Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by MaxxPower

  1. If you read the details then it makes sense to me really. Payouts aren't actually being increased, it's just that previously any payout awarded was discounted by 2.5% as there was an expectation that the money could be easily invested/put into savings to make back that amount, and so to not discount the payment would result in the recipient profiting rather than simply recovering their losses. These rules were originally set before the financial crisis though I believe. So the rules have been updated now to better reflect the current financial climate. Payouts are not being adjusted, only the level that they are discounted by. The insurance companies seem to be trying to spin it as if the actual payout levels are being increased though.
  2. I believe the manufacturers/supermarkets have run studies which showed that consumers were more accepting of size/portion reductions than they were of price increases, so that's the approach they went with.
  3. If only they had been warned that exactly this was going to happen. Wait....
  4. The Repair/Replace/Refund terms were pretty much the same under the Sale of Goods act though. Even under the Sale of Goods act you had no right to demand an immediate refund several months down the line.
  5. I had this issue a little while ago, bought two bottles of Rum marked at £15 each or 2 for £20, but after leaving the shop I was thinking my bill had seemed too high, so when I checked my receipt I realised they really had just charged me £15 each. When I went back in to complain they not only refunded me the additional £10, but they refunded me double. Apparently it was store policy to refund double when it was their fault. In that case they did remove the out of date label, right away when they'd gone to check it. Kind of a shame really given that they essentially gave me two bottles of rum for free. I'd have gone back the next day and gotten a few more if the label had still been there... I can definitely understand the problem though, so many people don't check their receipts, they just pay and walk out with no idea of what the amount should have been. I only realised because I'd been keeping track of the prices of what I had been buying (a relatively small number of items which is why I could keep track). Had it been a big weekly shop I probably wouldn't have noticed the extra £10.
  6. I have to drive 75 miles each way to work. Diesel is pretty much my only option. By all means charge extra to low mileage diesel users, but some of us have no real choice in the matter if we don't want to double our fuel costs.
  7. Once again my dad has managed to get a parking ticket and it's up to me to sort out. Last time it was all sorted thanks to the help on here Basically they've sent my dad a letter saying he entered a pay and display car park at time X and left at time Y on the 29th December, approximately 90-100 minutes apart, and that he wasn't displaying a valid ticket. The letter only has pictures of his car licence plate, no pictures of his dashboard showing either no ticket present or a ticket that didn't have sufficient time purchased. He insists he bought a ticket and, being almost 2 weeks ago now, has obviously binned the ticket. I've started the EuroCarParks internal appeal process, saying that a ticket was purchased and they have not provided any proof that no ticket or an invalid ticket was being displayed. I fully expect this appeal to be denied (Do these private parking companies ever allow internal appeals?) and so it will go to Popla, at which point I'll present the same argument along with the argument that the operator has demonstrated no Genuine pre-estimate of loss. Is there anything else I should be prepared for with putting together the Popla appeal when the time comes? The previous instance was in a free car park so slightly different to this entirely pay and display one.
  8. Are you able to go back to Paypal and have them reverse the transaction? If the seller isn't communicating and has shut down the page then Paypal should refund you.
  9. How did you pay? Has the money actually been taken?
  10. AO.com are an online retailer, they generally deal in large appliances and electrical items like TVs, basically an online only version of Currys. They advertise quite a lot on TV.
  11. Cessation of Broadband charge is normal. Every ISP using BT infrastructure will charge you a fee to cease your broadband if you aren't using a MAC code to transfer to another provider as, in that case, I believe there is work that must be physically carried out at the Exchange by Openreach. If Sky are able to provide you with a phoneline though, then BT would be able to as well. Sky uses BT infrastructure. Reading the OP, it appears to me that BT did not say that they could not provide a service, just that the OP would need to pay to have a new line installed as no BT line was present at the property previously since it was serviced by Virgin Media who use their own infrastructure. It sounds like Sky basically offered to absorb this cost as a new customer benefit whilst BT would not for an existing customer. Thusly, BT have not terminated or breached the contract, the OP has. In that case I think it's reasonable that BT would charge something to terminate the contract early, though the full balance of the remaining term is excessive.
  12. This was a change the Indian government made with less than 24 hours notice I believe. The idea behind it was that 500 and 1000 notes were a favourite for criminal uses so short notice was given to prevent giving criminal groups time to more gradually exchange large amounts of notes.
