Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.  
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

rewardsnow.co.uk scam


kinkyklee
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4361 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

hi just checked my online banking and i have a strange debit from rewardsnow.co.uk taken 19.95 never heard of them at all went straight to there site and it came up [problem] on every search im gutted as its left me over drawn,rang bank and got put thru to fraud peeps they have cancelled me card but i dont get another for 7 days great just what we need around new year...just wundered wether anyone else has had same issues with this [causing problems] company

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

This is such a good company that they have got their very own e-petition running, that is certainly the sort of reputation that any good company would want. I suggest everyone that has been duped by them to go along and register on the e-petition for rewardsnow and hopefully between us we can stop this [problem] before it goes on for much longer.

 

This company rewardsnow are hitting the people at the bottom of the ladder, the sorts of people that find it hard to obtain credit and the people that are struggling to live and their credit score has become an important part of their life, it has even become a choice for some to obtain a credit report before they apy their bills and heating and food. Sign the petition against rewardsnow and lets stop this company

 

I have just found out that rewardsnow has an actual e-petition running, which can be found on the e-petitions site, you only need to search rewardsnow and you can register on the e-petition for this company

 

i am not sure if i am allowed to post the address on here but if not please can admin can remove

 

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/17209

REWARDSNOW AND CREDITSCOREMATTERS ARE NOW GETTING THEIR COME UPPANCE, I WILL MAKE SURE OF THAT

 

Grabby bank are the thorn in my side.

Claim issued 31st may 06

Served 5th june 06

Judgement obtained 20th june 06

Claim amount 1305.19 inc costs

CCA letter sent to Activ Kapital (now in default. 60+ days have passed)

CCa letter sent to Close management(21st june no response what so ever)

Data Protection Act letter sent to Black Horse(21st june no response so far)

Data Protection Act letter sent to First National(no response either.)

DFS has succumbed to my request for a new suite as the last one was not fit for purpose

All letters sent recorded and signed for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Done some more checking on creditscorematters and rewardsnow, they are all part of the same company that was highlighted in the Daily Mirror under the name high-street max, its part of the adaptive affinty group, this in turn is owned by Verture inc

 

" Adaptive Affinity is part of *American firm Vertrue Inc and in the States its reputation, is far from being a "legitimate business" - is of a firm awaiting sentence after being convicted of consumer fraud.

 

It was prosecuted by the attorney general of Iowa, Tom Miller, who accused Vertrue of "deceptive" tactics that "obscured" the fact that customers were signing up to a subscription service.

 

"Many customers don't look for a charge because they never provided a credit card number to purchase trial membership," he said.

 

"But Vertrue companies already have the credit card number from the 'partner' business that the consumer called in the first place."

 

Vertrue claims that just half a per cent of customers complain.

 

It can all be read on the site at the following link

 

http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/investigations/2010/09/online-shopping-firm-highstree.html

 

admin please remove if i have posted this link against the forum rules

REWARDSNOW AND CREDITSCOREMATTERS ARE NOW GETTING THEIR COME UPPANCE, I WILL MAKE SURE OF THAT

 

Grabby bank are the thorn in my side.

Claim issued 31st may 06

Served 5th june 06

Judgement obtained 20th june 06

Claim amount 1305.19 inc costs

CCA letter sent to Activ Kapital (now in default. 60+ days have passed)

CCa letter sent to Close management(21st june no response what so ever)

Data Protection Act letter sent to Black Horse(21st june no response so far)

Data Protection Act letter sent to First National(no response either.)

DFS has succumbed to my request for a new suite as the last one was not fit for purpose

All letters sent recorded and signed for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

There are thousands and thousands of complaints against this company online and none of them matter until the official petition is signed online. Please follow the link below and petition against this company exploiting vulnerable people who are trying to check their credit rating! This company MUST be stopped!!

 

Go to the epetitions on the HM Direct Gov website and it is petition 17209 or Rewardsnow

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Further to seeing all of the complaints against this Company. The MO has a distinct pattern and in my opinion apart from complaining to the trading standards I believe that there is sufficient MO to prove that this is OBTAINING PERCUNERY ADVANTAGE BY DECEPTION under the Theft Act. As such people should complain to the Police in sufficient numbers to cause an investigation and hopefully prosecution. I am a Retired Police Officer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...