Ok, 1st post on here so bare with me.... Bought a car in mid Feb this year for 3.5k, 6weeks later an engine mount fails and the dealer tries to fob off with "I'll get it fixed for you at trade cost". I use my right to reject and compose a letter to demand it repaired under the CRA. At this point I find out that the dealer xxx motor company, is actually xxxx body repairs (I won't name and shame as we are still in dispute). The sales invoice hadn't included this info and I wasn't made aware at time of sale. If I'd known I was buying from a body repair shop I wouldn't have bought the vehicle. The company director is also his wife, but under her maiden name on companies house. So it took me a bit of FB stalking and 2hrs searching on companies house to even be sure who to reject the vehicle to. I get no responce, so compose another letter, giving more detail on the fault and why I'm rejecting. Then get a letter back from "law firm". Basically saying it's an old car so it'll break down, deal with it. I reply with chapter and verse, an mention that their 'member' did not disclose who they are on the sales receipt along with a request to confirm the milage at time of sale as my invoice says exactly 75,000. So in the eyes of the law I had completed only 150miles.balso for copies of a service check on the vehicle and or pdi as I have no copies given to me at time of sale. They come back two weeks later with, yes the dealer rounded up the milage on the sales receipt! (illegal) And have included a copy of a pdi and service. Turns out the service check was completed after I'd laid down my deposit and taken for a test drive (also illegal) . So he had no idea the condition of the vehicle when he put it on the forecourt, I took a testdrive in what could have been a death trap. At this point Ive already contacted the back for a chargeback. Which has gone into my bank account, but he can still dispute in the next 6 weeks. I've responded to "law firm" with your member has committed a criminal offence(s) and I'll take it to small claims if he tries to refute the chargeback. Due to the severity of the above and flat refusal of liability on the dealers part I've also reported direct to the local trading standards with the above info and evidence to back it up. Now I'm happy to take home to scc if required as I'm 100% I'd get cost of the car back just on the mis selling of the vehicle under the wrong trading name. However, how likely are trading standards to take action and if so how do I find out if they have? He's basically only checking cars after they are sold (if at all as service check sheet could have been completed at any point in the last 4 months), and is pretending his main trade is a car dealership rather than a body repair shop. He could potentially be taking vehicles that have come through the body repair shop, offering customers a part ex and doing a quick fix to what could be prang on a vehicle and then selling on for big profit through the sales site (what I suspect with my car due to the type of fail and his reaction on the phone). Oh and here is the crux, he also didn't include Ltd on the sales invoice (or any other documents) so he or his wife could be personally liable rather that the Ltd company she is director of (there is a case law which proves this). If I do have to take to scc - who do I serve against? The Ltd Co. He who sold the car and signed the invoice or her who is sole director of the Ltd company? This could end up losing him his marriage as well as business.

Bogus Police and Trading Standards Officers in Kent READ MORE HERE: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/bogus-police-and-trading-standards-officers-in-kent

New tougher electrical safety standards to protect private tenants READ MORE HERE: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-tougher-electrical-safety-standards-to-protect-private-tenants

Hi all, Looking for some advice regarding a parking charge received in an NCP car park for having an expired ticket. I park there every weekday for work, I pay for 2 hours as I'm in the office usually for about an hour before heading out again, but on this day I was delayed leaving and returned 20 minutes after it had expired to find one of their lovely bogus charges. I received the ticket stuck to my windscreen, with the time of year and seemingly countless work and personal life issues I didn't get round to writing an appeal. The Notice to Keeper arrived in due course and I haven't responded to that either, most recently I received a Keeper Liability Notice stating that it is now too late to appeal and they will pass the matter to a debt collection agency who may take me to court if I don't pay up. Now I'm not worried about their scare tactics, but I've reached the point where I have room in my brain's limited attention span to deal with this What would be the best course of action at this point? I understand that I was at fault but they're asking for £100 which is ludicrous, and I know they cannot charge more than the amount of lost revenue for the car park owner. Should I write to them offering payment equivalent to 1 hour's parking to cover the lost revenue? Thanks in advance, Nick

Hi, I just received a PCN for Entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited on Cricklewood Lane. This junction box doesn't cover the whole intersection. Does this comply with the standard? I've attached a video showing this box junction and my car entering it (Silver Car) video.zip

