In message , Jack Taylor
writes

I demand that they give me their banking details (sort code and account
number) and set up a one-off direct credit on my Internet banking, with an
appropriate reference (membership number or name). I've done that for all of
the annual subscriptions that I have, with only one exception, that was
still issuing two-part carbonated subscription reminders, even in 2002!
After a second request that they provide a direct credit option for renewal
(it only requires the provision of sort code and account number and of a box
to tick on the renewal slip) and no response, a year after my first request,
I cancelled my membership. The others have actually commented that they are
happy with a direct credit payment as it saves them the hassle of banking
cheques.

Unfortunately that wouldn't work with our (voluntary) organisation. Our
treasurer lives in North Wales and I (the membership secretary) live in
East London. I have no access to our group's bank accounts and our
treasurer would constantly be sending me details of random payments
received that may or may not be anything to do with my role.

We continue to prefer cheque payments for the time being. If you want
to be a member, that's the way it's done.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

Steve Fitzgerald wrote:

Unfortunately that wouldn't work with our (voluntary) organisation. Our
treasurer lives in North Wales and I (the membership secretary)
live in East London. I have no access to our group's bank accounts
and our treasurer would constantly be sending me details of random
payments received that may or may not be anything to do with my role.

That's similar to the various preserved railways that I am a member of. The
treasurers receive membership fees by direct credit, with the membership
number quoted as the payment reference. The membership secretaries receive
the renewal forms, with the direct credit option ticked. The treasurers (I
presume) periodically confirm the latest batch of payments that have been
received by e-mail to the membership secretary. It's hardly rocket science
and it's far more secure for both parties.

We continue to prefer cheque payments for the time being. If you want
to be a member, that's the way it's done.

I'm afraid that, if that is the attitude, then I wouldn't be bothered about
being a member. I've already discontinued my membership of one preserved
railway that I had been a member of for over twenty years, due to their
inability to embrace modern technology (ironic as they are one of the bigger
railways, whilst the smaller ones that I am a member of can function
efficiently).

In message , Jack Taylor
writes

That's similar to the various preserved railways that I am a member of. The
treasurers receive membership fees by direct credit, with the membership
number quoted as the payment reference. The membership secretaries receive
the renewal forms, with the direct credit option ticked. The treasurers (I
presume) periodically confirm the latest batch of payments that have been
received by e-mail to the membership secretary. It's hardly rocket science
and it's far more secure for both parties.

You're right, it's not rocket science, but as you suggest it, it would
cause for us, a number of people more work. These people are all
volunteers so I'm not inclined to be some sort of a job creation scheme
for them.

I'm afraid that, if that is the attitude, then I wouldn't be bothered about
being a member. I've already discontinued my membership of one preserved
railway that I had been a member of for over twenty years, due to their
inability to embrace modern technology (ironic as they are one of the bigger
railways, whilst the smaller ones that I am a member of can function
efficiently).

shrug

You're obviously not that interested in being a member if you can't even
manage to raise a cheque once a year.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 02:08:29AM +0100, Steve Fitzgerald wrote:

You're right, it's not rocket science, but as you suggest it, it would
cause for us, a number of people more work. These people are all
volunteers so I'm not inclined to be some sort of a job creation scheme
for them.

The two model railway groups I'm a member of, where the treasurers and
membership people live at opposite ends of the country, have found that
accepting modern payments saves them a lot of hassle. They do still
accept payment from Luddites, but I'd not be surprised if in another
couple of years they impose a surcharge on cheque payments. One of them
accepts card payments online and paypal, the other hands out its bank
sort code and account number so people can do BACS.

You're obviously not that interested in being a member if you can't even
manage to raise a cheque once a year.

You mean that the organisation doesn't care much about its members if it
insists on them using such antiquated and inconvenient methods. Perhaps
more importantly, it doesn't care about its officers if it makes them
traipse to the bank every few days to hand over silly pieces of paper.

--
David Cantrell | Nth greatest programmer in the world

I think the most difficult moment that anyone could face is seeing
their domestic servants, whether maid or drivers, run away
-- Abdul Rahman Al-Sheikh, writing at
http://www.arabnews.com/?article=38558

In message , David
Cantrell writes

You're obviously not that interested in being a member if you can't even
manage to raise a cheque once a year.

You mean that the organisation doesn't care much about its members if it
insists on them using such antiquated and inconvenient methods. Perhaps
more importantly, it doesn't care about its officers if it makes them
traipse to the bank every few days to hand over silly pieces of paper.

You have no knowledge of our operation and are therefore unqualified to
comment about how we choose to operate our business.

To put this into some sort of perspective from our side of things:

We operate a membership system where members have to submit a
'requirements' form on renewal. This is because we offer something
approaching 100 varieties and combinations of product and the member has
to indicate their preference for the year. With any system we use, that
member would still have to submit to me a list of their requirements
before I could renew their membership. This is because that is what our
members prefer.

I have spent much time attempting to find a better way of dealing with
this, but the bottom line is still that members would be required to
communicate with us twice to renew - once with their requirements and
once with the transmission of funds and all this would have to be
re-assimilated once we received the two items - so, why not do this
once, altogether with a 24p stamp?

To use the banking system as it stands (ie. Giro transfers) costs us 96p
for every membership we receive in this manner. With around 2000
members that is a lot of money that could be put to better use for the
group. Then the paying in slips (which also include the above mentioned
requirements) have to be posted from North Wales to me for action as the
bank won't send then direct to me, adding to the cost. It costs us 40p
to bank 100 cheques; I have never been to the bank with these yet, I put
them in the post with the multitude of other items I have to send out.

So, until we (read I as I'm the only one apparently interested in
achieving a better cost/benefit in this matter) establish a better
system, we will continue to prefer cheques. Of course, this could all
change next month, year, whenever as it's kept under constant review.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)