Hi, My parents own a house in Northern Ireland which is 'split' in two halves and one half is rented out as a self-catering holiday home with its own entrance and exit door. The whole house still has only one postal address and the two halves have an interconnecting door which is locked on my parents' side. They currently have insurance from Santander (buildings, contents and public liability) but Santander are going to exclude the public liability aspect from the policy in January. My questions are: Did Santander provide enough cover for their situation (Satander said they did) or were they miss-sold? If miss-selling did occur, what recourse do they have (they never had a claim on the public liability insurance and only two claims over the years when they had a chimney fire and when a tree fell down on their greenhouse. If they were undersold on their insurance what should they have been sold? Thanks in advance. John

I know. It's sad that I have so little effect. This individual edit is just one of many but I may help a little. Your quote "Anything that says the capacity will vary is pretty much guaranteed to be a con like this" is superb. I shall take it up with eBay in the first instance to see what they say. I suspect nothing. Then I'll think more imaginatively, lol.

No I have not. I think that he knows what he's doing and is relying upon consumer ignorance. His adverts include the words, "These cards will vary in capacity and speed as they are factory formatted in bulk and so the capacity can vary from 8GB to 128GB" This is his getout I think. But every card is 8GB.

Hi, I recently saw the previous version of this advert on eBay: Link removed And immediately thought it was a [problem] but was intrigued so I bought one for £6.99 including free postage. It IS a [problem]. The eBay user edit. He's selling 8GB SD cards and USB sticks purporting them as 128/256GB ones. Basically, they've been 'hacked' and have had their "File Descriptor" identities changed to reflect a new size. What happens when users get these items is they insert them into their PC/Camera/Phone and it reports as the expected size but when they try and save anything over the actual 8GB the pic/video/file, etc seems to save but is never retrievable. But most users don't get to the 8GB limit before leaving positive feedback! Imagine if you'd used this card/stick to save your whole family holiday pics and videos thinking that 128GB was loads of space only to come home to find that only 8GB of your files were usable? Now..... The question is what to do? This user obviously has my home address so I don't want to raise an eBay refund (and I want to keep the SD card as evidence) since it may have unpleasant consequences. He (and it is a He) is still selling the cards and has branched out to selling faked USB sticks. Should I contact Trading Standards in Cheshire where the seller lives? Should I create a false eBay account and report him? I don't know. I just know that this twonk is ripping people off and needs to have his 11-year eBay account killed and everyone who he's conned told what has happened. Any advice would be good Thanks people, Swirly

Thanks for all the advice that everyone has given me with my Parking Eye problem. As expected, I've won my appeal to POPLA. I think the kicker for the evidence was the £6000+ invoice sent to my employer from the hotel for the rental of 38 parking spaces for the period covering my charge date. Obviously this had been paid and Parking Eye offered no defence against that. So, the next step is for me to start making complaints about Parking Eye's behaviour to the various bodies. Clearly, a formal complaint to the hotel is in order as is one to the BPA and the local Trading Standards department. Are there any other suggestions of organisations that I should contact? Also, I would be grateful for any suggestions as to what I should include in the complaints I make. Thanks in advance.

OK...I've just received the evidence that PE have provided so it seems they they want to press ahead with the claim. Frankly, it's pretty weak; it consists of 32 pages of guff including 11 pages of pictures of signage, 7 pages of previous emails (ie, two of my emails saying I don't owe this - why does this take up seven pages?), etc. Their compelling evidence seems to be 'Section G - Other Evidence' where they do a search for my car reg on their whitelist of cars that are permitted to park on the land - it come up with nothing hence why they are waving their hands. I have been legitimately parking there for several years using my employers agreement/payment with the hotel and still do to this day; since the start of this farce I have been parking every working day in their car park without a charge because I pay for it. This sounds to me that PE are trying to use me as some sort of test; probably because they are watching this CAG thread. I'm quite happy to take this to court since I will easily win but thought I'd let everyone know of the hassle that ParkingEye are creating me. John

The position I've taken is to provide enough evidence to discredit PE but also to point out their failings. No matter which way the POPLA appeal goes I'll still have enough evidence to make a fool of PE which in turn will focus attention on PE and the way their systems are at fault. Hopefully, this will make them reconsider their way of working (I doubt this) and by costing them money will take a look at themselves. If PE take me to court I'll be making the most of it and will be publishing the full details to all media outlets. I've informed my employer of their poor performance and they're completely behind me with this. Obviously, they'll be able to use this case as a way of negotiating a lower cost for parking in future!

