Last August I purchased my first MBP during the "Buy a Mac for college and get a free iTouch promotion." I also applied for and received the 0% financing for 12 months on the purchase. I didn't need another iPod but I thought what the heck, free is free. My first surprise was that I was charged for the iTouch and would have to request a rebate on the purchase. When I got the rebate I added the amount of the rebate to my monthly payment, thus paying off the "free" iTouch. I have been sending monthly payments with the intention of paying off the MBP in 10 months. I received my March statement today and was surprised to see a $3.10 finance charge tacked on. I couldn't believe it, all my payments were on time and more than the minimum. I called BarclayCard and was told that the items are charged when they are shipped, the iPod shipped one day later than the MBP so it was charged on that day. In Barclay's eyes they see it as two purchases. The 0%/12months is for purchases over $900, and for purchases under $900, you only get 6 months 0% financing. Also they are applying my payments to the larger purchase first (MBP) then the iPod. So, as I told the kind lady at BarclayCard, I'm basically paying finance charges for a FREE iPod. They credited my account.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sneaky Apple practice?
- Thread starter Tadz
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think that it in fact has some to do with Apple, but I don't believe there is any intentional deception here. However, I think it should be brought to Apple's attention. What if you had bought a printer, iPod, and other accessories- you would likely be looking at much bigger finance charges.
That being said, Barclays is simply doing what all credit card companies do- apply payments to lower % things first. That is why I get so many 0% checks in the mail from all my CC companies. Because the minute you run up a credit card they want you to have 0% balance on there so your payments go towards the 0% part and you pay interest on the other charges. Luckily for me I pay off my CC every month so it isn't an issue. However, this whole issue should not be a problem in the US now with the new CC act- CC companies have to apply payments to the highest % items first.
That being said, Barclays is simply doing what all credit card companies do- apply payments to lower % things first. That is why I get so many 0% checks in the mail from all my CC companies. Because the minute you run up a credit card they want you to have 0% balance on there so your payments go towards the 0% part and you pay interest on the other charges. Luckily for me I pay off my CC every month so it isn't an issue. However, this whole issue should not be a problem in the US now with the new CC act- CC companies have to apply payments to the highest % items first.
Not sure why that was a surprise. They've been doing that for years now, and it's stated clearly on the website and on pretty much every ad that it's for a rebate you can use to get the low-end iPod touch "free" after rebate, or put it towards any other iPod.
I agree Miles01110 - it is clearly stated as a rebate- no different than going to a brick and mortar store to buy something on rebate.
Also, the reason they do the rebate thing is that a % of people never send in for rebates so it ends up costing less for the promotion.
Also, the reason they do the rebate thing is that a % of people never send in for rebates so it ends up costing less for the promotion.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/7E18)
That card isn't involved with Apple just gives people a speccial deal they promote.
That card isn't involved with Apple just gives people a speccial deal they promote.
credit card law was recently changed.
ONe change:
"Highest interest balances paid first: When consumers have accounts that carry different interest rates for different types of purchases (i.e., cash advances, regular purchases, balance transfers or ATM withdrawals), payments in excess of the minimum amount due must go to balances with higher interest rates first. Current industry practice is to apply all amounts over the minimum monthly payments to the lowest-interest balances first -- thus extending the time it takes to pay off higher-interest rate balances.
"
But probably too late to help you.
ONe change:
"Highest interest balances paid first: When consumers have accounts that carry different interest rates for different types of purchases (i.e., cash advances, regular purchases, balance transfers or ATM withdrawals), payments in excess of the minimum amount due must go to balances with higher interest rates first. Current industry practice is to apply all amounts over the minimum monthly payments to the lowest-interest balances first -- thus extending the time it takes to pay off higher-interest rate balances.
"
But probably too late to help you.
I don't normally correct other people's spelling - but when it is their signature I will make an exception since it's not really part of a conversation.
I will just point out that "wine" might not be word you were meaning to send out over and over again, every time you post.
OP does have a point. If two items are on a receipt and the purchase is supposed to qualify for a promotion, the fact that they shipped separately should not matter.
Yeah, but Apple only charges the credit company....all the credit company knows is that there were two charges on different days.