Jysmystry v Optical Express

[Dustymunchkin]

Thought I'd keep my reply short...

Dear Sirs,

 

I refer to your letter dated 10 March 2008 which I received today and which you entitle “OVERDUE ACCOUNT” (again!)

Ref: Final CC/ 52590113 / contact lenses.

Please check my letter to you dated 23/2 and your reply to me dated 29/2 ref 002939 to find out why your letter is in breach of OFT guidelines. You may also wish to google SAR to find out what it means.

Kindest Regards

[jysmystry]

hahah we got the same letter

 

The only difference was that yours said "Overdue Account" and mine said "final Demand".

 

I'm rather upset though that your letter was handle by a customer care manager! I only got slightly illiterate Lyndsey

 

wonder who will get a reply first?

[ScarletPimpernel]

These clowns really are turning out well, aren't they?

 

To those engaged with them, I offer another quote from my hero, Admiral Lord Nelson: "I could not tread these perilous paths in safety, if I did not keep a saving sense of humour."

[The GodMother]

well its that Ar$e from elbow contition again here. What do u think SP?

[Dustymunchkin]

'Optical Express customer care' has to be an oxymoron!

 

Any takers on a bet that that's not the 'Final' demand?

[ScarletPimpernel]

Could it be that the sender of the latest final demand didn't notice that his colleague was 'investigating'?

 

Perhaps he needs his eyes testing...

[Dustymunchkin]

I was going to suggest he might have 'contacts' in the business but then I realised he's at work all day at it's probably miles to the nearest decent optician...

[jysmystry]

Could it be that the sender of the latest final demand didn't notice that his colleague was 'investigating'?

 

Perhaps he needs his eyes testing...

 

 

lol, he should have gone to specsavers

[The GodMother]

lol this company are just making me laugh.

 

aybe that all need to go to specsavers.

[Dustymunchkin]

We don't have to wait long and Lyndsay has really excelled herself this time. As jysmystry says she really is unarmed.

As he also says she replies pretty fast. This letter is dated 14th March and it arrived today 14th March. Miraculous!

 

 

I don't know where to start.

1) If the letter of 7th Dec was in response to my request for more detail, why did they just send me a balance? (Actually it wasn't. It was an apology for getting the customer id wrong)

2) I assure you I had written & phoned quite a bit 'previously and after'

 

3) I love the fact that, Inexplicably, £29.99 rises to £59.98 in the course of the letter.

 

4) The summary suggests they owe me money?

I was paying them monthly for a monthly supply of 30 disposable lenses.

(I dispute I paid them in March as I closed the account in Feb 2004) From what Lyndsay says they were only shipping them every 52 days on average. According to this I paid 6 times for 4 dispatches and failed to pay a 7th and 8th payment.

 

5) There were no lenses shipped to me in March 2004. Had there been and had their debit request been refused by my bank it's pretty certain that they would have notified me prior to October 2007.

 

6) The letter she's responding to was an SAR.

They have 20 days.

 

Shooting fish in a barrel?

Dusty.

[jysmystry]

Im ever so slightly drunk right now so things might be slightly better in my head than reality but this letter has made me very happy. Im excited to receive my exact same copy in the post tomorrow.

 

I think dusty we need to simply decide together on one thing. Do we seek to resolve their inevitable non-complience through the information comissioner or the courts?

 

I really want it to be the courts but will that look bad for us if we miss out the nformation comissioner?

 

I might be tempted to simply ignore lyndsey and wait for the summons. Instant absolute defense and counter claim with costs.

 

Is it really worth £60 lyndsey?

 

Bet it would be a JBD too haha

[ScarletPimpernel]

The only surprise in Lyndsey's letter is that she has not signed it in crayon.

 

To misquote Blackadder: "The eyes are open, the mouth moves, but Mr Brain has long since departed, hasn't he, Lyndsey?"

[Dustymunchkin]

Jysmystry- Equally pleased to hear you're slightly drunk. I promise you it reads just as good in the morning.

Just to add insult to injury I went to OE website and the said contact lenses ONLY come in boxes of 30 and cost £65 for 3 boxes - so current price per box £21.67.

If they were only sending me 7 a year (as they claim) I was paying £51.29 a box.

 

When Lyndsey says 'Our opening are Monday...' Is she referring to when I'm allowed to 'contact her in writing' ?

[jysmystry]

Now Im sober i'm still just as pleased by this letter. In the cold light of day I am both stunned and appauled by the number and magnitude of the holes to be picked in it.

 

None the less I take great offence at ScarletPimpernel's quoting blackadder like that! Clearly blackadder was talking about Baldrick when using that phrase and so presumably you are attempting to liken our Lydnsey to Baldrick!! As we all know Baldrick frequently came up with "a cunning plan" suggesting he did, in his own unique way, THINK and engage some form of brain activity in going about his daily life. As such the difference between Lyndsey and Baldrick is vast, he is clearly her mental superior and there can be no comparison drawn between them!

 

Anyhoo's, the main reason i like this letter is that, however hard lyndsey tries the numbers just don't add up. This was the exact point of my seeking clarity in my case and this just compounds the concern i have for their claim i owe them whatever magical figure they saw on sesame street the morning they wrote their first letter to me.

