but each time the calls eventually disconnected. This weekend I checked with my aunt. She'd received no mail or follow up of any sort,' he writes.
'My aunt's a trusting and generous person, and it seems as if Sky are happy to take advantage, deliberately make it incredibly difficult to contact them, and apparently impossible to get support.'
It seems to Pricewatch that both of these people are is paying way over the odds for their television service but it also seems like they have both struggled to find out exactly what they are paying for.
We contacted Sky.
In connection with our first story a spokeswoman said Sky is 'committed to supporting all of its customers. In our efforts to provide fast and efficient customer support, our billing teams have maintained an average call response time of just 58 seconds year-to-date.'
'The customer in question regularly availed of promotional offers as a long-time customer with Sky. However, now that we are aware of the customer's health condition, we believe he would benefit from Sky's dedicated accessibility service, which provides tailored care and alternative contact methods to support customers who may need additional assistance. We have since outreached to the customer to support with this.'
And when it came to the second story she said the company was 'sorry to hear about this customer's experience, which was unfortunately due to an initial miscommunication while resolving a technical issue. We have since spoken with the customer to apply the due credit on their account and ensure they are set up correctly.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTÉ News
3 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Hopes of EU-US trade deal ahead of August deadline
It was Ursula von der Leyen's late afternoon social media post that confirmed a deal is on. All the hard work has been done by trade negotiators. But US President Donald Trump likes to seal the deal himself with a high-level figure - that is why his own press office likes to call him "the closer". Of course it is not done till it is done. But there is no way Ms von der Leyen is getting on a plane tomorrow morning in hope: there is a deal to be sealed - though she will probably have to sweeten it a little in the end to get the closer to close. During the week he personally closed deals with the prime ministers of Indonesia and the Philippines (Ferdinand Marcos Junior) and with Japan's senior trade negotiator (Prime Minister Ishiba's LDP party had lost its parliamentary majority in elections last Sunday, and he is expected to resign). Taoiseach Micheál Martin is hopeful the deal can be signed - though he says it will be an outline deal, leaving much detail to be filled in later. But it should give some certainty to businesses to enable them to get on with planning. (The US President will meet UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to "flesh out" the outline deal he made with the British in May - the headline in that is a 10% tariff on British imports to the US). Mr Trump was certainly talking up prospects of an EU deal as he left the White House yesterday. "I would say that we have a 50:50 chance of making a deal with the EU, and it will be a deal where they have to buy down their tariffs, because they are right now at 30% and they'll have to buy them down maybe, or they could leave them the way they are," Mr Trump said. "But they want to make a deal very badly. I would have said we have a 25% chance with Japan. And they kept coming back, and we made a deal. "The biggest part of the Japan deal, and maybe we get this with the EU, maybe we don't, is that we have the right to go in and trade. We have the right - they've totally opened Japan to the US," he added. Note the phrase "buy down their tariffs". What is Europe offering the US that Mr Trump thinks is worth reducing the tariff rate from 30% to 15%? Big purchase agreement on energy expected Part of the deal is expected to be a big purchase agreement on energy. The day after the Presidential election last November, Ms von der Leyen offered to negotiate a massive gas contract with America, knowing that Mr Trump was coming gunning for the EU on trade. That deal, she said, could more or less close the annual trade gap between the EU and US. And besides a new gas supplier was needed, after Russia put itself beyond the pale by invading Ukraine. This will be Liquified Natural Gas (LNG), which is why the Irish Government has stamped on the accelerator of getting a long talked about LNG terminal built in Limerick. The gas plays into Mr Trump's campaign rhetoric of "drill baby drill" and energy dominance. But there will be many more elements, as even a deal to supply 450 million Europeans with gas will not be big enough. Mr Trump complains a lot about market access, particularly in relation to cars and food. In general the EU market is very open to US products and services. Look around your own home, shops, businesses - what American stuff do you not have? (genuine, made in USA stuff, not made in China with US marketing hype). Mr Trump is wrong about the car market being closed to US producers - Ford dominates the light commercial market on both sides of the Atlantic, while in left-hand drive mainland Europe, pretty much any American car is available to consumers - if they can afford the running costs. It is not the huge bulk of the vehicles that is the chief problem (though it is a problem): it is the huge cost of feeding the massive and inefficient engines they use. On food, there is a bigger problem, and it is the extra chemicals and hormones that go into the US food chain that are banned in Europe (a ban strongly supported by consumers). Mr Trump's own Health Secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr frequently mentions the thousand food ingredients that are banned in Europe but allowed in the US as a bad thing - for the US consumer and the health of the nation. His mission statement is MAHA - Make America Healthy Again, and he is trying to ban or force the discontinuance of these additives. Europe does have a quota for US beef - but only if it has been grown without artificial