Victory for consumers as cap on energy tariffs to become law READ MORE HERE: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/victory-for-consumers-as-cap-on-energy-tariffs-to-become-law

To all our Fellow CAG members, make sure you be careful.

It is now being reported that Mitsubishi offices have been raided, after the company admitted that some of its vehicle performance statistics produced were not true. This follows on from the VW scandal, the latest of which is that apparently VW might have to buy back vehicles sold in the US at a cost of approx. $7 billion. Can we presume that most vehicle performance stats produced by a company or on their behalf are unlikely to be true ? The stats are likely to be manipulated so they compare favourably with similar vehicles and have nothing to do with the performance drivers will experience. In regard to totally different products, it has been widely reported in the media that many household appliances are now so poorly made, that they will not work for the lifetime expectancies previously experienced. And in the worst cases, some appliances now represent a serious fire hazard, as seen by the number of household fires caused by washing machines, tumble driers etc around the country. Are some products now being made with very cheap parts, as companies look to sell them at a cheaper price, but maintain profit margins ? The products might pass any safety tests conducted after production, but can consumers trust that they are buying a safe product, that will last for a reasonable amount of time ?

There was a BBC2 programme on last night, now available on i player, showing the BMW Mini production plant, where they have over 1000 robots involved in production. They also employ 4000 people as well, to do the tasks that robots cannot currently perform. The question is who will be the future consumers buying products made mostly by robots. With humans being made redundant by robots, there will come a time when there are insufficient people with enough money to buy the products. The companies investing in too much robot technology to replace humans will also reduce the size of the market they can sell to. Within 10 years there will be the AI technology that can replace many call centre and customer service type jobs. You will be able to talk to a computerised call centre agent, who will probably tell you that your complaint is outside of its parameters and was there anything else they could help you with.

Mediation is a must if you want to stay on the right side of the judge and avoid the opposing party using a refusal to mediation against you during the case. Specific attention is being paid by courts to timescales in orders; and the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) such as mediation. Practice Direction- Pre-Action Conduct section 1.2(2) and section 8 asks participants to consider ADR methods before going down a more formal route, and the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) part 1.4(e) asks parties to explore the suitability to mediate. If a mediation offer is not considered or explored, refused or ignored, this is now being seen as unreasonable failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or a relevant pre-action protocol. Recently ignoring a request to mediate (i.e. not responding one way or another) was seen as ‘an unreasonable refusal’ to mediate and incurred costs implications for the offending party (PGF ii SA – v – OMFS Company Limited [2013] EWCA CIV 1288 2nd October Court of Appeal.) Sanctions can be anything, at the judges behest. The mediators opening gambit is to ask you 'what is the nature of your grounds to dispute the claim'. It is important you remember the burden of liability and strict proof. This is the ideal opportunity to find out exactly what the claimant has against you i.e. refer to the particulars of claim and do not deviate from them. Answer the claimant’s position and claim; and do not expand at this stage. The claimant will have to support their case and answer your disputed issues. This may sound like I am asking you to be difficult, not at all. You are the defendant and only have to defend the claimants claim but you will do no harm to your case by finding out what they have against you. My point being, you don't want the claimant having the opportunity of obtaining all of your argument and then using the mediation to satisfy CPR but not taking it seriously; and then tailoring a WS to defeat your position whilst giving you no such information during mediation. So initially (first 15mins) use the time to gain some idea of the actual substantiation the claimant has against you. It will help you evaluate the need to settle and potential settlement you are willing to go to as the mediation progresses. The mediation itself will be brief and probably seem rushed, as you only have an hour. It is important you get your matters of dispute out early, to leave enough time to negotiate. Take notes of their argument in case you don't settle, this will help others on here to advise re your WS. The mediator will shuttle between the two parties passing information backwards and forwards. They may play devil’s advocate and challenge your position and you will feel under pressure, but don't. The mediator wants to settle and move on, they are paid a flat fee and work on volume, don't be pressured and do have yourself prepared for the mediation with everything you want to say and have ready your various negotiating positions. Settlement can be financial i.e. a lower value over an agreed term of instalments, and can also be in relation to the actual terms i.e. the claimant with notify the defendant of a default in writing and will allow 14 days to remedy this default- as opposed to a term which states the claimant upon default by the defendant can go straight to court to claim the original amount due to a default of this agreement. You really need to work out what you can afford and what you are prepared to pay, over what period and on what terms. That way you do not waste time with basic elements of negotiation. Start with a best case scenario offer and be prepared to narrow the gap between you. That may change the more you find out about their case. Approach this mediation with an open mind and with an appetite to settle, if that is what you want. You have a great opportunity to bring closure on your terms, without having a judgement imposed on you by a judge; and avoid the possibility of attending court, avoiding a possible CCJ, avoiding the stress and the other issues that this dispute or possible judgement against you brings.

