Jump to content

Showing results for tags 'tradein'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums

Categories

  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location

Found 1 result

  1. I recently purchased an HP Sleekbook from this retailer. The laptop was marked £299.99 after £150 trade-in of my old laptop. The pricing was not accidental, it was recorded at that price on their website and in-store. It was also £50 cheaper than a similar but later model containing a small 32GB SSD drive, but lower spec processor. The in-store advertising, including a brochure I retained, and the in-store sales assistants all maintained this laptop was eligible for the trade-in deal. I was also directed to a list of conditions online which I have electronically retained a copy of. However, when I tried to claim the rebate, the website (operated by a different company on behalf of the retailer) refused to accept my claim on the basis that the minimum purchase was £499.99. As you can easily see, £299.99 + £150 (the amount I paid) is £449.99. Thus I am unable to claim. (It is necessary to provide a photographic record of the receipt in order to claim.) I emailed the help email address and after some days received absolutely no reply whatsoever, not even an acknowledgement. I subsequently sent two further emails to this address pointing out the information online which proves that my claim is eligible. I then emailed the retailer's support email address yesterday. I also asked for a copy of the company's complaints procedure and the address of their corporate headquarters for such correspondence, should it become necessary. After a full working day I have received no reply, though I did receive an immediate automated acknowledgement of my email. However, since that time, the retailer has modified their pricing (increased the price of the model of laptop I bought by £150) and added the £499.99 condition to their terms and conditions (I can prove all this -- I have photographic evidence). Edit: actually I have just discovered there are two sets of terms and conditions online, one which lists the £499.99 condition and one which does not. In fact, I cannot prove that the one which lists the £499.99 condition has been altered. It may be useful if a CAG user could volunteer to be an independent witness of the information which is currently showing online and retain an electronic copy of it. I would be happy to provide the relevant URLs for this. /Edit Can someone advise me what I should do about this situation? Given that the offer expires 14 days after purchase, I cannot see how I can prevail. Does anyone know how long I must give them legally to respond to my email? And what should be my next step if the matter is not resolved? Would Trading Standards be the appropriate place to take this up? I know the OFT could not intervene in my specific case, so it seems pointless going there.
×
×
  • Create New...