growth hormones. Chicken is washed in chlorine in the US, to kill off health threatening bacteria. The practice is banned in Europe, but the EU has a higher rate of food poisoning from chicken. In trade talks in 2012, Eurocrats said they had an alternative method that would satisfy both EU and US health norms, but those talks went nowhere. Critics of the US use of chlorine washing say it covers up lower animal welfare standards. None of this is likely to feature in talks in Scotland. But yesterday there was an unexpected development when Australia announced it would take imports of US beef. It has been quite a closed, protected market - but producers there also doubted the US could supply much beef to Australia anyway, as its own beef industry, they claimed, could not satisfy local demand for beef and needed to import. But Irish and French farmers will be wary of any agricultural sweeteners in this deal. Defence is another element in the trade balance between the EU and US. The EU defence commissioner Andrius Kubilius spent a few days in the US, setting out some big numbers that have sprung out of another "Trump Win" - getting European NATO to raise its defence spending to 5% of GDP. This consists of 3.5% of GDP going on "real" defence spending, and 1.5% going on enabling infrastructure, such as roads, bridges, railways, communications satellites and other things that can be called "military mobility". About 40% of the EU's defence equipment spending goes on US made products. In cash terms that figure has risen sharply in the past three years as the EU supplies weapons systems and "consumables" to Ukraine. With the big increase in European NATO spending, and the EU's own €150 billion defence loans scheme (applications close on Tuesday), there is an awful lot of money sloshing around, and inevitably a big chunk of it is going to go to American industries, particularly in the highest end of high tech defence. According to Mr Kubilius, EU states are going to spend around €2.2 trillion on defence equipment over the next seven years of the EU "Financial Framework" budget cycle. If America gets 40% of that, then it could be looking at the thick end of a trillion bucks. It is hard to see more concessions here, especially as the French and some others have argued that if the Europeans are going to spend these kinds of colossal sums, they should spend as much as possible on developing home industries, not acting as employment support for the Americans. Trump planning regime of pharmaceutical tariffs As for pharmaceuticals, that seems likely to be left out of this outline deal, at least for the moment. Mr Trump is planning a special regime of pharmaceutical tariffs - medicines have not been tariffed by tradition - in order to force the relocation of manufacturing for the US market back to the US. That is a more complex business, as "patent cliff" effects come into play, as well as investment decisions. It seems the US plans on this one are not yet ready for rollout. That will be the big one hanging over the Irish after tomorrow's outline deal (if it is done), because of what we might call the 'Reverse-Leprechaun' economic effects of a sudden disappearance of a large lump of GDP, and with it associated corporation tax returns. Ireland's trade in goods surplus with the US is about $80 billion, according to the Americans - it vies with Germany for the biggest trade surplus of any EU state, a position it has been driven to almost entirely by the pharmaceutical industry in Ireland, which is mostly US owned. According to US trade statistics, Ireland has the fourth or fifth biggest trade surplus of any country doing business with the US: only Vietnam, Mexico and China have bigger surpluses. And China's trade surplus is only three times bigger than Ireland's. So the Emerald Isle does stick out on the charts - worldwide as well as European. And most of that is because of the strange world of pharmaceutical manufacturing, internal pricing and tax regime arbitrage that US pharma companies are so good at. On landing in Scotland, Mr Trump was asked what areas are outstanding to be negotiated with the EU. He said about twenty areas, but said he was not going to list them off. It felt like a deflection, not an answer. Trump says US-EU agreement would be 'biggest of them all' The uncertainty of the past six months has been paralysing for many investment decisions on both sides of the Atlantic. And that is important, because as Mr Trump said yesterday evening, getting an agreement with the EU would be "the biggest of them all". Because the EU-US trade in goods, services and investment is by far the biggest and most important in the world. The US President has decided to charge an entry fee to the US market. He believes - correctly - that the market is so valuable to outsiders that they will pay more to do business here. The art of this particular deal is finding out the realistic limits of bearable pain. For Japan it was 15% - down from the 25% they were told to expect. Once that news broke on Tuesday night, it was the tipping point for the EU, which had been hoping for a 10% tariff, but had been told 15% would be more like it. It is pretty much what the EU has been charged for the past three months - a 10% general baseline tariff on top of the 4.8% pre-existing average tariff rate on EU goods coming into the US. The impacts of that have yet to play out. And if the 'closer' and his visitor from Brussels cannot close the deal tomorrow? The US is set to impose a 30% tariff rate on the EU on 1 August. But according to US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, talks on a final deal would continue, and the rate could still come down. But the 30% would act as a spur to the talks. The EU also made moves to show it was reaching the end of the rope as far as talks with the US are concerned. On Thursday, member state governments approved a retaliatory package on $70 billion of US exports, on top of an earlier $23 billion of tariffs on US steel and aluminium products. A third package of levies on US services exports has also been floated in the Brussels ether. The EU tariffs on $90 billion