New Which? research reveals that three quarters of you are completely confused by your energy bills, with 74% of people who receive energy bills finding them very complicated. . Our research, where we surveyed nearly 1,600 Which? members about their household bills, also revealed that 18% of the people we asked are not confident they can check the accuracy of their energy bill. It's vital to be able to do this if you want to be sure you're not paying more than you should for energy Which? believes that energy bills should be easy to understand, which is why we are running a campaign calling for fair energy prices. http://www.which.co.uk/news/2015/04/energy-consumers-bamboozled-by-their-bills-400728/

they should be closed down!!! by the regulators using indian call centres to ring on unavailable or withheld or untraceable international number then leaving an 0800 number to 'further' their UK business. truecall box does its job but 41 calls in 3months!!

Vouchers, or gift cards, can be a great idea at Christmas. Give them to a teacher, a colleague, or a teenager perhaps, and you can show you have at least thought about them, without second-guessing their tastes. But last year thousands of consumers were left out of pocket, when HMV, Blockbuster, Comet and Jessops all went out of business after the Christmas period. Most vouchers were eventually honoured but only after a period of uncertainty. In the case of Jessops, now under new management, some people were offered replacement gifts, but customers with vouchers worth, in total, more than half a million pounds never saw their money back. The fact is, if you buy a gift card, there is no guarantee it will be honoured if the shop goes out of business. Advice So what should consumers do if they are considering buying gift cards or vouchers this Christmas? First of all, they should watch their local high street carefully. Blockbuster, the video chain, has already announced its intention to call in the administrators, for the second time. "I'm really concerned that there's going to be something again this Christmas," says Deborah Harvey from Newport. "And it's going to be too late for anyone to do anything about it," she warns. The UK Gift Card and Voucher Association advises customers to think very carefully about where they buy vouchers from. It says as long as you trust the retailer, you should trust their vouchers. But the reverse must be equally true. If you wish to buy more than £100 of vouchers, make sure you buy them on a credit card. But otherwise there are still no guarantees that your money will be safe. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24868288

Read the full story http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22868820

http://www.scotsman.com/the-scotsman/personal-finance/pressure-growing-to-crack-down-on-ppi-firms-1-2795828#.USEFNDqEh0M.twitter but in scotland its a frre for all to fleece for now dx

http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2013/07-13#.UPkjP2eVCtM

Damian Reece, The Telegraph's Head of Business, says the scale of fines awarded to banks will have an impact on their ability to lend money to consumers. UBS has swallowed a £940m fine after a global probe revealed its staff orchestrated the manipulation of benchmark interest rates. The extent of the wrongdoing was highlighted in a series of emails released by the Financial Services Authority (FSA), which showed how traders and brokers conspired to rig the rate and referred to each other in congratulatory terms. In this video, Telegraph Head of Business Damian Reece explains the impact that FSA fines will have on consumers. Link: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/9755502/Libor-scandal-FSA-fines-will-make-it-harder-for-banks-to-lend-to-consumers.html

