Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello Caggers,   I've been trying for years to get an old EE account wiped off my credit file. It was opened in 2013 and almost immediately defaulted but was shown as "Payment Arrangement" ever since. I contacted EE by telephone in 2022 and was advised it had not been wiped because therte was still £69 owing, so I paid it and thought it would correct once the CRA's updated their reporting cycle.   However, it has still not been removed. I made a formal complaint on 27/03/2024 and have had contact with the executive team who advised that  "EE account 106985089 has now been deleted from the Credit File as it failed to close as it was reporting the payment arrangement set up despite, as advised this failing which should have resulted in a further default showing.  Please be advised the deletions we have completed take 24 hours to update if a paid service is used to view the Credit File. If the customer uses one of the free services to view the Credit File, the recordings update in 24 hours but the changes can take up to 30 days to be visible on a new copy of the Credit File. I have requested compensation and been advised by EE that another team are looking into this. That was almost 2 weeks ago and there has been no contact since, despite me chasing it. I do not want to go to court and would rather settle this amicably. However,I have been advised that I might have a claim for aggravated damages due to the length of time the incorrect reporting has been on my file and the fact that I told EE about this issue and paid the demanded outstanding amount of £69 almost 18 months ago. Should I just wait for EE to reply or should I start building my case against them? Is their statement admissible as evidence of their blame or do I need to dig a bit more? I made a DSAR which was initially rejected as having no data found yet. I trawled my e-mails from 2013 and found the account number and mobile number, so I'm now awaiting the result of my 2nd attempt at DSAR. I have very little in the way of proof of actual loss except a mortgage refusal e-mail from HBOS in 2015. I have also had high interest loans and credit over the last 10 years but again cannot directly attribute this to this one specific error. There were other items on my credit file that could also have contributed to a low credit score too and I'm not out to cash in on anything. I want to make sure I don't end up shooting myself in the foot for any obvious reason and would appreciate any help from anyone who has had similar experience with breaches of DPA.
    • Noted. Keep an eye on the other threads here including the update a few hours back by Rob Carr.
    • dont need statements. nor std info sheets. EVERTHING else  dx
    • they have 6mts else it dies. ................. BUT yet again today you've posted on someone else's thread posts now moved here. please keep to your OWN THREAD!! now to date you've not bothered to reply to our questions so we CAN help you.    
    • Update: tfl is taking me to court I'm trying to get an ooc claim from them but they have not been replying to my emails. 
  • 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
      • 161 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
  • Recommended Topics

Refund from a fraudulent activity Ebay/Paypal?


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2055 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

Hello all,

 

Recently I became a victim of fraud and I have been trying to reach out to all the right people in order to correct this.

 

I purchased a brand new, still sealed mobile phone from what looked like a reputable seller on eBay. They had been on eBay for quite a few years selling all sorts of items with great feedback and not negatives.

 

I received the mobile phone after paying using my CC and used it for 6 months as there were no issues until February this year. It had turned out the original owner had put the mobile phone on the global blacklist as I believe they're the only person (except the police) that can do this. I tried to get in contact with the seller and it had seemed they had deactivated their eBay account, which was strange since they had been a long term user of eBay.

 

I'm reaching out to the eBay community for advice on this situation please. I have actioned the following so far:

 

- My CC company won't issue a refund due to a third party handling the transaction (PayPal). There is a Consumer Credit Act 1974 (yes, this is a problem in this day and age) that apparently stops banks from issuing refunds.

 

- eBay have said they wouldn't help and I needed to go to the payment handled.

 

- PayPal have said they wouldn't help being it's outside their 180 day limit. I have sent the CEO a letter with all the evidence screenshotted.

 

- I wrote a letter to the supplier of the mobile phone and report the fraudulent activity but I received a very unprofessional letter with no name or signature back. I am looking to send this to their CEO and ask if this is acceptable.

 

- I logged a case with Action Fraud who tried to pass it to the National Fraud Agency and got told they literally don't have the time to check this case.

 

- I am currently trying to work with the Financial Ombudsman Service to push my CC company into getting my money back.