Thank you to everyone for their advice. My appeal to POPLA is below: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Following a parking charge notice received from Parking Eye for an event on 21st July 2014 and issued on 25th July 2014 I appealed via their website. My appeal detailed the fact that my parking fees at the Park Inn Hotel were paid on a monthly basis via my employer (xxxxx xxx Ltd) who occupy land next to the hotel and provide this facility to many of their employees via their monthly salary. These charges have been paid via my salary since I began working for them in November 2012 and via my previous employer (xxxxxxx xxxxxxx Ltd) since August 2001. This facility allows me to park my registered vehicle at the Park Inn without charge at any time of day. In fact I have parked my car almost every day since the start of my employment(s) to the present day without issue and I continue to do so. As such I find it very strange that they have issued a parking charge for parking on 21st July 2014 and not for any day before or since. I also find it doubly strange that they have decided to reject my original appeal. I can understand an error in their sophisticated computer system which would issue an initial Parking Charge but I cannot understand a rejection of my appeal when further details were supplied. This would appear to be complete idiocy resulting in costs to both Parking Eye and myself rejecting the accusal. Clearly, their processes are lacking in governance and without compliance to the contract between Parking Eye and the Park Inn hotel. This lack of coherence will affect the relationship between Parking Eye and the Park Inn since I will be making a complaint to the hotel regarding this matter. In addition, I will be informing my employer of the poor service received by Parking Eye via the Park Inn hotel and will bring this matter up with the British Parking Association and Shropshire Trading Standards. A sensible reponse from Parking Eye would be interesting. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I also sent an anonymised payslip .jpg which showed my payment for parking. I hope it does get interesting

Thanks for all the valuable replies; very interesting. I agree that POPLA is the route to take since taking it to County Court would be far too much inconvenience for the possible benefit. What evidence would I have to submit with my POPLA appeal? I only have my payslips which show a monthly amount being deducted for "Car Parking" since it's my employer that actually pays the bill to the hotel/Parking Eye. Obviously, I'll mention that I park there every working day and haven't received any parking charges before or since the date of the notice (21st July). In addition, many of my colleagues are provided the same parking facility and none that I know of have received a similar parking charge. What would constitute a GPEOL? Thanks in advance, John

Hi, I pay for my parking at a ParkingEye carpark which I park in every working day. The payment is made by me via my salary and was taken from me during the relevant month by my employer. ParkingEye have sent me a £100 parking charge notice for one of the days I was there last month. I have appealed (and reminded them one week later since I hadn't had a response) and have had this rejected (together with a POPLA code) with the reason being given as, "no parking was purchased on the date of the parking event". I know I've paid the monthly charge and have parked there every working day ever since without charge - and for about two years previously actually! Soooo, I think I have a pretty solid case and also think I should be able to get some recompense for the hassle of the three letters and two replies I have had to compose to respond to their 'threats'. How should I go about this? Clearly, a court would throw this out but I would like to make a rather costly point of how ParkingEye treat people who are in the complete right. Any interesting ways of making this gradually expensive for ParkingEye would be welcome