Consumers will be given the power to request the data held on them by credit card and energy companies under new measures. Following a consultation, the government is expected to announce today (19 November) that it will look to legislate if firms fail to comply with the voluntary release of consumers’ electronic data. As part of the ‘midata’ programme, companies will be required to release the data they hold relating to a customer’s consumption or transactions in an electronic machine readable format on request. Link: http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article/14582/online-news/new-measures-allow-consumers-to-request-personal-data

Read more: - http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article/14526/online-news/businesses-may-be-forced-to-repay-consumers-for-mis-selling

Savers rate supermarket banks above the high street lenders, and a quarter of us would bank with Amazon. Only one in ten consumers believe high street banks offer the best value for money when it comes to banking, compared to supermarkets who topped the list with 53pc of the public vote. High street banks may have more experience in the mortgage market, yet according to research carried out by uSwitch.com, some consumers would rather consider a brand with no experience in banking. One in four said they would be willing to bank with Amazon and one in ten would trust eBay with their finances. The backlash against the high street banks following a string of allegations has meant Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury’s and Marks and Spencer’s are becoming increasingly popular options. Mis-selling of PPI (payment protection insurance) and the Libor rate fixing scandal have seen customers vote with their feet. Research revealed 46pc of consumers saying that they would trust Waitrose Bank, 36pc opted for Asda, while 26pc said that they could entrust Morrison’s with their banking services. Michael Ossei, personal finance expert at uSwitch.com, said: "It’s a telling reflection of the UK banking industry that consumers are willing to put their trust in brands that have no previous banking experience. More: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/banking/9508001/Supermarket-banks-offer-better-value-for-money-say-consumers.html

67/12 1 August 2012 Following an OFT investigation, Euroteam AS, Uncus AS, Ticket and Travel AS and the controlling director of these companies, Andreas Gyrre, have given undertakings to the High Court in relation to the unauthorised sale of tickets to the London Olympics. Under the terms of the undertakings, the traders have committed to provide a full refund to any of their customers who either do not receive their tickets or are refused entry to an event as the tickets supplied are not valid. People who are refused entry should ensure that they retain their tickets, or get a receipt from the Games Organisers if their ticket is seized indicating that the customer was unable to gain entry. They should send a copy of their void ticket or the receipt to the trader when applying for their refund. The traders have also promised the High Court that they will make their contact details available on their websites so that customers can submit their refund requests easily. Last week, the Honorable Mr Justice Kenneth Parker granted an interim enforcement order requiring 12 websites owned and operated by the Norway based traders to stop selling Olympic tickets, failing which the OFT would be able to have the sites redirected to a holding page. He ruled that the traders had misled consumers by failing to make clear that they were unauthorised to sell Olympic tickets, that they may not be able to supply the tickets ordered, and any tickets they do supply may not in fact allow the purchaser to enter the Games. Following the traders' agreeing to undertakings, the OFT agreed to release six of the websites. The investigation was initially launched over concerns that the traders are not authorised to sell Olympic tickets. The OFT has worked in partnership with the Metropolitan Police and Serious Organised Crime Authority (SOCA) during the course of the investigation. Under the terms of conditions of the tickets, the tickets are only valid if purchased from an authorised ticket seller. In July 2012, the OFT was informed that approximately 20,000 tickets were purchased from the websites but the traders had only sourced 5,000 to supply. Jason Freeman, Legal Director in the OFT's Goods and Consumer Group said: 'This is an important agreement from the traders to provide refunds to anyone who finds their ticket does not turn up or is turned away from an event because their ticket is not valid. 'Lots of people want to go to see the Olympics, but you need to be careful about where you go to get your ticket. Only authorised sellers can guarantee to supply you a ticket, and if you buy from someone else, even if your ticket arrives, you may be refused entry to the Games.' Customers that may have purchased tickets from these traders should contact the trader at Evolve, Martin Linges vei 25, 1364 Fornebu, Oslo. The email address is contact@euroteam.net. People wishing to purchase tickets for the Olympics should visit www.tickets.London2012.com. NOTES See the case page for this investigation. There will be a final hearing on this matter later this year. The High Court granted an interim enforcement order on 24 July to allow the following websites to be directed to a domain holding page: - http://www.londonsummergames.org - http://www.londonsummergames.net - http://www.summergames2012.org - http://www.olympicticket.info - http://www.2012tickets.org - http://www.euroteamtickets.com - http://www.euroteam.info - http://www.euroteam.net - http://www.euroteam.travel - http://www.euroteamtickets.wordpress.com - us.euroteam.info - www.worldticketservice.net Following the traders agreeing to undertakings on 27 July 2012, the sites released by the OFT were http://www.euroteam.net, http://www.euroteam.info, http://www.euroteamtickets.com, http://www.euroteam.travel, http://www.worldticketservice.net and http://www.2012tickets.org. Of these sites the first five now only sell tickets for events other than the Olympics (the Olympics content having been removed by the trader since the sites were taken down last week). The sixth site contains information for consumers who have already bought an Olympic ticket from the trader to track their order, or to provide an up to date delivery address. The OFT worked with the Metropolitan Police's Operation Podium and SOCA to secure an interim enforcement order under the Enterprise Act 2002, for breach of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs) and unfair contractual terms under Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCRs) thereby stopping the trader selling Olympic tickets. People can report potential ticket fraud to Action Fraud. Operation Podium is the Metropolitan Police's dedicated response to serious and organised crime affecting the economy of the London Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012. SOCA tackles serious organised crime that affects the UK and our citizens. The CPRs contain a general prohibition against unfair commercial practices and, specifically, prohibitions against misleading actions, misleading omissions and aggressive commercial practices. The Regulations are enforceable through the civil and criminal courts. See further information and advice for businesses. The UTCCRs apply to standard contract terms with consumers and protect consumers against unfair standard terms in contracts they make with traders. The OFT can take legal action to prevent the use of potentially unfair terms. A term is likely to be considered unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations under the contract, to the detriment of consumers. A consumer is not bound by a standard term in a contract with a trader if that term is unfair. Ultimately, only a court can decide whether a term is unfair. Link: http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2012/67-12

Dear All Just to let you know that the trial of the 7 remaining directors (2 directors took voluntary disqualification) begins this coming Monday 21 May 2012. It is at the High Court, London and is set down for 6 weeks. We have updated Unfairpak to include live Twitter feeds, a blog which we will update each day to sum up what has happened in Court and contact details if you need any help. We also still have the Forum running and can advise you and help you with any aspects of the Liquidation of Farepak. You can also follow us on Twitter @unfairpak Hopefully there will be an end to this debacle soon as it is now 5 1/2 long years since Farepak went into administration. If we can do anything to help anyone affected by Farepak or wanting to know more about the case against directors then please get in touch. Kind Regards from all the team at Unfairpak P.S. I hope we are in the right place to post! I cannot post the link to Unfairpak as I have to have more than 10 posts to do so.

Hi i'm posting this for my dissabled father i really hope someone can help me on this matter has my father as given up trying!!. My father bought a 07 vw passat from the local garage & they sold him 12months warranty for the vehicle, within 3months of purchasing the car there was a fault with the accelerator pedal. He rang the garage to report the fault & they said to phone the warranty company which he did on more than a dozen occasions but could never get through to them , so he went back to the garage & ask to speak the manager a few times but the manager was never available, any way being dissabled he needed the car so he took it to a VW dealer & they went through the small print on the warranty & the problem was covered the VW dealer wrote a letter stating this & carried out the work costing £900. My father went on a consumers programme on the radio they looked into it for him & said the warranty company had gone bankrupt before the policy was sold to him hense thats why he could never make contact with them, & the radio said he's not the only person thats having the same problem with the warranty company. He went back to the garage that sold him the car & they said they are not interested. So if anyone could give me some addvice i would be grateful.