 

Short of me running about and trying to get either my mobile phone working (off the blacklist and the IMEI number moved to my account) or getting my money back, I am running out of ideas. I could try legal advice but if anyone has any kind of appropriate and helpful advice, I would be grateful.

 

Kind regards,

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and Welcome to CAG

 

I have moved your thread to the appropriate forum...I would suggest your problem is with Ebay/PayPal not Santander. Section 75 refund to not apply to third party sales.

 

Thread title updated

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

seems weird they would blacklist a phone after 6mts?

sounds like an admin error somewhere by someone

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

seems weird they would blacklist a phone after 6mts?

sounds like an admin error somewhere by someone

 

Certainly does. I found out the IMEI is linked to an EE account. This means EE were the phone supplier who sold this phone from new. EE have it in their contracts that you cannot sell a phone within the first 6 months of starting a new contract because you're still paying for the phone.

 

I'll leave it to you what to think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah right that explains it then

the guy sold it off [or it was sold to him] before he/they was allowed to and EE have found out

probably left them with a tidy usage bill too.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ah right that explains it then

the guy sold it off [or it was sold to him] before he/they was allowed to and EE have found out

probably left them with a tidy usage bill too.

 

It could be an insurance claim. Check this scenario; original owner sells and waits 6 months before claiming on insurance for this phone as lost/stolen. This means the IMEI goes on the blacklist and the original owner gets a new phone. This also means that by selling the original phone, they have gained 605GBP from myself. The reason for the 6 months could be to avoid all helps from eBay/PayPal leaving the buyer with nowhere to turn.

 

No one left a usage bill because I bought the phone brand new and still sealed. Only I have ever used the phone which I can prove from my account.

 

I would like to get the IMEI off the blacklist and removed from the original owners account so they cannot blacklist it again. Failing this, I would clearly want my money back. Sadly, I'm not very well protected due to the seller waiting this duration and PayPal being the third party handler which stops my CC refunding me due to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Not that I agree with this, I believe all fraud should be fought against and with none of the big companies nor the National Fraud Agency getting involved, I do not have a lot of options left.

 

I have quite a lot of evidence in screenshots but so far no one is wanting to help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one left a usage bill because I bought the phone brand new and still sealed. Only I have ever used the phone which I can prove from my account.

 

Surely the usage part of a bill would relate to the SIM card, not the phone.

Unless you got the original SIM too, (& it was unused, still in the carrier it was supplied with originally), I wouldn’t be so confident there wasn’t a usage bill ......

Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the usage part of a bill would relate to the SIM card, not the phone.

Unless you got the original SIM too, (& it was unused, still in the carrier it was supplied with originally), I wouldn’t be so confident there wasn’t a usage bill ......

 

I'm not sure why the usage part has come up because this has nothing to do with buying the phone and my issue. I bought a brand new, still sealed mobile phone and put my own SIM in it. I do not have the SIM the phone was sold to/with.

 

Whatever the original owner does with their SIM has nothing to do with my end of this. Could you please clarify what you mean?

 

For clarification on my part; I have tried not to talk about a SIM because I didn't want people to get confused. I'm purely discussing the phone IMEI being blacklisted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but if you read whats been said the original sim card could be the reason why its been barred?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but if you read whats been said the original sim card could be the reason why its been barred?

 

If you mean because of a usage bill on the original SIM sold with the phone (if it wasn't just an upgrade) then surely the SIM alone would be blacklisted and not the phone as well? After all, it was in my own care for 6 months, longer than EE T&Cs.

 

Unless I'm clearly missing the point. Sorry, not trying to be awkward, I'm only trying to understand the situation so I can see if there is something I can actually do about this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes so are we.. Its an interesting one

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most likely the events developed as follow:

1. Fraudster signed up to a contract and got a new phone

2. Signed up to insurance at the same time

3. Sold the phone to you without telling the network provider

4. 6 months later he/she made a claim through the insurance for lost/stolen phone

5. Phone gets barred

6. You get shafted

7. He/she gets a new phone and keeps your money

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...