I would love to know just how many other uninformed people that telecomdomains.co.uk have ripped off. Unfortunately I suspect that they prey upon the people who wouldn't browse internet forums such as the elderly and generally people who only have a passing interest in the internet. They seem to rely upon conning people who will say yes to their high-pressure sales techniques which is an evil way to do business. I would put these people in the same class as a parasite which moves from host to host, killing each one with no sense of care. The other thing to bear in mind is that they will automatically attempt to resubmit your domain name (in their name as agents) when the two years is up and you'll be billed again! However, if you have a right to the domain they've sold you then you can ask for it to be transferred to another registrar and stop them from doing this. I detest these people since they are absolute thieves and shysters. The following is their Nominet details: Domain name: telecomdomains.co.uk Registrant: Telecom Domains Ltd Trading as: Telecom Domains Ltd Registrant type: UK Limited Company, (Company number: 06415800) Registrant's address: 1-2 Universal House 88-94 Wentworth Street London England E17SA United Kingdom Registrar: Fasthosts Internet Ltd [Tag = FASTHOSTS] URL: Web and email hosting, domain names and dedicated servers - Fasthosts Relevant dates: Registered on: 30-Oct-2007 Renewal date: 30-Oct-2011 Last updated: 02-Dec-2009 Registration status: Registered until renewal date. Name servers: ns1.servage.net ns2.servage.net ns3.servage.net ns4.servage.net And this is their registered info with Companies House: Name & Registered Office: TELECOM DOMAINS LIMITED 40 THOMAS STREET LLANELLI CARMS SA15 3JA Company No. 06415800 Status: Active Date of Incorporation: 02/11/2007 Country of Origin: United Kingdom Company Type: Private Limited Company Nature of Business (SIC(03)): 7260 - Other computer related activities Accounting Reference Date: 30/06 Last Accounts Made Up To: 30/06/2008 (DORMANT)

From what I've gathered the DSR only apply to 'trader to consumer' transactions, not 'trader to trader'. However, my mother paid by personal credit card and can't be sure that she didn't buy the domain name in a 'personal' manner. It's true that the invoice and the domain registration are in different names though so it might be argued that it wasn't entirely clear who the seller was selling to; I'll have to clear that up with my mother. What is clear is that she was totally conned by Telecom Domains Ltd and their despicable behaviour is one to be warned against.

Yes. She paid by personal credit card. How does a chargeback work if the transaction was for a payment for a 'trading as' person? Sorry to ask but how does she initiate a chargeback? Thanks for the help. John

Hi, I don't know if this is the right forum to start with but it is related to sales of internet services. Here's my problem: My mother rents out half her house as a holiday let. It's a completely seperate part of the house and has its own exit/entry door. For this I've designed a very simple website with its own domain name. She recently received a call from Telecom Domains Ltd selling her a different domain name which would be redirected to the domain that is currently used for the website. For this she was charged £115. I know that this service is currently available for just under £7 (yes, £7!). She's obviously a little miffed at being ripped off because she was sold it by the salesman using terms such as "top level domain" and "you'll get a ranking in Google", both of which terms I know are meaningless in terms of website popularity status. She also stated that she knew nothing about computers or the internet in general (she's mid-60s and a retired pensioner). Unfortunately she allowed the salesman to bill her to the assumed trading name of the 'business' she runs, although she has not registered her income from the letting as a 'formal' business (Ltd, etc). Obviously, this is totally exploitative and I've investigated how the distance selling regulations could be used to attempt to gain a refund but they only seem concerned with sales to comsumers, not traders (which I assume she has become since the invoice, etc went to the 'business'). Does she have a leg to stand upon? I realise that this may be outside the remit of this particular forum but any advice or direction would be particularly appreciated. Many thanks, John

And now I'm wondering......how much cash can I actually make these clowns spend on chasing me before they realise they're onto a losing streak and give up? Any suggestions for questions I could ask to clarify the supposed debt? I could really go for it and ask questions such as, "Who is your supervisor?", "Can you confirm that you have received my last letter?" and when they've got completely bored of me, "Can you tell me why you have decided to write off this alleged debt?". Some years ago I heard that it cost about £25 to send a letter. This cost has certainly reduced due to advances in technology, etc, but I'm sure it must cost some money to reply to my advances. If they don't reply to my (legitimate) questions then do I have a right to complain about them for each and every request? I really am interested in making this company's life as difficult as possible so.....suggestions anyone? Swirly