of US imports will go into effect on 7 August - if there is no deal this weekend. Mr Trump is one of those people who always has to feel he has gotten one over whoever he is doing a deal with; the sort who always tries to chip a little extra in the end. Ms von der Leyen ought to be prepared to give a little sweetener. Will it be in some aspect of trade or taxation, or will it be old fashioned cash?. Last Tuesday, Mr Trump spent 75 minutes talking in person with Japan's trade envoy Ryosei Akazawa, screwing an extra $150 billion out of the Japanese for an investment fund that the US government will direct. It helped to "buy" them a tariff cut, according to US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who claimed credit for the idea of the "tariff buy down". Market access will affect trade deal with Japan, says Lutnick Mr Lutnick said in an interview for Bloomberg that market access was always going to be a big issue in any trade deal with Japan. He did not see the Japanese opening their market to the extent the US wanted, so looked for another way. His solution was a fund of $400 billion, which the Japanese would put at the disposal of the US. Mr Trump, the 'closer', bumped that up to $550 billion before he said "deal" and shook hands. So what is this $550 billion for? It is not an investment by Japanese companies, according to Mr Lutnick. He told Bloomberg on Wednesday the Japanese will be bankers, supplying the money to pay for American projects. The Japanese cut will be 10% of the profits: "The Japanese are going to give America the ability to choose the projects, decide the projects and execute the projects. Suppose we want to build a generic antibiotics plant - America doesn't make antibiotics anymore - the Japanese will finance the project and we will give it to an operator, and the profits will be split 90% to the United States, and ten percent to the Japanese," he said. "So the Japanese have basically brought down their tariff rate due to this commitment that 'we will back what you Mr President want to build in America that are key to national security concerns, we will back that'," he added. He said the money can be equity, loans or loan guarantees. "They are the banker, not the operator - this is not a Japanese company like Toyota coming in and building a factory - this is America saying we want generic pharmaceuticals, microchips etc". Mr Lutnick - who claims to talk to Mr Trump daily at 1am by phone - said he came up with the idea in January to get the equivalent of market access for the US and a tariff rate at which the Japanese car makers - who account for the vast bulk of Japan's trade surplus with the US, can live with. "15% is right on the line where they can still build cars in Japan - huge amounts here as well - but $550 billion bought that," he said. "For the Europeans it is 25%, for South Korea it is 25% - the Japanese have bought 15% by giving Donald Trump the means to invest. We'll see what happens in the EU and South Korea talks, but let's be clear: Donald Trump has put pressure on them," he added. Peter Navarro, a senior trade advisor in the Trump administration and ideologue of a hard line on foreigners, especially China, said of the $550 billion : "its a blank cheque to invest in America: it's going to used to cure our supply chain vulnerabilities - this is really important: we've seen in the pandemic we were exposed on pharmaceuticals, we have a chip problem with too many of the chips made offshore: we've seen Chinese export restrictions on gallium, rare earth magnets, critical minerals. "Howard Lutnick is going to be the symphony orchestra guy on this - we are going to figure out every vulnerability we have in our economy with the help of the Japanese," he added. Medical devises may be excluded from tariffs The EU is of course the home of the car, specifically Germany where the internal combustion engine was invented. A deal on cars is huge for Germany as well. So is a deal on spirits - especially for the Irish whiskey industry and French and Italian liquor makers. Medical devices are another really important area for Ireland that may be excluded altogether from tariffs, according to some of the chatter reported late last week. For the Irish Government, which has become so dependent on corporation tax revenues - far more than is the case in most countries - the potential hit to revenues from Mr Trump's tariffs are what causes it sleepless nights. But it is not just tariffs that are making life more difficult for Irish and European exporters to the US. The dollar has weakened against the Euro since Mr Trump took power, making foreign imports more expensive for Americans to buy. The tariff comes on top of that. On leaving the White House yesterday, Mr Trump extolled the virtues of a weaker dollar. "The weak dollar makes you a hell of a lot more money. So when we have a strong dollar, one thing happens, it sounds good, but you don't do any tourism. "You can't sell factories, you can't sell trucks, you can't sell anything. It is good for inflation, that's about it. And we have no inflation. We've wiped out inflation. So when I see it (the dollar) down there, I don't lose sleep over it, put it that way," he added. As for other countries, Mr Trump said "We have the outlines of a deal with China" (Mr Bessent is meeting his opposite number in Stockholm on Monday and Tuesday for more trade talks). But he did not hold out much hope for Canada, the US' number three trade partner: "We haven't really had a lot of luck with Canada. I think Canada could be one where they'll just pay tariffs, not really a negotiation." Next Friday is the closing deadline for this round of tariff related deals, as far as the US President is concerned. He plans to send letters out to close to 200 countries over the next week "I'm not looking to hurt countries", he said yesterday morning. "I could - I could do that too, but I'm not looking to do that. But when that letter goes out, that's a deal. "Now, we sent one to Japan, we sent one to the EU, and they came back and negotiated a deal. I think the EU has got a pretty good chance of making a deal," he added.
