[ILL-L] Processing Fees: Do you charge them? What is your bestpractice?

[Peterson, Kim A.]

Our overarching philosophy of ILL lending is to fit our practices within our Board approved circulation policy whenever possible. That way I don't philosophize or ruminate on collegial relations, we have simple procedures that anyone here can carry out. to get the job done.
 
Philosophically, I don't much care whether the non-returned book is checked out to a patron on Wyoming Street here in my city or to the University of Wyoming.
 
But that said, there are some procedures that for us, for practical necessity, differ for the University of Wyoming vs our Wyoming Street patron, a longer loan period being one of them. 
 
Depending on your process, a case could be made that billing the borrowing library is more labor intensive than billing your local patrons. If so, I can see justifying an up charge in a processing fee ("processing" meaning "invoice processing."  ) 
 
Kim Peterson
Director of Technical Services
St. Louis Public Library
 
 
 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: ill-l-bounces at webjunction.org [mailto:ill-l-bounces at webjunction.org]On Behalf Of Eastman, Carrie
Sent: Friday, December 18, 2009 9:47 AM
To: 'Interlibrary Loan Listserv'
Subject: [ILL-L] Processing Fees: Do you charge them? What is your bestpractice?



Hi,

 

I think I pretty much know what some folks would say about this.  But the question came up in conversation today and I thought I would put it out on the list to see what others have to say.  

 

For many, charging a processing fee for lost interlibrary loan books, on top of the cost of the book, is standard practice.

 

For some libraries, processing fees are standard even when overdue books are returned or a replacement copy is given.

 

Some, correct me if I am wrong, prefer not to charge a processing fee in these situations.

 

I have been inclined to charge a processing fee on top of the cost of lost books.  If overdue books are returned I do not charge a processing fee.  

 

I have been working under the assumption that most do charge a processing fee along with the cost of a book.  And that is partly why I have been charging the processing fee (on the rare occasion that I actually have to bill for a book).  Our Circulation Desk also charges a processing fee on top of the cost of lost books.  However, I have sometimes wondered if tacking on a processing fee really makes sense.  In a time when budgets are shrinking, tuitions are going up, and we are trying to rethink interlibrary and resource sharing is it really a good idea to be tacking on a processing fee?  Does is work against our efforts to foster stronger and better collegial relationships between libraries?  Maybe, maybe not.  Granted, there are still a set of rules we need to adhere to in order for the interlibrary loan system to work.  If we didn't the system would fall apart.  

 

So, in the spirit of some good conversation, do you charge processing fees?  If yes, why?  What is the background/history behind your library instituting such fees?  

 

What would not charging processing fees mean for your library?  Less money?  Less work for ILL staff?  Abuse of your good will?  Anything else?

 

Are the reasons you charge processing fees in line with our Circulation Desk's reasons?  Or, are they different?  Why?

 

And for a harder more philosophical question, separate from you institution's policies, do you like charging processing fees?  Why or why not?  If you feel at odds with the library's policy, what differences of opinion are causing the tension?  

 

Please, share if you like,

 

Carrie

______________________________________________________________________________

 

Carrie Eastman

Information Services/Interlibrary Loan Librarian

Purchase College Library-SUNY

735 Anderson Hill Rd.

Purchase, NY 10577

914.251.6428

 <mailto:carrie.eastman at purchase.edu> carrie.eastman at purchase.edu

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webjunction.org/wjlists/ill-l/attachments/20091218/e982a08d/attachment.htm>