Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by red-ed

  1. First, please advise if you are legally qualified to provide such advice., Second, if it is the intention of the CAG to operate this as "forum" or a process based web site that dispenses legal advice. Lastly, please confirm if you are acting moderator or a legal advisor. I guess from your silence re. the above questions that you are not qualified to provide legal advice. I also suggest that you confine your role to moderation rather than making rude comments toward new forum contributors. Thank you
  2. I do not need your help with my claim. I am very familiar with law and legal process. If I need specific legal advice I will consult a solicitor. I have posted because this is called a "forum". It is where we (Consumers) share views and experiences and opinions etc. I am particularly interested to hear how others feel about the increased use of unfair contractual terms to mislead staff and consumers, and more importantly what can done be to discourage and reduce this unfair practice. Hermes seem to have taken this to whole new level. The links you provided above add nothing to discussion, and as such, are unhelpful. I see that you try to guide others through the legal process, and provide advice on law. You seem to have process and expect people contributing to the forum to follow a strict process and follow your advice to the letter if they want receive your advice and guidance. You are quite rude if people do not do what you expect. First, please advise if you are legally qualified to provide such advice., Second, if it is the intention of the CAG to operate this as "forum" or a process based web site that dispenses legal advice. Lastly, please confirm if you are acting moderator or a legal advisor. Thank you
  3. @BankFodder Thank you for this. I am sorry you don't have time read everything. I find your comment about my letters being ineffectual is rude and condescending and discourages us (consumers) sharing our experiences, ideas views on this forum. Which i thought was the point of this forum. Concerning my letters, emails etc. At the start of claim i like to fish, and also point out the relevant law. The fishing helps and often i find process errors - which strengthens my legal claim. Pointing out the legal basis and expected resolution of my claim early (and getting ignored), will help me increase the quantum. ie a failure to act reasonably. Which judges take very seriously. This is because both parties are expected to mitigate the others losses by working "reasonably" toward settling the dispute. For example: Packlink wrote this - "Take into account that this type investigation requires the coordination of the different participants involved (driver, depot, warehouse, carrier's local offices), so it might be necessary to wait for a response from the different parties involved before being able to provide you with an answer" and said this can take up to 30 days. Hermes/Packlink responded in less than a day with standard copy and paste email. Investigating the loss of a parcel is part of the service provided by Hermes/Packlink, and failure to do this with reasonable care skill is another breach of contract and strengthens my claim. *********** Lastly, i am interested to hear from others re the use of unfair contractual terms to discourage and put off valid contractual claims. Worse the fact they deliberately train their staff to believe this is law, and they happily mislead customers. I have experienced this with Apple, Amazon, Hermes etc, etc. and it is getting worse, because helps to swell the companies profits. For consumers, it simply adds insult to injury. I also believe misrepresenting the law to deprive others may be a criminal offence. If that is case, and others are getting as fed up as me as having take delinquent companies to law, to recover compensation, there may be an opportunity to get regulators involved. For example ASA might be interested - because they are effectively trying to make you pay to cover yourself against the their breach of contracts. Now if you want to help, please do so, otherwise let others contribute Thank you
  4. Here is my first to PackLink ********************* This is a very poor response. First, it is clear there has been no investigation whatsoever. You have simply looked at the tracking and because the parcel has not moved for 72 hours it is assumed lost. Second, I was informed an investigation can take upon 30 days. You provided a long speal (see below) about searching large warehouse text etc. The Hermes response was barely a day, and it is clear they simply looked at the tracking and also assumed the parcel has been lost. Third, why was I not informed the parcel had been lost. It has been 16 days since the parcel stopped moving on tracking. Forth, why was an investigation not started after 72 hours, when we might have had a chance of finding the parcel. Lastly, according to the tracking the parcel was out for delivery. This means it was in the van with the delivery driver. The parcel was not delivered. Why was the parcel not returned to the depot. Was it stolen ! Why did it mysteriously disappear? Why was there no supervision or oversight when the parcel turned RED on the tracking. The above describes an organisation that just does not care about the service it purports to provide. It also looks like, rather than performing a full and proper investigation, and making an effort remedy what was appalling service, Hermes and yourselves considers far easier to cough up £25 and try to hide behind your terms and conditions. In English law, you are required perform service with reasonable care and skill. English law also provides that you cannot limited my right to fair compensation if you are in breach on contract. The item was clearly mislaid by the Hermes delivery driver. Hermes has not