RTÉ News
4 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Ireland faces 15% tariff reality as EU-US deal takes shape
The EU and US are edging closer to a trade deal revolving around tariffs of 15% imposed on European goods. The details of any agreement will be critical. Recent discussions have come close to an agreement only to be derailed at the last minute by the White House - and that could happen again. Based on what is known so far, the EU-US deal would include a baseline tariff of 15%. Some existing tariffs would be folded into that 15% meaning it would be an all-in tariff. For example, it would include the existing "most favoured nation" duties of 4.8% which exist currently under World Trade Organisation rules. However, there would be some exceptions. The punitive 50% rate on steel and aluminum, introduced by US President Donald Trump on exports from the EU, would remain in place. It is understood that what may emerge is an agreement between the two sides that sees the threatened 1 August cliff edge of 30% tariffs on EU goods removed. It is now long past time to strike a deal. Tánaiste Simon Harris says he remains "cautiously optimistic" a deal could be reached for a "positive future EU-US trading relationship within the coming days". He adds: "It is now long past time to strike a deal." Under the framework, which is being negotiated, the US would have some immediate implementation steps, but some aspects would still need further negotiations. In a boost for Irish exporters, it is expected aircraft, medical devices and spirits would be covered by a zero for zero tariff arrangement. The critical part for Ireland is what would happen to exports of pharmaceuticals and computer chips to the US. At present, there are no tariffs on either sector while the US holds an investigation on national security grounds into imports of those goods. However, indications are that the investigation may result in the EU seeing a 15% tariff imposed on both pharmaceuticals and computer chips once the process concludes. If that rate is introduced, it would have significant consequences. Pharmaceuticals are Ireland's biggest export to the US and were valued at €44bn last year. Any company faced with a new tariff is going to have to figure out how it will be paid. Exporters will be asking whether they can make internal savings, adjust supply chains or pass it on to customers? Donald Trump told Taoiseach Micheál Martin on St Patrick's Day that Ireland "took" American pharmaceutical companies. But despite Mr Trump's comments, no US drug manufacturer with an operation in Ireland has so far threatened to relocate to America. The baseline tariff of 15% for many companies would have significant effects. Simon McKeever, CEO of the Irish Exporters Association, said his organisation would be looking for a "tariff adjustment fund" largely based on the Brexit Reserve Fund of €1bn, which was introduced to help companies when the UK left the EU. While there may be relief if a deal is agreed it would be a much worse trading environment than Irish companies faced last year. Tariffs are fundamentally bad for an export-led economy such as Ireland. Globally, the removal of trade barriers over recent decades has lifted millions of people in developing countries out of poverty. But perhaps the most damaging aspect of the trade war is that it has created enormous uncertainty and put many investments on hold in Ireland and elsewhere. If a deal is agreed companies will know the future landscape. And that is likely to unlock investments which had been put on hold.
Irish Times
4 hours ago
- Irish Times
Amazon is not the only multinational losing confidence in Ireland. Will a €102bn plan fix it?
