PS I tried to send you a private message John Brown but apparently it's not possible with your account.

Hello John Brown, you've made a number of assumptions. I have made very clear that the fitting company is responsible for the fitting, who happens to be the kitchen company's designer, and not the supplier of the kitchen. It's been admitted by the kitchen company that they supplied the wrong oak worktops; they don't match because they are different types of oak (one prime oak, the other rustic oak) and so they will never match however much they are are oiled. The wrong quality of oak worktops was also supplied; the kitchen company has now offered to replace the worktop with 27mm thick worktops and I am considering this offer. However, I am concerned that 27mm thick is not the best quality oak I had requested and 40mm thick would be better. The sink seal failed that's why water leaked. Nobody has taken screws out of the door, they have just worked loose. There are other issues wrong that I haven't detailed here; but you can see an indication of them in the photos, such as the sub-floor not being correctly installed. However, it's probably best for me delete the blog and write a fuller report once all the issues have been resolved, so that I can share with readers what I am learnt from this exercise.

Thank you very much for your reply with useful advice. I will check out the Furniture Ombudsman, although we don't yet know the cost of fixing the problems. As I wrote in my blog, the kitchen was supplied by Custom Kitchens and Bedrooms Ltd, and their in-house designer, who has a separate business called Nigel Hirst t/a Bluestone Interiors, separately quoted to do the installation, along with some other related projects such as plastering, decorating, flooring and electrics. I am unsure why Custom Kitchens and Bedrooms Ltd didn't quote for fitting, which I did request at the time, as they do advertise this service. It was my preference not to split supply and fit, and it would have made matters much more simple and straightforward. However, Nigel Hirst insisted on being contracted to do the fitting. Obviously the two businesses are connected in some way, as Nigel Hirst is the in-house designer for Custom Kitchens and he works from their premises. As far as I was concerned, I went to one shop for a kitchen. My chartered surveyor has been attempting to negotiate with the parties to come to a resolution, but has not received satisfactory answers. I have lost trust after waiting so long for the projects to be finished, and after the quality of the installations has been so demonstrably poor.

Hello, some of you may remember my posting of last year about QuickQuid and how my identity was stolen: Recorded telephone call with QuickQuid Now I have a problem with a kitchen installation, and I'll be interested in hearing from other members who may have had to deal with similar issues. My Kitchen Nightmare I'm very grateful this website forum exists. Best wishes, Jon Danzig www.JonDanzig.com

I now have a problem with a kitchen installation. Read my new blog: My Kitchen Nightmare

I agree. At the very least, a loan company needs to have a proper presence in this country to be able to operate here. Every call I tried to make to QuickQuid London was automatically routed to the USA - and to members of staff who often appeared to know little about our financial regulations or procedures.

There's an interesting article just published in 'This is money' about another victim of QuickQuid's slack vetting procedures. TONY HETHERINGTON: Dodgy 'debt' demands of US payday loan firm Mr Hetherington's conclusion: "The blunt fact is that QuickQuid seems content to ignore British law."

There's an interesting article just published in 'This is money' about another victim of QuickQuid's slack vetting procedures. TONY HETHERINGTON: Dodgy 'debt' demands of US payday loan firm Mr Hetherington's conclusion: "The blunt fact is that QuickQuid seems content to ignore British law."

Thanks Stu007; yes I had noticed this and it appears on the video of my BBC interview,

Yes, and I will keep an eye on it.

Here's Ofcom's advice on the recording of phone calls: Recording and monitoring telephone calls or e-mails

As far as fraud is concerned, the police only seem interested in crimes concerning large sums of money - usually tens of thousands of pounds. Stricly speaking, in this case, it wasn't me that was the victim of crime as far as financial loss was concerned, since it was QuickQuid who suffered the monetary loss. They lent £400 to someone and never got their money back. Apart from my time, I didn't actually lose any money. So it would be up to QuickQuid to report the matter to the police. I suspect they didn't. Often banks and money lenders prefer to keep these things quiet, for fear it may give the organisation bad publicity. As for banning things, I also agree in individual freedoms, but there surely have to be limits, to protect the public and those who are vulnerale. We wouldn't be happy for a restaurant or supermarket to sell contaminated food; that has to be illegal. We banned small children from cleaning chimneys, that's surely correct. And if we had had better regulation of our world wide banking system, and banned certain practices, then I do believe we would not be experiencing the depth of economic crisis that we are going through now. QuickQuid and similar organisations should not be allowed to compromise innocent peoples identities by being so slack in their vetting of those applying for loans. I understand that in some States of America, similar carelessness by a loan officer would be considered a criminal offence. So it should be here.

I am not 100% sure. However, in the case of QuickQuid, they clearly announce at the beginning of every call, "For quality assurance purposes, this call may be monitored or recorded." I have taken that to mean 1) That I may also record the call and 2) that I can also have the call monitored for quality assurance purposes; in this case, monitored by all the readers of Consumer Action Group and my viewers on YouTube. How's that for logic? In any event, it's the logic I used to conclude that it was alright to broadcast that phone call on YouTube.

