Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I apologise if I was being unclear. Where it currently stands is that they will have it repair, placing scaffolding in our garden for 5 days. They have moved fast, but we will still have to postpone our contractors, meaning, we won't necessarily have the work done in time for the wedding and therefore will incur additional expenses for either a marquee or a wedding venue. They are vehemently against having any kind of liability in any regard but continue repeating that they are legally entitled to use our garden for their repairs (I believe this is true unless the work can be carried out using a cherry picker). The neighbour seems either indifferent or oblivious to the fact they can't reach all of the side of the roof from the space where they can place the scaffolding. They have asked their roofer of choice about using a cherry picker but the roofer has said it wasn't possible. It's not clear whether the roofer doesn't want to use a cherry picker or whether there is an issue with it. They have told us it is a problem that we are installing a gazebo as it will prevent them to access their roof from our garden in the future?!?  
    • Couldn't agree more, really wanted a true ruling on this just for the knowledge but pretty sure the Judge made some decisions today that he didn't need to?.. maybe they all go this way on the day? We hear back so few post court dates I'm not sure. Each Judge has some level of discretion. Their sol was another Junior not even working at their Firm, so couldn't speak directly for them! that was fortunate I think because if she would have rejected in court better, she might have  been able to force ruling, we are at that point!, everybody there!!, Judge basically said openly that he can see everything for Judgement!!!  but she just said "I can speak to the claimant and find out!" - creating the opportunity for me to accept. I really think the Judge did me a favor today by saying it without saying it. Knowing the rep for the sol couldn't really speak to the idea in the moment. Been to court twice in a fortnight, on both occasions heard 4 times with others and both of my claims, the clerk mention to one or both parties "Letting the Judge know if you want to have a quick chat with each other"! So, it appears there's an expectation of the court that there is one last attempt at settling before going through the door. So, not a Sol tactic, just Court process!. Judge was not happy we hadn't tried to settle outside! We couldn't because she went to the loo and the Judge called us in 10 minutes early! - another reason to stand down to allow that conv to happen. Stars aligned there for me I think. But yeh, if the sol themselves, or someone who can make decisions on the case were in court, I would have received a Judgement against today I think. She was an 'advocate'.. if I recall her intro to me correctly.. So verbal arguments can throw spanners in Court because Plinks dogs outsource their work and send a Junior advocate.
    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

AOL taking money without authorization??


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6057 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I cancelled my account with AOL several months ago, as they kept saying I could no longer use a Debt card to make payments and I had to set up a Direct Debt.

 

I switched over to Virgin Media, who have been great by the way!

 

AOL however have still been taking the monthly payment out of an account belonging to my Mum. I used her card the one time to pay a months payment, but thereafter paid using other means! Since cancelling they seem to have decided to use the details of my Mums card to continue to take payments???

 

I have spent hours on the phone on their infuriating customer service helpline trying to get them to stop, but they still take money. She has told her bank they are taking money without authorization, but the bank says they can't do anything apart from cancel her card. Which she doesn't want to do as she would have to spend hours changing her details with other companies she uses!!

 

I have letters confirming the account is no longer active and that there is no debt to pay. So why to they persist in taking money without permission??

 

I really would like some advice on what to do. I have considered writing a letter for my Mum asking for the money back, but I'm not sure what to write and how much to ask for. Should I just ask for the total figure or should I add on any interest or costs. Should I threaten court action in the first letter or wait for a response from an initial enquiry??

 

Any advice would be gratefully received!

 

Thanks

 

Simon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Get your Mum to contract her bank and say there has been no agreement to take these funds and you want them back. You cannot do this on her behalf.

 

AOL in the UK is..... Carphone Warehouse.... so join the list of Talk Talk complainers, you've got a lot of company out there!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You also need to inform AOL in writing via recorded delivery* that you are complaining to OFCOM if they don't stop doing this. Give them 28 days to stop their actions.

 

As they won't contact OFCOM in a month during office hours on 020 7981 3040.

 

And yes I've compained about Talk Talk as well.

 

*If you don't send it via recorded delivery they will deny receiving the letter even their staff in the shops state this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They'll laugh if you say you'll complain to OFCOM, as they now do not deal with consumer disputes.

 

You need to try OTELO or the other one CISAS for Broadband/Internet related complaints.

 

I've successfully complained to OFCOM about

1. AOL (in 2005)

2. Talk Talk (this year)

3. Three (this year)

 

They don't laugh at you they:

1. asked how you have tried to deal with it.

2. if you have dealt with it properly which includes writing to the organisation using a proof of receipt method with a timeframe of a month for the organisation to reply and the organisation has not replied, they take your complaint down

2. they then give you a reference number and the details of who you can directly call in the organisation concerned to deal with your complaint.

 

When you then contact the organisation concerned they fall over themselves apologising to you due the complaint being registered with OFCOM and then deal with your complaint immediately. They do this because they know you can go back to OFCOM, or take them to court and win very easily.

 

I suggest you don't tell of people who are writing from experienced and have successfully dealt with their problems that way.

 

In the case of Talk Talk they have a dedicated team who deal with complaints from OFCOM and you can only get their number from OFCOM.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggest you get your own facts right.

 

I didn't 'tell off' anyone - simply pointing out that OFCOM is not OFTEL (the purely communications regulator). What happened prior to June 2007 is immaterial, as they have been lobbying to get out of the morass of consumer disputes to concentrate on industry-specific issues.

 

They have always wanted to ensure they don't have to deal with the hoi polloi, and they see no reason to duplicate the work of the agencies I already mentioned. However, OFCOM quite happily pass on complaints to the correct resource (like ICSTIS, now PhonepayPlus) for premium rated phone issues.

 

I you wish to recommend folk take the long way round to their resolution, feel free - however my route is the direct one and saves being sent from pillar to post. As for 'only gettng the number from OFCOM', you'll find this info is also provided by OTELO, who you were probably dealing with anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

Thanks for the replies. Buzby, if you read the post you where replying to, then you would see that my Mom had called her bank (Natwest) about AOL using her card details without her permission! They could only cancel her card!!

 

As for OFCOM! They provide great consumer advice on their site. I followed the advice they gave me and managed use their Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme. They found in favor of my Mom and I. And a refund from AOL appeared shortly after!

 

I did some research whilst doing this and found that there are many ways of approaching ISP's if they've misbehaved.

 

Home page | Ofcom will give good advice. But only advice!!

Office of the Telecommunications Ombudsman - Home Are the Ombudsman service for ISP's and not only give advice but provide a structured complaints form!

 

ISPA - Home The Internet Services Providers Association is the UK's trade association for providers of internet services.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...