This week we got a State investment plan with no list of projects and a pre-budget document with no estimate of the likely position of the public finances next year. Economic nerds like me felt short-changed. The first document was all uppy stuff about boosting investment and securing the future. The second doubled down on the scary backdrop provided by a changed world and the unpredictable actions of Donald Trump . The Government has clearly made a political decision to 'go for it' on State investment. But the document published this week was more a manifesto for the multinationals than a plan. It was a pitch to foreign investors, who have become increasingly outspoken about Ireland's energy and water infrastructure and the lack of housing for their staff . And it was a bid to try to allay public concern – on housing in particular. The head-wrecking details, including how to deliver it all – most notably in housing – are still being worked out. The decision by Amazon to abandon a project in northwest Dublin because of problems getting an electricity connection is by no means a first. There has been a building crisis of confidence in corporate headquarters in the US about Ireland's ability to deliver on these areas – and this week's plans are an attempt to send a message to these American boardrooms, who are central to our economic wellbeing. They will also look for evidence that Ireland can actually make this happen - reassurances over the years that the key infrastructure areas were being addressed have not been delivered on. READ MORE And so we have a €102 billion, five-year investment plan. It is, for sure, heading in the right direction. The Fiscal Council has estimated that Ireland's infrastructure is 20 per cent to 25 per cent behind other richer EU countries. In this context, the recent growth rate of the economy has been remarkable. But Ireland is now running hard into the infrastructural buffers. Turning this investment manifesto into a fully coherent plan and then implementing it will be a big task. Ireland has struggled to deliver on the scale of promised investment in recent years; Covid was factor, for sure, but the State missed opportunities to cash in on a time of fiscal plenty. Now, it plans to boost investment plans just as the outlook is getting uncertain. It is necessary – but it also carries some risk. It looks like a turning point may be approaching in the national finances, when more difficult decisions await and trade-offs have to be faced up to. The State has been swimming in cash in recent years – but the budget surplus is being eaten away. And this means some politically difficult choices, which have yet to be squarely faced. Corporate tax is still funding a spending rise across the board. The Government plans to increase current spending by almost 6.5 per cent next year, well ahead of inflation. However, the combination of a big investment plan and Donald Trump's policy decisions are changing Ireland's fiscal arithmetic. In the spring, the forecast budget surplus of revenue over spending for next year was €6.3 billion. And that was before any tariffs. This week's document does not update that figure. But on the basis of what we now know from this week's documents, economists have cut this forecast to around €2 billion. [ Taoiseach to 'delve into' Amazon's scrapping of Dublin plant over failure to secure power supply Opens in new window ] As Goodbody stockbroker economist Dermot O'Leary pointed out, this is a small margin for error in the light of the tariff threats and the hugely concentrated nature of our tax base. And the gamble is not so much that the State might have to borrow a bit for a few years to ramp up investment. It is that a bigger hole might appear, because such a large part of our corporate tax is potentially transitory – based on multinational tax planning rather than economic activity here – and that policy changes in the US could lead to some of this cash leaving. The Fiscal Council estimates that subtracting the tax planning froth, the public finances would be heading for a deficit next year of €13 billion. [ Corporation tax surge a sign investors have not been put off by economic uncertainty just yet Opens in new window ] Now we are, of course, into 'crying wolf' territory here. The council, Central Bank, Department of Finance and most of us who write about economics have been warning about this risk for years. In the meantime, the tax paid by multinationals has just kept heading higher. And this may not be over yet. The Fiscal Council has said that corporate tax may again outperform this year compared to forecasts, which could give the Government some leeway in 2026. But that does not remove the risk of hanging on to a tax pile which has grown so large than it has now attracted jealous eyes not only from the rest of the EU but from Washington DC. And the State investment plans lower the room for manoeuvre if something goes wrong. If you plan to spend another €34 billion over the next five years, it has to come from somewhere, and using an expected budget surplus each year to help pay is part of the plan. Already, there are signs of the budget scope tightening. We are seeing the potential juggling in Budget 2026, with the hospitality VAT rate possibly deferred until midyear to leave scope for an income tax package. But that is a bet that the cash will be there to pay for a full-year VAT cut in 2027. And this is really only budgetary small beer, if the Government is to really slow the growth of day-to-day spending to leave room for more State investment. If it does not, then any fall-off to corporate tax will leave tricky decisions. For example, the Government is committed to putting money into two State funds for the future. It is legally obliged to do so, though can stop if there is a downturn. But if the numbers do get tight, does the State borrow cash to then invest in these funds – which would look very strange? Or does it divert money from other cash holdings? Sitting watching will be the National Treasury Management Agency, which was set up to borrow on behalf of the State. It has had a quiet time on this front in recent years, with the budget in surplus and a requirement just to keep things ticking over and refinance maturing debt. Now, as the State finances tighten, it may soon be back in business.