provided service with "reasonable care and skill”. This is a breach of contract (1). The investigation, which is also a service provided by Hermes, was a sham (lie). This is also a breach of contract (2). The £25 compensation limit is likely to be construed as unfair and struck out by a County Court Judge. Moreover, it seems to have be used in lieu of an investigation which is misuse of contractual term. i.e. A term that was drafted to limit financial liability not to limit service provided. This is also a breach of contract (3). You now have two choices, 1. Bring this matter to a swift conclusion and pay the full xxx in compensation or 2. We take the legal route, and I make a claim for xxxx plus court fees plus further compensation for hassle of having to take this matter to law. The choice is yours - but please be aware, I will ask the judge when he considers compensation, to take account of the fact you ignored my very reasonable offer (choice 1) to end this dispute. You 14 days to provide a satisfactory response. Thank you ...................... Here is my letter to Hermes ************* Thank you for your response. I have already contacted Packlink and they have been the opposite of helpful. I note that you are referring me back to PackLink and making no effort whatsoever to locate the lost parcel. Please see the attached email to PackLink. In fact, it looks like you are using the £25 compensation term in our contract in lieu of the provision of the contracted service. You should also note from attached email that PackLink defined how you were expected investigate the loss of my parcel, and it is clear from recent correspondence there was no investigation whatsoever from either yourselves or Packlink. I therefore do not believe you are 100% dedicated to ensuring every parcel arrives safely. Quite frankly it looks like you do not care a jot what happened to my parcel. Please be aware that Packlink are based in Spain, and i will therefore be using the provisions in Contracts (Rights of Third Party) Act 1999 to hold Hermes responsible for all loses flowing from your breach (s) of contract. Please see clause 1 (1) (b) Contracts (Rights of Third Party) Act 1999. You should also note that Hermes has been expressly identified as a third party. I will be doing this in England using the provisions provided the Consumer Rights Act 2015. In particular the reasonable care and skill requirement, and the use of terms in our contract that tries to limit my legal rights. I therefore urge you to work with Packlink to provide a satisfactory resolution to this dispute and to this promptly and efficiently. Any further procrastination or deliberate legal confusion on your or Packlink's part will be added to my to my claim for compensation. You have 14 days to provide a satisfactory response. Next letter to Hermes ******************* Thank you for this and I note that you are unable to help with this matter. I urge you to reconsider because your intransigence will only increase the hassle, costs and my claim for compensation. Thank you Email to PackLink Here is an extract from your email 19th January 2020. "What happens next? After you complete the online form Packlink will initiate an investigation with the carrier to confirm the loss or damage. After the investigation is concluded if parcel is confirmed lost or damaged the dossier will be transferred to the claims department for the final approval". You will note I submitted a claim form (for xx), and then submitted the same evidence again in my email 19th January 2020 (in answer to your email). I also refer you back to my COMPLAINT email 20th January 2020 (attached) which provides the legal basis for my claim. PLEASE CONFIRM THIS CLAIM HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED TO THE CLAIMS DEPARTMENT. Please also make the claims department aware of my COMPLAINT email 20th January 2020 (attached). Please also confirm that that a COMPLAINT has also been raised about the poor response, especially the fact that there has been no investigation whatsoever by Hermes. You now have 13 days to provide a satisfactory response or I will start legal action against Hermes with further reference. Thank you I am getting the standard blocking and misinformation. It is deliberate and designed to put off customers claiming fair compensation for contract breaches. I believe it is a criminal offence to deliberately, and knowingly misrepresent the law in order to make gain or cause someone a loss or both. . From my research and reading it is clear Hermes service is very poor, and there is a huge number of customers who have been badly impacted, and they are seeking to mitigate their losses through intransigence, awkwardness, unfair contract terms (a legal wall), copy and paste emails, use of untrained foreign staff, and a whole host of underhand and illegal tactics. If I had been dealt with fairly, and felt that Hermes and Packlink had made an effort to help me, I might have written off the loss, but they have been so annoying, I have decided to take them all the way, and share my approach with others, who struggle dealing with the misuse of our legal system to mitigate their losses from their own contractual breaches. Any comment, direction, advice and help gratefully received Thank you
  5. @silverfox I will go the whole the hog just to be bloody minded - i know it is like banging your head against a brick wall - but i know the more people that do the more its costs, so some body might have the common sense to deal with our queries before them take on a life of their own as a complaint. Ed
  6. Agreed Axel29 - the adjudicators at these places are in the main incompetent. Not sure about bias - i think more hapless. Perhaps if we all march Vodafone in to court they might be less arrogant, and Ofcom might realise the public have lost confidence in the ombudsman process. Ed.
  7. Vodafone had their chance, but did nothing to help, so i don't want to go back to them. Ed.
  8. I have had the pleasure of dealing with the communications ombudsman - they are slow and random - manned by low paid low quality people - and blind to the facts. The responses look like they were written by Vodafone which makes them either lazy or bias or both. Put more simply the Communications Ombudsman are a waste of time - i recommend people take their disputes straight to the small claim court. Ed
  9. Be warned - Apple don't care about SOGA. I quoted it and they told me they only follow Apple policy and followed it with a threat (we are so big we always get our way). In my view this organisation has become arrogant because of success. I am planning to take them to the small claims to see if their policy will work with the judge. Ed
  10. Hello Rebel11, Do you think the FOS know about these - i note that it is unlawful if they are ignored. I do wonder if anyone has ever relied on these principles in court ? Ed
  11. Thank you rebel11, Your story is exactly why i started a discussion on this theme. They try to be as awkward as possible to put you off and send you back to the trader - and i have found they are not always honest and play all sorts of games. I recently contacted Which on the subject - and they advised to claim from the trader and the CC at the same time - and yes be relentless. Ed
  12. Hi All, I use section 75 a lot. Unfortunately i have found that the credit card companies deliberately make it as difficult as possible to claim. This ranges from using low quality staff with no legal skills or experience and arming them with counter policy to claiming letters are lost in post. I have found taking matters to the FOS is unreliable - and depends on who you get - and very often they make judgements counter to law. I note that Section 75 is spread across CAG. I have put this tread together to try and catch as many section 75 experiences as possible, and hope we can use this to present a more united front against the credit card companies. Maybe, if we are lucky, we can even expose some of the bad practices, and help each other make quick and successful claim. Many thanks Ed
  13. Update Apple claim that it is entirely within their rights to replace a brand new but faulty iPhone with a full warranty a second hand refurbished phone with a limited warranty (just 3 months - and they will replace again with another second had phone) because they class this as a REPAIR not replacement. Are they being clever are they wrong !!! Ed
  14. Thank you rebel11 - i will write to Apple as advised. You advise re. checking the replacement phone is not reburbished is also very valid as I no longer trust Apple. FYI - the so called store manager become very unhelpful when i declined the refurbished phone - and then down right rude when dared to suggest that English consumer trumped Apple policy. Ed PS - i am of the view that big stores deliberately train their staff in policy rather consumer law to try and dupe their customers into accepting rotten resolutions.
  15. Bought an iPhone 5s in November from Apple - it developed a fault problem. Took it back to store - they confirmed it was a fault - but only offered to replace it with a refurbished phone. Said no - cause i did not want to end up after two months with second hand phone (with new T&Cs). Also does not feel fair or legal !! What should i do ? Any ideas Thanks Ed
  16. This makes interesting reading: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2381028/MELANIE-PHILLIPS-NHS-111-service-disaster-start.html#comments The problem with the NHS is we don't realise how bad it has become until we need and have to use it. Being offered a complaints procedure when not being treated properly, when in fact you are desperate for help is just inappropriate (putting it politely) - and just adds insult to injury. There is also an inherent pressure not complain when you are so dependant on help which means that the true extent of the NHS decline is not realised. I am a supporter of the NHS principle. I believe it sets us part from other countries and is a benchmark for the whole world. It is for this reason we must use every forum, avenue etc, to drive improvement from the top to the bottom. This improvement must be driven not from complaints but from an inherent desire within the NHS to restore it old values and competencies. Ed
  17. Lee, You will note that contacted Vodafone UK on many occasions - and Vodafone had a chance to deal with matter. I suggest you deal with the failures in customer service instead of trying to appear helpful AFTER the event Ed
  18. Hi Pixel_92, Here is the link - good luck http://www.ombudsman-services.org/communications.html Don't expect too much - they are slow and very awkward to deal with - and try their best to destroy your claim with procedure Ed
  19. Hello Anchco, I have exactly the same issue when i left Vodafone after 23 years - as i paid in advance i worked out they owed me money. i asked them for a paper copy of the bill and exact details of tariff more times than i can remember - they promise they will deal with the issue in 24 hours - then i hear nothing. I have escalated this practice to communications ombudsman - and they have finally agreed to take the matter up with Vodafone. I suggest you do the same as this looks like a trend! Ed
  20. A web relations team is a good start and shows Vodafone are concerned about the negative chatter - the question is will they attempt to suppress the chatter or deal with the source. I suspect, because Vodafone is huge, it will be easier to try to suppress. I agree re. small claims. I will give everyone in the Vodafone channels a chance to put matter right as this always reads better with Judge (as you done everything to try resolve the issue) if you need to file a claim. Ed
  21. Thank you Silver Fox for your advice, Have been overcharged by Vodafone - they even admit they owe me money! I have written to Vodafone (as per their complaints procedure) four times and emailed more times than i can remember over the last six months asking them to resolve this - all i get is a standard response promising to resolve the issue in 24 hours - and then I hear nothing! They don't seem to be able to deal with any problem that requires more than 24 hours to resolve - they certainly cannot string together more one event or letter! I have escalated this to the Communications Ombudsman - who, after six invalid attempts to refuse to deal with the issue, have finally agreed to sort this out. You should note that some of the refusal attempts demonstrated that a lack of understanding of even basic telephony which does inspire confidence. This is why i asked below at CAG if others have had similar issues! As you can see I have given Vodafone every chance to correct this matter - and the matter is now with the Communications Ombudsman - so i do not feel that it is appropriate that i ask Lee to help. I would suggest, however that Lee, asks his Vodafone complaints team to provide him with a list of the unanswered complaints that Vodafone has chosen to ignore or lost or whatever, so he can intercept complaints before they are posted on the web!!! Ed
  22. I believe that Vodafone will be more inclined to improve their services issues if they are aired openly and not deflected. This to me is one of the reasons CAG is such a good forum. Moreover, the nice chap from Vodafone turning up on CAG offering to help is welcome but far to late. Furthermore, i know that if they succeed in deflecting open and valid criticism they won't bother with the root cause - i.e. improve poor service. The question i might ask 'web relations' is exactly what corrective action (with timescales) have they put in train as result of the CAG and other feedback ! This, i think, is what pretty much all the long suffering Vodafone customers would like see. Ed Ps I have been a Vodafone customer (when it was Racal Vodafone) for 23 years - and have watched and experienced what was top QoS degenerate to what is quite frankly a disgraceful mess. The ombudsman service does not work either, and just looks like an attempt prolong and put down complaints.
  23. Hi All, Don't allow Vodafone to bury or redirect these issues - Once buried Vodafone will just carry on offering poor service. The best approach is use CAB and other forms to share issues and concerns - and then maybe Vodafone will have the 'business' sense to address the root cause (poor customer service). Ed
  24. Hi Vodafone, If you don't like people 'moaning' about your service on the web and other places, i suggest you improve the service provided, instead of trying to silence people or re-direct valid criticism. Ed
  25. Has anybody had issues with this lot! They don't seem to know what they are doing ! They don't answer letters and when they do their responses make no sense ! If you write back they just ignore you. [edit] Red
  • Create New...