  13. This seems a good place to ask this question. When watching these shows you quite regularly see someone pointing out that possessions on the property do not belong to them but to someone else who is not the debtor (Especially when the debtor is staying in someone elses home). The DCBL staff then say that it's down to the debtor to prove that goods do not belong to them, rather than DCBL having to prove the goods do belong to the debtor. Is that correct though? I'd have thought that surely they would need to prove that goods do belong to a debtor before removing them. It can't be the case that they can just seize whatever the hell they want and if the non-debtor owners have lost their receipts then tough luck, can it?
  14. The best solution would be to stop energy providers being able to charge more for Gas/Electricity to prepayment meter customers than to standard meter customers.
  15. Don't most of them setup outside of the UK so don't have to abide by a lot of UK legislation anyway?
  16. It's fairly reasonable for them to ask for some kind of proof of purchase. When you say you've found an e-mail do you mean the e-mail receipt/order confirmation? That should be enough provided it has details such as an order number. As dx said though, after this length of time they can insist that you get an engineers report on the fault first. Also note that if they do opt for a refund route, it likely wont be a full refund and there will likely be a deduction for 'enjoyment', which they are entitled to do legally. I'd expect any refund to be for about 50-60% of the total paid at most if it's almost 2 years old.
  17. I wouldn't call that screenshot misleading at all really. It clearly says "Sign up and pay" and you're on the sign up page for Amazon Prime. It's stating in bold black text what you're agreeing to. The only way you could accidentally sign up based on that screenshot is if you were just clicking through without reading what's on the screen, which you certainly can't hold Amazon responsible for.
  18. Ahh right. Phew! I always just thought "Search on credit file = Impact". Still seems a little off that they're running searches years later for a previous address in my name but with my brothers date of birth.
  19. So yesterday I was taking a look at my Noddle credit report and when I checked the section for previous searches I noticed that in early July there were about 21 searches all done on the same date. I was rather puzzled by this and at first I thought something serious was going on, but when I checked the names and Purpose of the searches it began to click. The purpose was mostly "General Insurance" but some were marked as "Identification Check" and "Quotation Search", and the names were things like, "Lexisnexis Risk Solutions Uk Limited Insurance Quote - Www.Lexisnexis.Com/Ukconsumer" "Covea Insurance Plc (Cr Bsb) Provident Insurance (Cr Bsb Api)" "Quote Me Happy.Com" And other Insurancy sounding names. And then it hit me, that was when I was searching comparison websites because my car insurance was coming up for renewal! Now I know I searched a few comparison sites, but 21 searches? Digging a little deeper I found that some of them also seemed to be for my previous address that I haven't lived at for nearly 3 years. It seems that old companies are keeping my details on file and even years later they're running searches, even if they don't seem to be contacting me about it. Even weirder, the date of birth shown on some of the searches is my brothers rather than my own. I have run insurance searches for him with his details, but that was also his name and address (Just in the same browser session) so something seems to be going wrong there with the same browser session not changing all details. This all just seems a little strange to me. Should a comparison site be running credit searches like this just for me getting some quotes? Should insurance companies be carrying out credit searches even years later like this? Could 21 searches on the same day, even if they're of these types, have a potential short term impact on my credit score?
  20. In that sort of situation it's best to change the channel that your router is using in the settings. To figure out the best channel you can get various WiFi scanner apps for free on Android/iOS and it'll check the various networks and what channel they're using.
  21. Almost certainly, any settlement will be for US citizens only. The recent Nvidia settlement over the GTX 970 scandal was $30 for everyone who bought the card, but only if they lived in the US and purchased from a US retailer.
  22. Whilst the payment may have been to Paypal, it was not a standard Paypal payment. The OP did not actually link his Credit Card to a Paypal account and then make a payment that way, he made a payment via a Chip and Pin terminal that just happened to be provided by Paypal. My understanding would be that this latter method used by the OP would indeed be covered by S75 as it is not a standard Paypal transaction, but a standard Chip and Pin transaction, the same as with any retailer.
  23. I think some of the complaints also stem from the tracks being slippery when wet and cyclists riding over them sometimes find their wheels slipping when cycling at speed. But as the video says, you should approach tram tracks at very close to a 90 degree angle if you intend to cross them. The start of the video shows a cyclist riding practically in parallel with the tracks, so not sure what they thought was going to happen. All it takes is a little care, approaching them the right way and perhaps slowing down a little in wet conditions.
  24. Well, what do you want? What loss have you suffered as a result of the problem? You can only claim compensation for actual losses you have suffered as a result of the issue. The courts wont decide on what level of compensation you're entitled to, you have to come up with a figure yourself and request that amount, then justify it.
  • Create New...