Before anyone reads any further..I know nothing about court or how it all works this is just an opinion based on my logic. But if the transaction was subject to the conditions of and completed by a third party, in this case paypal and those conditions were that the third party can decide that the buyers money can be refunded without the goods being returned, yet when challeneged in court the judge completely over rules paypals policy and awards the funds back to the seller, then doesn't that make paypal and it's 'buyer protection' completely worthless? I can't remember which way round it is...ebay own paypal or paypal own ebay, but, paypal is a massive business on ebay and for a judge to over rule the terms that users agree to would open the floodgates to a mass of court claims surely? as I clearly stated, I don't know how court works, and I may have completely the wrong end of the stick, but I use ebay alot and I thought I knew where I stood when chosing to use paypal but this would make me think twice if this case were to be a victory for the seller.

Just to tag on my experience of this, I'm still new and had no idea at all how all this really worked, but I was amazed to find just how many rights I had. I had one DCA threatning to take everything I owned if I didn't pay a stupid amount of money by a certain date (ruined my christmas actualy) then I found CAG and now that DCA hasn't spoken to me since:) I'm dealing with others but now thankfully I have the upper hand to sort them. Good luck with your situation All the best Happyfeet24

I'd like to hand deliver a document to them:mad: they're not having my doughnuts though!

I agree with Hightail, Paypal's policy states that the goods don't have to be returned for a refund to be issued but in this case they requested that they were, which you did, but the seller seems to know the system by refusing to take delivery of them but wasn't expecting paypal to stick to their 'hidden terms' ( I say hidden because it takes alot of digging to find the section that states that goods don't have to be returned for the buyer to receive a refund) Either way, you are in the right here.

Hi Dannyboy, It's confused me, but I can only guess that the Bristol Golf Club is a national company with branches in different places:confused: I could be wrong though, Knowing my luck, next time I send a letter to them the RD slip will say 'KFC' or something:mad: Stupid fredricksons. Why can't they just get their own office

Thank you Palomino, I know that answers my question and I'm sure others will find that reply helpful too:) To put miltonworries thread back on track....

I'm interested in the way DCAs think when they go for legal action. They send the threat letters to scare for BR, and I understand that with the personal situation taken into account it wouldn't be a worth while move for the dca, but how is the DCA to know the individuals personal circumstances, how would they know until they attempted the BR that it isn't worth it, and then if the individual didn't defend then it would go ahead anyway wouldn't it? I'm not highjacking as such but I honestly don't know the answer but would like to and it might help the OP too

Plenty to chose from:grin: Thanks everyone:)

Thanks everyone, that's ok then, I just panicked when I saw a completely different name on the slip and I didn't want to be caught out if it's needed as evidence. It does look weird though, but I'll relax a bit more now. It's just that Fredrickson have never replied to my letters and I didn't know if this had something to do with it. I'll keep sending it to the address though, after all, it is their registered office address so they should be getting them

Thanks cerberusalert, would the slip I've got be proof of delivery to Fredrickson in court?

Hi, I've just sent a letter to Fredricksons saying that they're in default of my CCA request. I've just got home after going to the post office and checked my RD slip. It says at the bottom that the building name that it's been sent to is 'Bristol Golf Club Ltd' The post code is correct for their registered office on Chandos Street but what's with the Golf club in Bristol? I've checked previous RD slips for Fredricksons and they have the same postcode but the building name is just 'Flat' I'm sure the letter will get their because it's addressed to their office but if I need to prove to a court that I sent it and the slip says 'Bristol Golf Club Ltd' am I stuck? It was sent from the same post office as the slips that say 'Flat' , does anyone know what's gone wrong or where I stand now?

We're a family of 4. My husband supported us and we paid our way. The economy went wrong and he lost his job. Not because he didn't want it, was a drunk, druggy or anything like that!, it was just simply because of the economy created by someone other than us. He now can't get a job as well paid as he once had. we have tax credits and child benefit, housing benefit and council tax benefit (ooooh aren't we ****) anyway, to take the jobs on offer we would lose all of that, except the child benefit, we would get working tax credits instead of child tax credits. Either way, if my OH took the jobs offered at the moment then we wouldn't be able to afford to pay rent and live. Yet, if he stays as he is, then we can just about afford to live and we have no worries about losing our house. If you had 2 kids then what would you do??? does this make us **** and a drain? No! it's just that this is the situation we're in and we have to live. We don't like it but that's life

Again, as I said before, if it it is BCW as has been said, then don't worry about the doorstep visits, they want you to be worried. They want you to hear stories of how terrible it is when they visit. In reality, it isn't terrible. Get that 'revoke licence' letter printed off and ready to hand to them if you open the door to them. The second they meet legal knowledge resistance then the quicker they will go away.

Sorry Alan, I understand you've had a difficult time with a difficult situation,

5035 is the best post ever. It'll take alot to beat that:D

That's all you had to say in a little pm to inform me:confused:

yeah, sorry again Fred That post really wasn't ment in a bad way towards the CAG

lol, oh sorry, I see now, no, I meant my post was deleted AS a nobody, but yeah, I see how it looked, sorry all I didn't mean to be awkward I was just confused why my post was deleted but the main body of the thread is stayed.

Not with you Fred, can you explain?

Erm the 'nobody' was me that a had a post deleted. so no, not really

this thread will never be the same again:(

After all this there wasn't much deleted then

I'm glad that by being united you were able to get the thread back. don't see why little old me was picked on? anyway, I don't care, I suppose a post had to be deleted by a 'nobody' to make it look like something was being done without upsetting the main people

I had no issues untill my PM saying that my one post had been removed

I'm just posting to make up for the post I had removed