Thank you Seanamarts. A lot of consumers are unfamiliar with the UK law about recording phone calls, as are companies. Businesses often announce that “calls may be recorded”, but when I tell them that I took that as permission for me to record the call as well, they often get shirty. Actually, the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 allows consumers to record their phone calls, without any prior announcement or permission, so long as the recording is used for their own personal purposes and not passed on to any third party without permission.

I agree, if they can record, so can we. I should add that I only record phone calls with businesses - not with friends. I don't want my friends to stop phoning me!

I agree, despite my brave front, this incident was actually distressful for me and took up precious time and energy. But I think you may agree that I am one person that QuickQuid would have preferred not to take on. There's an old quote, "We teach people how to treat us." I hope (probably naively) that QuickQuid has learnt not to treat people like this again, least of all me! But really, when lenders behave in this way, they should not be allowed a Consumer Credit Licence. In some states of the USA these types of payday loan companies have been banned. That, of course, is why some American payday loan companies have have come here to the UK; because their tactics are no longer welcome across the pond. We need to toughen up our regulations and regulators.

I agree, LaughingGirl, not just staggering, but very distressing. The fact that someone pretending to be me could apply for a loan in my name but have the money sent to a bank account not in my name caused me considerble alarm. I required and received from QuickQuid more information about the guy who allegedly applied for the loan in my name, and obtained his mobile phone number and email address (email address in the name of Steven ************, shouldn't that have rang alarm bells at QuickQuid, it's nothing like my name?). But I wasn't able to reach him and I felt QuickQuid were not interested at all in pursuing him. They seemed more interested in pursuing me for the repayment of a loan that I never took out, than in chasing after the person who had allegedly committed the crime.

Thanks LaughingGirl. Yes, I won in the end. QuickQuid were quick quitters after I fought back, which is often the case when you challenge the bluff of bullies. My view was that QuickQuid had to prove to me that I owed them money, and not that I had to prove to them that I didn’t. See my other thread, "QuickQuid: My payday moan" to see how the story ended.

An American company based in London,QuickQuid, wrote to me out-of-the blue, claiming I was late paying back a loan in my name. I had never heard of them and had never borrowed any money from them. Clearly, I was the victim of crime: my identity had been fraudulently used. Worse, the typical interest rate on loans provided by this company is around 1,700% APR. In my case, it was over 5,200% APR. I phoned QuickQuid. The American woman who answered told me that she was recording the call. I told her, “So am I.” She replied, “I don’t give you permission to record me.” I replied, “So I don’t give you permission to record me.” The call had to be terminated. The company then emailed forms requiring me to provide personal information about myself. I refused and wrote that I had reported the matter to the police and trading standards. I added: “If you wish to pursue this matter further, please provide me with documentary evidence that I owe money to your company.” I also made clear that I would not provide any personal data about me that would be exported to the USA; it had to be processed in the UK or I would tell them nothing. QuickQuid wrote back that my data would be sent from the UK to the USA and was subject to the “Safe Harbour” agreement. I was also told that if I didn’t provide the information required, I would continue to owe them money, there would be fees incurred, and my credit rating could be adversely affected. The investigation – to clear me of the debt – could only continue, they said, if I provided the personal information about me. I refused, and wrote: “I have taken legal advice on this, and also from the Consumer Advice line of Trading Standards. I cannot be of any further assistance, or provide any further personal information about me, unless and until your organisation provides me with documentary evidence that I actually owe you any money. Furthermore, I have spoken in detail with the UK Information Commissioner’s Office, and they have advised me of the short comings of the ‘Safe Harbour’ agreement between the USA and Europe. Therefore, I cannot agree to provide any personal data about me if it is to be exported or processed outside of the UK. “If you continue to pursue this matter without providing documentary evidence to me, then my local police station has advised me to contact them again so that they may pursue this matter. You surely understand that you cannot just claim an individual owes your organisation money in the absence of any evidence. “I trust this makes my position perfectly clear.” Within 8 minutes of my email, QuickQuid responded: “We have completed our investigation and have closed the QuickQuid account with your information. Any outstanding debt has been discharged and you will not be responsible for any monies owed… We truly apologize for this incident and any inconvenience it may have caused.” ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ BBC Radio 4 ‘You and Yours’ recently featured my saga with QuickQuid, which has now been produced as a video called, ” and another video of the phone call with QuickQuid called , and they are also available to view on my YouTube channel at EyesEars.com More about Jon Danzig

I've produced another video of how QuickQuid allowed my identity to be stolen in the first place:

London payday loan company, QuickQuid, records all its phone calls – but they objected when I said I was recording the call too. I was trying to complain that someone pretending to be me had borrowed £400 from them at 5,200% APR interest - and that I was not responsible for paying back the loan, as QuickQuid was demanding. As a newbie here I have sadly not been allowed to post a link, but you can hear the phone conversation on my YouTube channel at EyesEars.com The video is called, "My exasperating phone call with QuickQuid"

London payday loan company, QuickQuid, records all its phone calls – but they objected when I said I was recording the call too. I was trying to complain that someone pretending to be me had borrowed £400 from them at 5,200% APR interest - and that I was not responsible for paying back the loan, as QuickQuid was demanding. Hear what happened: