GM Group - Cowboys

[The Truth will Out!]

Back in January of this year, GM Group (whom i now know to be the infamous dealer of 3), rang me to offer me an ugrade on my handset and ultimately a new contract.

To cut a long story short, I have found they had blatantly lied with regards to the details of the contract that was agreed over the phone. Firstly was the amount of money they were offering me as part of a redemption deal. £120 was agreed but they are claiming it was £60. The second part was I made it quite clear that I would only be agreeing to a 12 month contract and they said this was fine. However, I found to my dismay that they had advised 3 that the contract was 18 months.

After several telephone conversations, I wrote to GM Group by recorded delivery on 17 March, the letter was in the form of a valid request for subject access as provided by section 7 Data Protection Act. They ignored this request notwithstanding they cashed my cheque (statutory fee) in the amount of £10 on 4 April.

The request that I made was for an audio copy of the telephone conversation that was made between myself and GM Group from the start of the call right up to the point of sale which was confirmed to exist by them.

After further telephone conversations in a vain attempt to speak a manager I was forced to write again by recorded delivery on 12 May stating they had not complied with my request and if they did not comply within 14 days I would obtain a court order to make them do so (sec 15(2) Data Protection Act).

To date I have not received any correspondence from GM Group so I want to file my claim. After visiting the County Court today, I learnt that the charge for filing this type of claim was £150. The clerk was also unsure that the correct form was the N1 that I had filled out. As far as I know the Information Commissioners Office has confirmed that claims of this nature should be made using the N1.

Just a few questions for anyone with knowledge of this system would be much appreciated.
1. Would I be likely to recoup my £150 on the understanding that I would be including it in my claim to recover from GM Group.
2. Is the N1 the correct form?

Any other comments would be much appreciated.

I know it seems extreme the measures I am taking, but I always remember what I agree to and I am not going to be "mugged off" by them.

Many Thanks

[buzby]

Two observations - there are many 'GM Group's - the best known is Gerneral Motors, the other is their former finance arm who are big in Europe and bought over by equity partners. I suspect neither ofd these outfits supply mobile phones, so your FIRST task is to find out PRECISELY who/what it is you dealt with and their legal responsibilities. If a company, where their Registered Office is, or if a sole trader, their residential address.

Secondly, you have no right to an 'audio tape' of any conversation. They may (or may not) record the conversations, but they are not obligated to provide it in that form. They could supply a transcript, or deny any recording was made. They most certainly won;t provide you with evidence that will assist you make your case - you need to do that yourself.

From what yuu've outlined, this all boils down to you said/they said, you need either corroboration or written documentation to support your assertions. You will have received a copy of the contract or a statement of the T&C's, these will what you will be held to, and if you did not query them at the time, this will seriously damage your version of events.

I would also shout long and hard at 3UK, because if it has happened to you, it will happen to others from this dealership, so they may be sympathetic. Either way, you cannot walk away from the contract, but 3 may offer additional discounts.

[The Truth will Out!]

Thanks for the reply Buzby.

Firstly, they are very much obliged to provide an audio copy of a telehphone call if they possess it. The same applies to CCTV footage/recording. This is a very well publicised fact as far as I can see.

Secondly, even if they deny possessing a copy, the fact that they have not complied with my request should automatically mean I can recoup court costs? Or do you think otherwise?

Many Thanks

[buzby]

Afraid not on both counts. There is no obligation to store or maintain what is THEIR data for any period simply to oblige you. Public CCTV is different matter and other laws apply.

If they deny having a copy it will automatically mean you have still to prove your case from a standing start. Now, if YOU had taped the conversation.... that would have been to YOUR advantage.

It would appear they cannot be trusted, based on what you've already experienced. It would be reasonable to assume that they will do nothing to assist in your pursuit, so you need to use what information you already hold to decide whether a claim could succeed - and for that you need to have proof, not hearsay!

[OrangePrimate]

This should be dealt with by 3uk and their Commercial support team. THEY will be able to request a recording and the dealer is obliged to supply it to them as an approved dealer. 3 are the best ones to do battle with them and to sort your account out IF your claim can be proved.

unfortunately this is a recuring issue that we hear many times a day. only about 8 out of 10 are actually as the customer says and the recordings/paperwork usually back up what the dealers say. they are now keeping the info as back up as for far too long contract dates would get adjusted and credits handed over on the customer's say so causing the networks and dealers major losses.

even more unfortunate, there are still some dodgy dealers out there! If this GM group are one of them, get 3 UK to do battle with them, they will be more afraid of losing authorisation to deal on behalf of a network than they will from a customer making noises (I am sure you can make big noise - but nothing to match a Network!!)

[The Truth will Out!]

Thanks for your replies.

Buzby,
Is it legal for them to accept my statutory fee (£10) without actually complying with my request? ie I am in a position to recover it?

With regards to the contract issue of 12 months or 18 months. Why should I have to prove it is 12 months? I will simply stop my direct debit after 11 months and demand a final bill. If they wanted to take action on me it would be up to them to find proof of contrary wouldn't it?

Many Thanks

[buzby]

The reasons for doubt are these - many firms erroneously mistakenly take the fee as a payment to account, and credit it. So in their eyes, they have not received any fee for the Subject Access Request. Also, there is no 'statutory fee', there is a MAXIMUM of £10, but it could be anything from free to a tenner. Did they tell you what their fee was?

If you send a Subject Access Request request, it is always a good idea to send it RD, as not only does it stand out more, but you have a verifiable proof of posting and receipt that you can present to the Information Commissioners Office of failure to comply.

Moving onto the 12/18 conundrum, years ago I would have said your stance was eminently reasonable, but now it carries a risk. You've already provided them with a very powerful tool - permission to disclose your dealings to a credit reference agency. Irrespective of what YOU thought your contract was, if you terminate by giving notice at 11 months and stop paying, when they have it flagged as 18, means red lights everywhere and a default. You need that like a hole in the head. Far better to confirm with them the period and negotiate to have it 'corrected' if an error had transpired. As OPrimate points out, memories can be fickle, and a casual remark that you miss because you were distracted may leave you looking silly as they prove their statement. You should always assume you need to have YOUR record(s) or recordings to prove your understanding should you need to.

[The Truth will Out!]

Thanks again Buzby.

I did send both letters by RD as stated above.

I suppose I will contact the Information Commissioners Office with regards to this issue. However, I have a feeling the general consensus is that they are next to useless. Would you recommend that I do make contact with them, or do you think it is a waste of time.

Many Thanks

[buzby]

Well, the devil in me feels for just the cost of a stamp, the potential for causing them grief is much more possible if you go ahead and do it!

[The Truth will Out!]

Sent my complaint off to Information Commissioners Office!

With regards to the £10 that they cashed. Do you think I would cause them more grief if I attempted to reclaim it through the courts if need be. Afterall, they didn't comply with the Data Protection request that the fee was for?

Many Thanks

[buzby]

Only worth it if you didn't get the benefit of the 'value' of the £10 paid, not that they ignored your request for a Subject Access Request. If they credited the £10 to your account, then you'd not have much success in getting that back as part of a small claims action. However, if the money just disappeared, then of course, it can form part of your claim against them.

[The Truth will Out!]

You see, I don't owe money to GM. All monies are paid direct to Three.

They wont talk to me on the phone or respond to letters so I think I'll go ahead and enter a claim against them online to recoup the £10. It'll cost me £30 and a bit of my time but it will cost them more grief and money.

Many Thanks.