 

I reckon we are on the higher ground here bud, they can't do anything (without repercussions for them) until they have released the info. I'm still thinking about whether they will go away if i ignore them now that i know im safe to do so or whether i should push the issue.

 

I guess I'll see what my letter says when it arrives and decide from there as we sent very different responses. I expect a similar display of ignorance and unjustified assertins as this though so in the meantime ill be reading up on enforcing SAR's and the funnest remedy for non-complience

[ScarletPimpernel]

None the less I take great offence at ScarletPimpernel's quoting blackadder like that! Clearly blackadder was talking about Baldrick when using that phrase and so presumably you are attempting to liken our Lydnsey to Baldrick!!

 

Blackadder was talking about Lord Percy.

[jysmystry]

ahh, in that case the similarity is startling

[ScarletPimpernel]

On the other hand, why not offer a turnip as full and final settlement?

[Dustymunchkin]

I've got a cat called Lord Purrcy. (because he's a few rats short of the full colony)

[Dustymunchkin]

I should have headed the following FINAL RESPONSE. If they make an offer (which I doubt) I'll tell them they've got to cough up to jysmystry as well (or he'll tell).

J: Is your CID reference different to your CC reference? Just that on my first call to them, they told me the letter was 'in error' and to disregard it. Since I don't tape my phone calls I pursued the fact that it was addressed to me at my address and the 'error' was quickly discovered to be an 'error'

Dear Lyndsey,

 

I refer to your letter dated 14 March 2008 which I received on 14th March 2008.

Ref: CID 52624625 / contact lenses.

Thankyou for taking the time to offer up an interim response to my request by letter of 23rd Feb. I trust the requests made in that letter are being dealt with separately and are not your dept. You must inform me if there is a charge for this service.

Although the figures submitted in your letter relating to payment dates cannot be held to be reliable, they certainly do not hold up your theory that I have an outstanding balance of £29.99 (page 1) or even £59.98 (page 2).

If they are reliable, then I was paying for 30 lenses 12 times a year and you were dispatching 30 lenses 7 times a year. Over 2 years that would equate to an overcharge of £300 + approx £190 (if you assume 8% interest over 6 years)

Since I am not the only customer currently being harassed by Optical Express for non-existent arrears, I can only assume I would not have been the only customer being cheated in this way.

I would be grateful if you would show your findings to a senior member of the management team. If true, then a court case could open the floodgates for 100s of similar claims so I would expect an offer that covers the debt with interest and acceptable compensation for the harassment I have been subjected to since October 2007.

This does not in any way relieve you of the responsibility of responding to the requests made in my letter dated 23/2/2008.

Kindest Regards

[jysmystry]

they certainly do not hold up your theory that I have an outstanding balance of £29.99 (page 1) or even £59.98 (page 2)

 

I was drinking coffee when i read this! It nearly came out my nose when i was trying not to laugh!

[Dustymunchkin]

OMG. You're right. We're not allowed to laugh.

Last year someone else with discalcula won an out of court settlement from Barclays for wrongly granting him a loan of £20,100 as they failed to inform him about the repayments in a format he could understand.

 

Which reminds me...I sent my brother a link to this thread and he sent back this succinct reply.

 

OE NCM QED

[The GodMother]

yes it is part of the DDA that things need to be made clear to ppl with anytype of disability and in a format that there disability allows them to understand

[Dustymunchkin]

Not 100% true. The disability must affect their day to day living and section 21 allows that support is reasonable.

If, in pursuit of financial gain, people start to argue that not knowing their arse from their elbow is a disability then it's abusing the act.

As for Barclays; NOT giving the guy a loan would have been an offence as well. My mum would find that funny and she has every impairment listed in DDA Schedule 1 S4 (1) a-h. I'm not knocking the act, just its misuse.

[The GodMother]

yes but if it is a disability that apperase on the act like deafness or blindness then they have to povide the info in a formatt that is in a format they can understand.

 

You would not expect a blind person to be able to read a letter would you?

[jysmystry]

Well, Its been 45 days today so they have made a boo-boo.

 

I have done a bit of reading and I'm not going to bother with the Information Commissioners Office, I'm going to go through the courts and get an Order forcing compliance.

 

This is a bit more of an aggressive approach and i'm aware of that but the Information Commissioners Office will simply consider whether or not to write to them then "work with them" to help them correct their proceedures. I have no interest in helping them with their proceedures, I want the info and court will be the quicker option. The Information Commissioners Office also suggest this is a perfectly acceptable thing to do.

 

I do intend to recover my expenses as even though have not been considerable they have taken up my money by neglecting their responsibilities and forcing me to keep writing to them, they have stressed me out and they have wasted my evenings researching.

 

I'm off to the court today to speak to them to see if they are likely to accept it (as there are issues about whethers its small claims, fast track etc) and i'll be claiming specific performance but attempting to avoid the Part 8 Proceedure. It should be simple enough.

 

My LBA giving them 14 days to comply will be going out after the bank hols and i'll post a copy on here for the record. I'm sure the LBA will sort things out in any case and if not i'll enjoy the learning experience of my first court appearence (outside of work) which will be fun on its own.