Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by gavva1

  1. The supplier is SuperFi, to clarify it's only the 2 leads (QED Reference)at £90- each, but QED has recalled this HDMI lead on a quality issue. Therefore I wouldn't want to find this lead elsewhere, as the fault apparently is present in all stock. I have said I'm prepared to accept a different brand of HDMI lead, at £35, but due to a change in my system setup I only require one. So basically, I want the alternative branded lead, & a £145.00 refund. Hitachi are the Finance Provider. Superfi are saying they can't accomodate this, & mentioned "pulling the order back from you" - This entails a 5.1 Surround system, brackets & speaker stands (all received on 12th December last year). I'm perfectly happy with the surround system & have no intention of returning it. I have made them aware that all the boxes & packing have been disposed of, their response was "we can go to the speaker manufacturer & see if they can send you the empty packaging" - ?? TBH it's getting a bit laughable now, they've stated they will offer me any equipment they sell at the lowest possible price, up to 30% off their stated price, but there's nothing else I need. What a load of fuss on a £145- refund, from an £800 sale. They've been ammicable about it, but insisted on moving from email comms to phonecalls, which always raises my suspicions. Surely I'm entitled to the refund, the simple option, or can they insist on the equipment back that I already have installed?
  2. I placed an order in early December 2018 for a surround-sound speaker system, along with HDMI leads. The items mostly turned up on time, but the HDMI leads were "awaiting stock from the manufacturer". I have since had a to-&-fro via email with the online supplier (a well-established UK company, who also has several physical stores in the UK). I have now been told via Phone that the leads have been cancelled/recalled by the manufacturer due to a quality issue, & cannot be supplied. This leaves me out-of-pocket by just under £200.00. The phone-discussion I've had with the online retailer has been pretty disappointing, they are saying that as the goods were purchased via Finance, they cannot refund me the balance I'm owed, & have tried to suggest that I find "goods to the value" from their website. But I do not require anything further, & would rather the difference is refunded, to the card I paid the 10% deposit from. (10% deposit being far less than I'm now owed). They are playing nice for now, but are insistant that they cannot just make a refund for the sub-£200- owed (I don't believe this at all) & that the alternative is to send everything back to them (I no longer have any boxes for the speaker system, & they have said maybe they can get the manufacturer to send me empty boxes to box it all up & return it, cancelling the credit agreement.) I am perfectly happy with the system I've purchased, & have no intention of returning it. So this is a tricky one - I am fully aware that it is possible for them to just make the payment from their business to me, they have stated that Hitachi would not allow this, & it would invalidate the agreement - they have also claimed that they only receive "Monthly, incremental payments" from Hitachi as the credit provider, therefore they have not received the full amount of the credit agreement (this seems highly doubtful). If anybody can shed any light on where I stand, I'd be grateful.
  3. I think that what's cheeky, in this situation, is for a Manufacturer to Kick & Scream about a 20-year average lifespan on their appliance, whilst quietly cutting the warranty period in half from 10 to 5 years. For their own employee to state this is due to the high volume of warranty claims they get. (Anybody who happens across this thread, considering the purchase of a Miele applience, you should definitely think on that). 20 years is clearly far more than they're prepared to underwrite. Just to be clear, in this complaint, I certainly don't feel as though I've had a massive result from this, perhaps you see this as unreasonable, however I've wasted countless hours & phonecalls dealing with this, whilst spending over a Month without the use of my washing machine - this has caused significant hassle for me. At the point where I disagreed with Miele's "Customer experience" Team over the £180.00 charge, they just went quiet. For several MORE days. Their attitude was "take it, or leave it". that's where we are. If the new Machine is warrantied for 10 years, I still only have 17 years of ACTUAL usage from *2* machines, as opposed to the claimed 20-year average I could expect from 1 appliance. This being the case, where has the extra money I spent on a high-end Brand gone? Why didn't I just buy a Hotpoint for £300, & when it packs up, bin it & buy another one? C'mon, "cheeky", I would say "ripped-off" fits the bill much better. If the Commercial Decision they reach, is to agree to this, they can "be done" with me, then so be it - I'm very certainly "done with them".
  4. BazzaS, maybe you're a bit confused, I'm after both. Why all this talk about "kicking & screaming", &"kicking off"? I don't know how old you are, in your head, but there won't be any "kicking off" here sunshine. I've taken preliminary legal advice, & as unclebulgaria67 mentioned, the payment has no legal basis. Please, no more terrace-talk, I've lost faith in the product, I want a decent length of Warranty on the replacement, & I want my money back, which was taken under financial duress - is that ok with you? Or, do you want to "kick-off" & scream about it? They won't be collecting the replacement, because - as you may or may not be aware - it's now my property, in my house, & it's not brand-new any more, is it? I Hope, I hope - I hope a big useless Miele drops out of a Window as you're walking beneath, but it won't happen, will it? Unlikely. Christ, as if it should need mentioning, adults-only with the replies, please. Oh, & Don't buy Miele, they're clearly rubbish now, even the last Bastion of quality, German Quality Engineering, is now lost to us consumers. This is evidenced by the drastically reduced warranty. Built for 20 years, with a 5-year warranty. So, you may as well pay peanuts for that, throw it away in a few years when it inevitably fails, comfortable in the knowledge that you paid nothing for it in the First place, so who cares.
  5. I've just called the warranty line & had the replacement registered for 5 years, there's no "kicking & screaming" going on here, I wouldn't bother getting stressed over this - I do want my £180.00 back, because I feel I've had it taken from me under duress, due to the fact I was unable to use my old appliance. The Warranty team have advised that for an extra £149, they can extend the warranty from 5 years to 10. I'm going to offer 2 outcomes, either they extend the warranty FOC, or refund my £180.00. I would prefer the extended warranty, as my faith in Miele isn't great.
  6. Their own website claims they build the machines to last 20 years. Miele Quality For more than 100 years it has been a proven adage that you can trust Miele and rely on our appliances. We are the only manufacturer in our branch of industry to test products such as our washing machines, tumble dryers, dishwashers and ovens to the equivalent of 20 years' use. Once a Miele, always a Miele: Miele customers around the world remain loyal to Miele and recommend Miele to others. Looking to the future, we promise not to entertain any compromises when it comes to the dependability and durability of our appliances. Frankly, I'd expect 10 years from all but the very cheapest brands, my old dear's machine is not a premium brand, gets used daily, & has returned 26 years without fault. This may be extreme luck, however it's going-on 4 times longer than mine has lasted. I maintained the Miele Machine in accordance with the handbook, ran boil-cycles every 4 weeks with the machine empty, used the Beckmanns cleaner 2-3 times per year. The tray was kept clean, filter removed & rinsed every 4-5 uses. The engineer said the reason for the warranty reduction is it's costing them too much, therefore whatever the volume of faults they get, it's clearly more than they're prepared to underwrite. The original machine was £1050, however I bought it carefully from the very cheapest online retailer, (One of the biggest Online Appliance retailers in the UK). The replacement is sold by Miele for £1249, however I've found it for £900, brand new, from this same retailer. At this point, it may sound like I'm getting the bargain of the century, however the fact remains - The First has failed early, the warranty on the second is at best 5 years, maybe only 3, & therefore significantly reduced. It's worth bearing in mind, I could've bought 3 average machines for the original cost + £180.00, had 5 years from each, & be in a much better position than I'm currently in. When you view it from this angle, hopefully you can see that I'm not that impressed. The clarification on the warranty will come once the machine is installed, bearing in mind the complaint is ongoing.
  7. BazzaS I can see how this seems like a good deal, however the machines are supposed to last 20 years on average, so I'd feel pretty slighted to get only 12 years from 2 machines - especially given the low usage (one cycle per week). To get only 7 years from the replacement, would be the end of me as a customer for Miele. I had a chat with their team on Friday, & made them aware I would pay the £180.00, however the complaint was not closed, & I wasn't happy with this. I've just made the payment, & the New machine is due next Wednesday. unclebulgaria67, my Kitchen has 9m2 of clear space, & in their opinion this would be "extremely tight". The engineer said they need so much space, as the machine has to be completely stripped, & there needs to be room for the hoist to get the drum out, I don't think a garage would be big enough. With regards to "under protest dispute complaint", is this a legal term, & what's the best way forward from here? I feel I've been forced into making the payment under duress, as having had no usable machine for over a Month, I have to get a working machine.
  8. Once it was established that I wouldn't accept damage to my flooring, their next step was trying to find alternative premises - they have none. Nowhere in the UK apparently. In the past, this was possible, due to agreements they had with local appliance repair companies, to borrow the space in their premises. This has been ruled out, hence the offer of replacement, however it's not my faault they aren't able to repair, therefore the only option they have is to replace - This is essentially why I'm not happy about the charge, because there's no other option. I'm unclear about the warranty, as the offered machine now carries only 5 years (the engineer mentioned that the 10-year warranty has been cut for *most* machines, as the costs to Miele for dealing with this were a problem) - This is worth noting, when they claim their machines are built to last 20 years. In the warranty T&Cs, it states "3.2 - If Miele replaces the appliance, the guarantee and/or service certificate become invalid" - So I'm unclear on this, & will ask them to clarify exactly what this means, ie - regarding the replacement? The service used for this includes delivery & installation of the new appliance, & removal/disposal of the old appliance.
  9. I Bought a Miele washing Machine in 2010 with a 10-year Parts & Labour waranty. A month ago, it began clunking during the rinse cycle. I called Miele, to book an engineer, & was told by the advisor, "if we can't repair it, we'll replace it." An engineer arrived last week, diagnosing a broken drum. The machine has only performed 1,000 hours use in 7 years, which is extremely low. I have Polished stone on the kitchen floor, & the engineer advised that despite laying protective coverings, the floor would likely be damaged during the repair, due to the weight of the drum assembly. Because I had been forewarned of this, Miele would not be liable. He also offered 60% off a new appliance, however with 3 years remaining on the warranty, this is not an option I would follow. I called their customer service team who agreed, with no alternative repair location, the repair could not be carried out. They agreed to supply a new machine of equivalent spec, HOWEVER I would have to pay £180.00 for delivery/installation. I informed them I was not prepared to pay this, as I had already been told I would receive a replacement if the machine was beyond repair. I am now dealing with their "customer experience team", at the highest level. As of now, they are saying they won't waive the £180.00 charge. I've read the terms of the warranty, which do state "at our discretion, we may replace the appliance", so they aren't obliged to replace it, however the repair is not viable due to space restriction & the likely floor damage. I have lost all faith in Miele, I've spent a month with no use of the washing machine, which in the engineer's opinion is a fire-hazard, due to sparking during use. Does anybody here think it's reasonable to be asked to stump up £180.00, because of their inability to carry out the repair, in line with the terms of the warranty?
  10. I've had a look around the forums & found some cases where people have used the small claims court to settle disputes relating to motor vehicles - if anybody can point me in the direction of either experts in this area, or other sources of information, I'd be extremely appreciative of this
  11. I bought the car 2nd-hand privately, nearly 2 years ago - it's always been looked-after, never thrashed, always dealer service. The guy who owned it, prior to me, kept it in fantastic condition, I really don't believe he'd ever treated the car badly. (& I had 3 viewings before I bought it, repeatedly questioned him on various details, & everything checked out.) Audi UK are calling me back tommorow to discuss the issue, but I've had dealings with them before, (with warranty issues with other cars) as well as a lot of anecdotal tales from other owners, I'm pretty certain they'll just want to wash their hands of it completely. The car has never caused me any problems, as you'd expect, but with it's current value at around 14k, the gearbox problem writes it off. It's going into my local audi Center next week to have the cooler replaced, the cooling system flushed, & the gearbox flushed with s-tronic oil several times, to see if (outside chance) this might cure it. If a small claims case becomes necessary, I would state I've paid for these repairs, out of my own pocket, (the bill will be steep for this lot alone, maybe £600-£700, maybe more) therefore I'm asking Audi to step-up & replace the box. Although they quoted me £11,600, this is not the cost to them. & the local centre does have a habit of "thinking of a number", then massively reducing it, when the complaint comes in. Would I need a solicitor for the small-claims side, I'm guessing not as it's a simple complaint, I needd to find the relevant sections of consumer-law to see if / how I'm covered for this. I've read that 5 years is considered a reasonable period for a car not to have a "critical component" failure.
  12. I have an A5 with an S-Tronic gearbox fault. The oil cooler has failed allowing engine coolant to flow through the gearbox, which has killed it. Diagnosed at my local Audi center last week, the car is a 12-Plate & Dealer service from New The cost of a replacement box is £12k with the car's value at about £14k The 3-year warranty expired in June 2015, however Audi still treat the car as "young", as it's less than 5 years old. Audi are saying they won't contribute towards the cost of this repair, I've raised it with Audi UK (callback tommorow.) I fully expect them to stick to their guns, I will then escalate to Audi HQ in Ingolstadt, Germany. Failing any joy with them, how do I stand, from a consumer-law point of view? I've been told that "reasonable use" with regards to a vehicle, correctly serviced at the Dealer, would be 5 years. The car is currently 4.5 years old. It also has only 28k miles on the clock, very low milage. My plan, if I cannot get it repaired by them, is to pursue a claim in the county court, but would like to know my chances of success. I've seen, in motoring forums, somebody turn an absolute "no" from the manufacturer, into a "yes", by pursuing them in the small claims court. Which I'm guessing, the manufacturer wouldn't want to go anywhere near, due to bad publicity? I feel like Audi should step-up & sort this issue, however it's going to be a battle.
  13. Can anybody provide any help with this? Is discussing Bitcoin not permitted on CAG? Lots & lots of views of this thread, & not a single chime from anyone
  14. I have a personal account with the coop bank, which I've been using to trade Bitcoins on localbitcoins.com. I recently had a trade of £1250, for about 7BTC. The buyer paid into my coop bank account, & the escrow was released for the bitcoins. A few days later I received an email from the coop's fraud department, saying the buyer's bank had claimed that the buyer hadn't received their Bitcoins, & they wanted the payment reversed. The coop froze my account (which had a balance of £250) & requested "proof of entitlement". I obtained screen-shots of the trade, proving the bitcoin was released, & attached them to an email. this occurred over a week ago, & I'd heard nothing back, so Yesterday I phoned the fraud dept. for an update. I had a conversation with a very impolite woman, who said "the evidence you've provided isn't sufficient, we require a signed receipt". I explained to her that the transaction is conducted online, with no physical meeting, so there is no signed receipt. She said "your account will be closed Tommorow if we don't receive adequate proof" - ? I did question the fact that she hasn't forwarded my proof to the other parties' bank, or seemingly done anything with it. She had no tangible answer for this. My issue now is, I want my £250.00 back. This bank is shocking, can anybody pls let me know the best way forward - surely I can demand the return of my funds?
  15. The solicitor originally said he felt it was worth 3k, right off the blocks - & this is the exact amount of offer no. 2 - The figures you stated, 3.5-4k, are what I feel would constitute "reasonable", & what I would settle at.
  16. I hate the term "whiplash" as we all know, how incredibly loaded that term is, these days - specifically a 12-month lower left trapezius/left shoulder injury, & a significant 6-month exacerbation of a pre-existing lower back (L5-S1) lumbo-sacral facet injury. There were psychological elements also, however I opted not to go down the road of a full "psych" report, as I've no interest in "milking" the claim, or trying to kick the insurer - just getting a fair & reasonable settlement, & moving on.
  17. My injuries had mostly healed, by the Medico-Legal, which was in March 2014. The solicitor had stated that as the insurer had already accepted liability, the claim should be done & dusted by the end of summer. The initial offer was made in May, & the 2nd received in August. Before my 1st solicitor went off on long-term sickleave, we'd had discussions that "there may be some wiggle room in the amount" - But I received a letter from the newly appointed solicitor, stating he feels that the 2nd offer is "within the bracket of damages you are likely to receive" I've reviewed the JC guidelines, & I feel that my injuries satisfy the higher end of the lowest bracket - the 2nd offer, amounts to about half of this figure. During a "full & frank exchange of opinions" with the 1st solicitor, back in August, he did concede that actually I was accurate with my own observations - Why should I have to battle my own legal rep, to get to a reasonable position? This guy should have been fighting for the best possible outcome for me, that's what he's being paid for? He seemed very "off the ball", & I've had to shove him at every stage of this process. Shocking inertia, it's now my understanding that I couldn't be doing this on my own, (as is possible in the US).
  18. Thanks for the responses guys & girls, I used the clinical massage as I found this to bring *far* more consistent & longer-lasting pain relief than osteopathy, though the medical professional has written back, stating he would not have recommended this. I am hopeful that my solicitor has not blindly sent this additional letter on, as it is not helpful to my claim - I'm puzzled as to why the solicitor didn't simply rebutt the insurance co's concerns, by referring them to the wording of the original medical report - which clearly states "In my opinion, the losses sustained as described above are reasonable in relation to the accident but should be considered with reference to his past medical history." The past medical history relates to the underlying nature of my lower-back problems, which were exacerbated, but not caused by, the accident. The way my solicitor basically worded the query, was "are you SURE that this is your position?" Which has basically beyed the professional, into changing his mind? I am aware that I bear responsibility for my treatment, & not racking up costs, but this aspect of the claim runs into the low hundreds, & I feel is reasonable & justified. With regards to settlement, the solicitor stated a figure, at the very beginning of the claim, which he felt it was worth. A very round, exact figure. The 2nd offer from the insurer, matches this figure, to the penny. I'm a cynical person by nature, & I wonder what the odds are, that this figure would be "estimated" so precisely by my brief, so early on, (pre-medical report), given the otherwise poor administration of the claim. I would rather not have the hassle of switching the solicitor, what I'm really after is the service that they assured me at the beginning. I was assured, by the original solicitor, that he was "in the process of issuing proceedings", so I need to clarify this with the new guy. I will be emailing him shortly, & see what he comes back with. Again thankyou for your input everyone, I am drafting my email around your post steampowered
  19. I would like to add, this is not a "dodgy whiplash claim", the other vehicle impacted into mine at a speed of between 35-40mph, COMPLETELY writing-off both vehicles & leaving me with significant injury.
  20. I was involved in a non-fault car accident in May 2013. I sustained injuries to my lower back & left trapezius, Paramedics & Police attended. The other parties' insurance have admitted liability. I contacted my trade union (CWU), who put me in touch with a Solicitor, who has been handling the claim on a CFA basis. I had a Medico-legal report in March 2014, which supported my injuries, & the treatment sought. I have been unimpressed with the slow pace of my solicitor, all the way through the process. The solicitor who was dealing with the claim has recently gone on long-term sick leave. I have been juggled around 2 other solicitors, & Today I received an email from one of them, stating that the 2nd offer made by the insurer, is the best he feels they can get, however I have been through the MOJ Guidelines, in a consciously unbiased & reasonable manner, & I feel that the 2nd offer is low. There is also an issue with the insurer wanting to clarify treatment, which led to a letter from my solicitor to our medico-legal. The original report stated "all treatment sought is reasonable." The medico-legal has now reneged on this, stating that "the clinical massage aspect of treatment would not have been recommended..." Therefore the solicitor has now proposed that this aspect of special damages be removed, which halves this aspect of the claim, & leaves me out-of-pocket for the treatment. I have receipts for all sessions, & the lady who performs the treatments has provided her contact details, should clarity be needed. I am at my wits' end with this solicitor, can anybody let me know my options? They appear unwilling to reject the 2nd offer, & dealing with them is like pulling teeth. I'm prepared to deal directly with the insurer if this is possible, failing this is it possible to have the file transferred, or would I need to begin anew? Thanks for any help you can offer.
  21. Thanks for the replies everyone, much appreciated input - ericsbrother - I would go with 'the person I spoke to being a tool' (BT were looking for a company to make a worse job of HR than they already did, & found it in Accenture, woeful) The scheme is run by "BT Pension Scheme, BTPS". However Accenture are the "point-of-contact". Hb, thx for your help on this one also - that's 2 shandies I owe you! I've been through the paperwork I have, but nothing is mentioned with regards to Ill-Health retirement. I found this: http://www.btpensions.net/149/section-c-member-booklet Page 15 covers Ill-Health retirement, One of my conditions is Life Long Asthma (since age 5) which is regarded as moderate/severe & permanent, & classed as a disability under the Disability Discrimination Act. The other issue is a lower back musculo-skeletal problem, involving disc damage & muscular / sacral facet problems. (L5S1). I am in possession of a Medico-Legal report, related to a claim against BT following an accident in 2007, where the Lead Spinal Surgeon states " at this time, the injuries sustained & the associated low-back problems may be regarded as permanent . " ocelot, I feel that I have a fair & reasonable case to put to them, & that I'm not trying it on here. However, the OHS are known for being heavily biased - this is my concern regarding the outcome of their specific medical. I'll have a dig around for the contact details for the BTPS directly, & try & remove Accenture from the process, if possible. Thx again to all
  22. I left BT via voluntary redundancy in 2009, & my pension was frozen. I had a few health conditions whilst there. (One pre-existing, one as a result of an accident whilst working) I'm currently in my 30s. TPAS advised I may be able to claim an Ill-Health pension for deferred members, the 1st step was to obtain a copy of the rules from Accenture (HR for BT). Accenture have stated that "there are no written rules, we would arrange for an Occupational Health Service (OHS) Report to be compiled, after a medical assessment." I'm familiar with these assessments, they are HEAVILY biased towards the company, & against the individual. This was my experience, & their general reputation across BT. My GP is fully aware, & supportive, of my various health complaints. But if I attend one of these OHS medicals, with a biased healthcare provider, I feel I'd get the same poor treatment I've seen before. & a report that would dismiss them. If anybody has any experience or advice here, I am currently self-employed, doing a Job I can work around my good & bad days. I need to see if I qualify, based on a fair & impartial assessment, which I wouldn't get from an OHS referral.
  23. Hi Hb, how do I get you a virtual Shandy? I just had a lengthy chat with TPAS, they are sure that the "Triviality comutation" rules will disappear after April 2015, & my Dad will be able to take the lot - ? With regard to Cap-Drawdown, the advice was "150% of an annuity, based on a rough calc, this would be about £2250 per year". So, if the fund of 34k is left alone, (ie don't take the 25% cash free) he can get all of it, post- April 2015. Does my understanding of this sound correct?
  24. My dad has said the mortgage rearrangement was carried out in an Abbey National branch, by an Abbey agent. AVIVA have echoed what you said, they have run the policy correctly, & I do accept this is a fair point. Santander could learn a lot from them! I'll speak to TPAS Tommorow, & try to get an idea on how drawdown would work - Beers on me!!
  • Create New...