My son bought a music book as a gift from a Music Store that is a small chain of shops operating in the midlands and north-west. It was a gift but the recipient unfortunately already had that item. He returned the product within five days unopened with a receipt in the original packaging and asked for a full refund, as the item was clearly re-saleable. To his astonishment and despair, the manager of the shop made him feel like a criminal by suggesting that he could have simply bought the book to photocopy the music and return it. No refund was offered, no exchange, no credit note, nothing. Citizens Advice suggested to him that he should try to sell the book on EBay!! They also stated that the shop had every right not to refund and that they could set whatever terms and conditions they wished. Trading Standards, who are extremely difficult to get hold of nowadays, eventually suggested that the shop was also within its rights and should my son require any direct help, he should contact ...... Citizens Advice Bureau!! Once upon a time, Citizens Advice Bureau were quite useful and of service - they used to employ people who were qualified to offer legal advice. Nowadays, unfortunately, they are mostly run by 11,000 volunteers who do little more than look on-line for advice. But don't be put off. Stand up for your Statutory Rights. Who ever heard of such nonsense coming from a shop? This shop also failed to adequately display its Refund Policy, dubious as it was stating that all refunds/exchanges can only be offered at the manager's discretion if returned within 7 days. Trading Standards interested in visiting this errant shop? Absolutely not. I don't suppose this had anything to do with it being in the Intu Centre and part of a chain? No doubt Trading Standards find it easier to tackle the Corner Shop or independent restaurant etc. Martin's Money Tips helped. My son took this shop to the Small Claims Court and quoted the Sale of Goods Act 1979 (which has recently been superceded by the Consumer Rights Act 2015). The shop has been ordered to refund my son in full and pay his expenses in taking this action. Bailiffs next if they don't pay up. How ridiculous refunding or exchanging an item retailing at only £10.95 has come to this. The local newspaper are aware of this story but have so far not put it in print. No doubt keeping an eye on their reliance for advertising from the Intu Centre. That is the way the world works, isn't it?

The Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013 was introduced on 6th April 2014 and to coincide with this regulation, the Ministry of Justice updated the previous National Standards. It must be stressed here that although the National Standards arenot legally binding, the government’s intention is that they are intended to be used by all enforcement agents, the enforcement companies that employ them, and the creditor (in most cases the local authority or HMCTS) who use their services. A link to the Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014 can be read here and listed below are selected parts that could assist anyone facing bailiff enforcement. Creditors responsibilities 8. Creditors should act proportionately when seeking to recover debt, taking into account debtors’ circumstances. 12. Creditors must not issue a warrant knowing that the debtor is not at the address, as a means of tracing the debtor at no cost. 20. Enforcement agents must not be deceitful by misrepresenting their powers, qualifications, capacities, experience or abilities, including, but not restricted to; • Falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when legally it cannot be taken by that agent. • Falsely implying or stating that a particular course of action will ensue before it is possible to know whether such action would be permissible • Falsely implying or stating that action has been taken when it has not 21. Enforcement agents must not act in a threatening manner when visiting the debtor by making gestures or taking actions which could reasonably be construed as suggesting harm or risk of harm to debtors, their families, appointed third parties or property. 23. Enforcement agents, for the purpose of taking control of goods shall, without the use of unlawful force, gain access to the goods. The enforcement agent must produce all relevant notices and documents, such as controlled goods agreements, that are required by regulations or statute. 24. Debtors must not be pressed to make unrealistic offers and should be asked to consider carefully any offer they voluntarily make and where possible refer to free debt advice. 25. Where a creditor has indicated they will accept a reasonable repayment offer, enforcement agents must refer such offers onto the creditor. 27. Enforcement agents must not act in a way likely to be publicly embarrassing to the debtor, either deliberately or negligently (that is to say through lack of care) Complaints/Discipline 45. The complaints procedure should be set out in plain English, have a main point of contact, set time limits for dealing with complaints and include an independent appeal process where appropriate. A register should be maintained to record all complaints and complainants should be notified of the outcome of disputes. Information and confidentiality 52. Enforcement agents should, so far as it is practical, avoid disclosing the purpose of their visit to anyone other than the debtor or a third-party nominated by the debtor, for example an advice agency representative. Where the debtor is not seen, the relevant documents must be left at the address in a sealed envelope addressed to the debtor. 53. Enforcement agents should make debtors aware of the possible additional costs of enforcement which will be incurred if further action becomes necessary. If a written request is made, an itemised account should be provided. Times and Hours 55. Enforcement agents should be respectful of the religion and culture of others at all times. They should carefully consider the appropriateness of undertaking enforcement on any day of religious or cultural observance or during any major religious or cultural festival. 56. Enforcement action should only be carried out between the hours of 6.00am and 9.00pm, or at any time during trading hours, unless otherwise authorised by a court Mode of entry 57. Enforcement agents should not seek to gain peaceable entry to premises under false pretences; for example asking to use the toilet, or to use the telephone. They should be clear as to why they are seeking entry to the premises. 59. Enforcement agents must only use a door or usual means of entry to enter premises. 60. A power to enter premises by force exists for the execution of High Court and County Court debts at business premises or at any premises where an enforcement agent is enforcing criminal penalties. This power should only be used to the extent that it is reasonably required and only after the debtor has been warned that the power exists and the consequences of a wilful refusal to co-operate. 61. A power to re-enter premises by force applies to both residential and business premises where a controlled goods agreement is in place and the goods remain on the premises but the debtor has failed to comply with the repayment terms of the controlled goods agreement. This power should only be used to the extent that it is reasonably required and only after the debtor has been given notice of the enforcement agent’s intention to re-enter. Goods 64. Enforcement agents should not remove anything clearly identifiable as an item belonging to, or for the exclusive use of a child (person under the age of 16) or items clearly identifiable as required for the care and treatment of the disabled, elderly and seriously ill. 66. Enforcement agents should take all reasonable steps to satisfy themselves that the value of the goods taken into control to cover the sum outstanding is proportional to the value of the debt and fees owed. 67. Enforcement agents should not take control or remove goods clearly belonging solely to a third-party not responsible for the debt. Where a claim is made, the third-party should be given clear instructions on the process required to recover
their goods. Multiple warrants 69. Where enforcement agents have multiple warrants for a single debtor, an enforcement agent must take control of goods, and sell or dispose of these goods, on the same occasion except where it is not practical to do so. Vulnerable debtors 72. Enforcement agents must withdraw from domestic premises if the only person present is, or appears to be, under the age of 16 or is deemed to be vulnerable by the enforcement agent; they can ask when the debtor will be home – if appropriate. 73. Enforcement agents must withdraw without making enquiries if the only persons present are children who appear to be under the age of 12. 74. A debtor may be considered vulnerable if, for reasons of age, health or disability they are unable to safeguard their personal welfare or the personal welfare of other members of the household. 75. The enforcement agent must be sure that the debtor or the person to whom they are entering into a controlled goods agreement understands the agreement and the consequences if the agreement is not complied with. Bailiff enforcement National Standards 2014.pdf Before Printing the PDF TIP If you DO NOT wish to print Page 1 (Cover Page) of the PDF, please ensure to do the following: Ensure you go to your Printer Settings and set it to 'Print from Page 2' (this way Page 1 (Cover Page) should not print out). Note: This will save you Ink & Paper

This may be of some use to consumers when dealing with complaints made to their energy suppliers: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2008/1898/contents/made

OK so it's not that new, but I haven't seen it posted up yet. They came into force on 26th August 2013. Some of the main points: Full standards of conduct can be found here: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications-and-updates/new-standards-conduct-suppliers-domestic-consumers

Ofgem Investigation into npower and its compliance with Standards of Conduct (Standard Licence Condition 25C), Standard Licence Condition 27 (provision of final bills), and the Gas and Electricity (Consumer Complaints Handling Standards) Regulations 2008 Publication Date: 19th June 2014 Company being Investigated: npower Ofgem are investigating whether RWE npower is complying with the Standards of Conduct (SOC) (SLC 25C) of its gas and electricity supply licence and with the Gas and Electricity (Consumer Complaints Handling Standards) Regulations 2008 (‘Complaints Handling Regulations’). On 4 July 2014 the scope of the investigation was widened to include SLC 27.17 and 27.18, in relation to final bills. More info: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publ...complaints-handling-standards-regulations-2008 New Standards of Conduct: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publ...clearer-fairer-energy-market

Hello everyone, I have a question regarding provision of heating in Scotland. I am renting a private accommodation and, as per usual, agent seems not to care, even though has been informed (emailed twice, now I am intending to send them a formal letter) the heating does not work properly. I have no boiler and only electric heating in the whole flat. Problems: 1) the radiator in the living room does not operate, tried all the switches that there are and it will not budge. (There is a small, fixed electric fireplace in the living room but it is only on/off and does not provide enough heat anyway when constantly on). 2) the radiator in a bedroom (smallish for the size of the room), whilst constantly on full power, never provides enough heat - as I am writing, being there, I feel cold, my fingers feel stiff and cannot bend them without minor pain. There is also draft due to improperly insulated windows in the bedroom and the the living room. 3) A heavy, vertical radiator in a bathroom is not properly fixed and is prone to falling of the wall which is a health hazard (apparently, the agent have been made aware about this by previous tenants as well and made no repairs). 4) There is no heating system whatsoever in the kitchen - is the kitchen excluded from provision of heating? My understanding is that the flat does not comply with tolerate and repairing standards and the issues I have mentioned above should have been addressed by the agent. I want to write a properly formatted, detailed letter to the agent but I canno find within the Shelter Scotland website (and others) or Scottish Housing Act precise information about the tolerable and repairing standards in respect of heating, that is: what are the exact minimum celcius temperatures in bedrooms and living rooms that the fixed appliances should provide at all times? I would be thankful if anyone could point me towards relevant legislation and/or guidelines as well as what the next step I need to take, should the agent disregard my formal letter of complaint. Thanks, K.

Has anyone else noticed the MOJ link to the 'new' National Standards cannot be found on the MOJ site anymore: http://aka.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/enforcement-officers/taking-control-of-goods-national-standards.pdf They can be found here (third link down): https://www.gov.uk/search?q=bailiffs Is there a reason for this, or is it just a technical blip?

Investigation into Scottish Power’s compliance with Standards of Conduct (SLC 25C), SLC 27 (provision of final bills), and the Gas and Electricity (CCHS) Regulations 2008. Read More Here: https://www.ofgem.gov.uk/publications-and-updates/investigation-scottish-power%E2%80%99s-compliance-standards-conduct-slc-25c-slc-27-provision-final-bills-and-gas-and-electricity-cchs-regulations-2008

im going to keep this brief: I purchased a car of ebay trader having being told i was getting full recon engine, new turbo and six months warranty since buying car i have had lots of trouble of which dealer was aware of from 2nd of purchse. It started with bad oil leak turned out it where engine had been fitted wrong lots of bolts also damaged fitting engine also the engine is not a full recon just old block with original parts added and there is no warranty with garage plus more issues appeared with car. I have followed consumer rights info 14 day letter responded dont care if i go to trading standards they take years and in meantime your dont have a car. 30 day pre-court no response After looking into where i stand i was told win in court but never get a penny out of him just throwing good money at bad but trading standards should be dealing with anyway he broke 3 laws in place to protect us from them. 1. dealer and garage fiddled service book to up value of vehicle 2. dealer sold car not to standard as advertised 3 dealer sold car not fit for purpose Took all evidence to trading standards where i was informed due to cut backs there not really dealing with the traders breaking the laws but you can take him to court but its a lottery, probley better if you just fix car and forget it. I stuck now as where i go with this and who to see to help fight agaist this matter of trading standards turn turning a blind eye any help here guys.

I want to make a formal complaint about the bag of rubbish I bought from CSL Sofas. Which do you think is the best organisation to complain to?

Earlier this year we received a speculative invoice masquerading as a parking ticket from Smart Parking. I simply wrote to Smart Parking explaining the legal position and they immediately cancelled the invoice. Given what I've read here and the document they sent I thought I would pursue the matter through my local Trading Standards. Having passed the matter through Consumer Direct, I heard precisely nothing. I had to ask twice to even get a TS reference number. I eventually made a complaint which was fobbed off. I have posted the level 2 complaint I made below and I have set out the response to the level 2 complaint in the next post. I intend to go back at them again and then refer the matter to the Ombudsman. I write with reference to my complaint referenced above and to the letter dated 18 September 2013 sent to me by Lee Ormandy, Business Intelligence and Legal Manager. I note that Mr Ormandy’s letter concludes Stage 1 of your complaints process and I now wish to escalate this matter to Stage 2. By way of background my original complaint to Citizens Advice was regarding a “Parking Charge Notice” received through the post from Smart Parking Limited also known as Town and City Parking. My concerns were: 1) This document is designed to resemble a Penalty Charge Notice issued by a local authority when it merely has the legal status of an invoice. 2) The Parking Charge Notice was issued to me as the registered keeper of the vehicle but given that it is an invoice and governed by contract law, it should only be issued to the driver at the time the incident occurred. As such, sending it to the registered keeper means that it is a speculative invoice. 3) The Parking Charge Notice contains the following sentence: “This may result in a summons or writ being raised for recovery of the outstanding Parking Charge Notice”. This is clearly intended to mislead the recipient as to the company’s recovery powers. Given that this is governed by contract law, the correct recovery route is through the county court and this is extremely unlikely to result in any form of summons or writ but rather a county court claim. In my opinion this sentence implies that the company can recover the invoice balance through the magistrate’s court which it clearly cannot. 4) Private parking companies such as Smart Parking Limited very rarely pursue county court claims and hardly win any that they do. This is because they are rarely able to identify the person they should sue to the satisfaction of the court and under contract law, the amount claimed cannot exceed the actual loss incurred. It is very hard to demonstrate losses equivalent to the £60 to £100 set out in the Parking Charge Notices. When I received my Parking Charge Notice I replied setting out many of the points above and challenged the company to commence legal proceedings. Within seven days they cancelled the Parking Charge Notice. I referred this matter to Trading Standards through Citizens Advice because I was concerned that companies such as Smart Parking Limited are attempting to secure payment of speculative invoices designed to resemble council documents and threatening legal remedies that they could not, in fact pursue. I was extremely disappointed that it took two attempts to obtain a Trading Standards case reference for this matter and then to find that I did not receive any acknowledgement or reply from Trading Standards. Having raised a stage 1 complaint I was astonished to find that my request for any documents relating to this matter produced no results. It is clear that Trading Standards have done absolutely nothing in response to my complaint except perhaps to include it within a statistical return. As a council tax payer this falls well short of what I would expect. I note that Trading Standards claim that they are unable to pursue all cases and that they apply criteria in their selection process. Having reviewed those criteria I believe that my complaint satisfies two of them: 1) Given the number of private parking tickets issued nationally, this matter will certainly affect thousands of Surrey residents each year because other private parking companies issue almost identical documents. 2) Many residents will pay these tickets because they believe that they are legally required to do so. This is particularly true of elderly, young and other vulnerable residents who are unaware of the legal status of the document they receive. I would be obliged if you would consider this as a stage 2 complaint.

The former head of the business lobby group the CBI, Sir Richard Lambert, is to lead a new organisation monitoring standards in the UK banking industry. Sir Richard has been appointed by the banks but will act independently of them and not lobby on their behalf. He will consult government, regulators, banks and consumer groups to develop the new body. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24170812 The collapse of bankers' self esteem There is something a bit odd perhaps about the banks setting up a new body to ensure that their people are following high professional standards and treating customers properly. On the one hand, it won't be the arbiter of whether individuals have breached banking standards - because the City watchdog, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), will soon announce how it intends to exercise those powers (having been urged by the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards to draft a new "single" set of banking standards to be followed by all). But it will develop codes of conduct that are somehow aligned with, but presumably not duplicative of, the FCA's new standards. It will assess the training programmes of banks and third party providers for their appropriateness and fitness. And once a year it will present its findings to the boards of each bank on whether ethical behaviour is - or is not - at the heart of the respective banks' culture and practices It is all about providing greater confidence to us that we are being treated decently by the banks. But in most industries, treating customers well is a competitive issue. For example, you would not expect Tesco, Sainsbury and Asda to set up and fund an independent body to tell them how to provide confidence to their customers that they're not being ripped off. So the appointment of Richard Lambert, the former FT editor and ex-director general of the CBI, to set up this new monitor of bankers' behaviour shows just how low bankers' self-esteem has sunk. Apart from anything else, it is less than a couple of years since the UK's eight biggest banks set up the Professional Standards Board of the Chartered Banker Institute to "support the ethical awareness, customer focus and competence of those working in the banking industry" and "build, over time, greater public confidence and trust in individuals, institutions and the banking industry overall, and enhance pride in the banking profession". Does the decision of the banks to finance the Lambert Plan show that the banks have written off that earlier initiative as a dead loss? That is unclear. But they clearly don't believe it is sufficient to restore their public standing. So what is the big conspicuous difference between that Professional Standards Board and the Lambert model? Well the Professional Standards Board is governed, at the top level, exclusively by serving bankers. Whereas Lambert has insisted that no senior active bankers will be on his board - though three out of the 10 members would be recently retired bankers or independent non-executive directors of banks (the others would include a consumer voice, a trade unionist, an accountant, an investor, a small business person, an academic and even - oh dear - a hack). Which probably tells you all you need to know. However bankers do have to be wary of one thing. Customer service and reputation for fair dealing is a competitive issue. And in an industry historically notorious for collusion, the bankers have to be careful that Lambert isn't seen as a veil for a collusive attempt to persuade all of us that the biggest banks are all much of muchness when it comes to conduct, thus deterring us from shopping around for the best and most sensitive customer service. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24172431

Can anyone be reported to trading standards or is it LTD company's only, what about PLC's or self employed people

Read full story : - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22954586

Hi....... I would be grateful if anyone can offer me some advice on the following: I have been an ebay member for 6 years as a private buyer/seller and in fact only ever sold a few items. On 1/12/2012 i purchased a Ralph Lauren shirt.I was'nt too keen on it and resold it on ebay last week. The new buyer took the shirt to House Of Fraser who apparently advised him it was a fake and he's now taking the shirt to his local Trading Standards office. Obviously i was unaware it was not authentic and purchased it myself from another ebay seller.I cant claim back payment from the original seller because 45 days have lapsed but i'm happy to refund the new buyer. However i am more concerned what Trading Standards will do to me? I am really concerned so would appreciate any advice. Thankyou.

Hi All, I have a big problem and would need some advice. I started working in this store some 7 months ago as a supervisor. Recently, I was working on my whole day shifts and stocking up the store as usual when my colleague called me out to tell me someone wanted to buy fireworks. I asked which one she wanted and went to the back to get it. I asked her if she had an ID and she said 'NO'. She though did look like a familiar face and decided to sell it to her as she was a regular and she might have come with her ID before. Minutes after she left the trading standards walked in and served me a notice and told me I was going to court. My company has suspended me with pay for now and told me they would not provide me with any lawyer. I explained to them (my company) that though I understood everything that went on I was sorry an age authorisation report did show that I actually had been refusing people on the basis of age. I had been working 19 hours and it was increased to 40 hours with the departure of the deputy manager. In some cases I have had to do 12 hour long shifts back to back. The day prior to this event I left the store one hour late as the alarm would not set and had to open the store at 5:30 am again in the morning. I explained in defence that I was physically tired and I was dearly sorry for my act. Also pointing out gaps in my training. I have to face the trading standards alone. I dont know what to say and I am so sorry. I only have the letter from the trading standards and an age authorisation report that shows I had been refusing sales of people underage. Please I know I havent done right. I have never committed any offence before. I have cried and beaten myself over this. I just need help. I need to know how to face the tribunal, please help me

Trading Standards Bridgend Trading standards aims to ensure that fair-trading is carried out in Bridgend County Borough so that consumers can purchase goods and services with confidence in the knowledge that they are safe, correctly priced and accurately described Bridgend Trading Standards Service offers a comprehensive consumer advice service that has been awarded the Community Legal Services (CLS) Quality Mark. The service is provided free to any person who is resident in the county borough or person who has purchased goods or services from a business in the county borough and will give advice on a wide range of issues relating to the purchase of goods or services. The service is available: Monday to Thursday 8.30am to 5pm. Friday 8.30am to 4.30pm. The service can be contacted by telephone (01656) 643278, in person at the council offices, in writing or by e-mail: consumeradvice@bridgend.gov.uk Initially, anyone contacting the service will be advised of their rights and the trader's responsibility to attempt to resolve the problem. If this initial attempt fails, the adviser will intervene to try and mediate/conciliate between the parties. Should this fail to achieve a successful result and it is thought appropriate, advice and assistance will be given to seek redress in the County Court. The service also provides a supply of leaflets to assist consumers with their problems and explain their civil rights.

Hello forum I hope somebody here can be of some help to me, let me begin. I paid a company i found on the internet a deposit of £101 to start work on a new website for my business including designing a company logo, letterheads, business cards. Initially communication was very good and i was happy to proceed with this company doing the work i needed. The owner told me that there card machines were not working so i couldn't pay by card, i naively offered to make a bank transfer to get the work started. Over 3 months later i haven't had any of the work we agreed on and the owner is no longer answering my calls/texts or replying to emails for about 1 month. The police were not interested as its a civil matter and so far my dealings with a guy at trading standards haven't amounted to much. He has tried phoning and sent a email which he has had no look with either and seems reluctant to do anything else? I have sent a letter to the addresses i can find for him off the internet stating my intention to pursue the matter but have not heard anything back. Whilst doing my research after the event i have found another company that he has dissolved that was also [problem]ming people out of purchases they made on the net. Surely he can not just get away with it? Hopefully someone could help in someway as i find a brick wall every avenue i am going down to resolve this. Thank you.