Before I post my comment I must say I work for an FTO/flying club (on the FTO side), but also suffered both in losing a job and from having paid upfront for some training in an FTO that went down.
The concept of paying upfront is not just a rip off for the company. The extra commitment from the student not only allows better planning by the school but also helps secure its line of credit, reducing interest costs. Thus it has real value reflected in the discount it allows.
If the 3% surcharce for credit cards is a rip off, complain to Visa. It is a disgrace that had I paid a £7000 installment this way to my training provider they would have charged £210 for one transaction, and the schools cannot just absorb that kind of fee, it would be unfair on the cash customer. There are other ways of protecting prepayments - my FTO would allow an escrow account (joint holding, only paying the company as the training was given) if a student requested, though it did not publicise this (it is better for the company to have the cash, it reduces interest, so this was not in their interest to encourage).
On the other hand there are training providers, such as my current employer, which do not allow a student to pay upfront for flying.
This is another factor in deciding which training provider to use, and another reason why I would advise anyone thinking of embarking on such an expensive course to compare all availabe options across as broad a spectrum as possible, and across as many criteria as can be judged.
Having said all that, it does sound like Custer's concerns are perhaps justified in this case.
Last edited by Send Clowns; 11th April 2002 at 22:08.