Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • while politicians trough at subsidised bars and canteens, claim thousaands in expenses while letting out their properties and tories vote to leave UK children hungry That ALL needs to stop
    • J&P Credit Solutions are specialists on debt recovery. Either way they seem to be swapping between the JandP and IDR whatever their exact definitions are.
    • Primary and secondary teachers are supporting pupils with their own money, buying food and warm clothing. Eight in 10 primary teachers in England spending own money to help pupils | Education | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Increasing numbers of children hungry and lack adequate clothing, with two-thirds of secondary teachers also supporting pupils  
    • I googled "prescribed disability" to see where it is defined for the purposes of S.92. I found HMRC's definition, which included deafness. I don't  think anyone is saying deaf people cant drive, though! digging deeper,  Is it that “prescribed disability” (for the purposes of S.88 and S.92) is defined at: The Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1999 WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK These Regulations consolidate with amendments the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1996...   ….. and sleep apnoea / increased daytime sleepiness is NOT included there directly as a condition but only becomes prescribed under “liability to sudden attacks of disabling giddiness or fainting” (but falling asleep isn't fainting!), so it isn’t defined there as a “prescribed disability”  Yet, under S.92(2)(b) RTA 1988 “ any other disability likely to cause the driving of a vehicle by him in pursuance of a licence to be a source of danger to the public" So (IMHO) sleep apnea / daytime sleepiness MIGHT be a prescribed disability, but only if it causes likelihood of "driving being a source of danger to the public" : which is where meeting / not meeting the medical standard of fitness to drive comes into play?  
    • You can counter a Judges's question on why you didn't respond by pointing out that any company that charges you with stopping at a zebra crossing is likely to be of a criminal mentality and so unlikely to cancel the PCN plus you didn't want to give away any knowledge you had at that time that could allow them to counteract your claim if it went to Court. There are many ways in which you can see off their stupid claim-you will see them in other threads  where our members have been caught by Met at other airports as well as Bristol.  Time and again they take motorists to Court for "NO Stopping" apparently completely forgetting that the have lost doing that because no stopping is prohibitory and cannot form a contract. Yet they keep on issuing PCNs because so many people just pay up . Crazy . You can see what chuckleheads they are when you read their Claim form which is pursuing you as the driver or the keeper. they don't seem to understand that on airport land because of the Bye laws, the keeper is never liable.   
  • 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

Suing Tiscali Broadband?


Guest shaff
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5911 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

Guest shaff

Hi All,

 

I am writing this as just gettin off the phone to Tiscali:mad:

 

My customer experince with them has been HELL!!!!

So much so, i'm actually thinkin of taking them to small claims court for misleading customers. I am on the 8meg Broadband package and have been since November recieving 0.3 of a meg.

 

Any ideas or advice would be welcomed??

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember my first bb contract was with Tiscali and they were apalling then too. This was back when the norm was 512k downloads. Trouble was, I often got only 30k, less than dial up!

 

Turns out that Tiscali were/are well known for sharing bandwidth between far too many users (high contention ratio) causing really poor speeds. One way to find out is to log in to your router/modem and see what speed it says you are connected at versus what speed you actually get.

 

If you are connected at a reasonable speed, but your downloads are low, then its likely Tiscali's fault. If, however, you are connected at a low speed, it may be a line/exchange (and possibly distance) problem. Did you ever have a good speed from when you first got Tiscali?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "official" route would be to review their complaints procedure on their website (if you can find it :rolleyes:). Probably something along the lines of "in writing to xxx, expect reply/confirmation within 5-10 working days" etc.

 

Do that, including all info (even if it goes to many many pages) with as many examples of calls you've made and responses received (or not). Send registered. Wait the required time (this is the worst bit by far).

 

You'll probably have heard nothing back, but even if you have, if you are not happy with it, go to the ISPA ISPA - Home and register a complaint with them - again including details.

 

If no response from Tiscali within another 5 working days, you can make a second complaint via the ISPA. This escalates to an external adjudicator - i.e. makes it much more "serious". I'm going into this stage tonight with Pipex (now "aka Tiscali"!) as they don't even bother to respond at all.

 

After that I think you would have a pretty rock solid case for going to the courts, which is the card I'm keeping in my back pocket.

 

Problem is all the waiting that's necessary - means nothing to them, but it's serious hassle for us! Of course, they probably count on that to make us give up and go away... Shows how much they know about me :lol: :grin:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiscali are the worst company i have ever dealt with, here is the first letter i sent them which explains the situation (This went on for months until i eventually obtained a MAC and migrated to another ISP and alas! no problems! simply Tiscali's inability to provide any kind of resonable service)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing with regard to the broadband service i currently receive from you. Since i joined your 8mb service last year i have never experienced speeds exceeding 1100kbps, and as of this moment the speed is so slow that the internet is unusable, i have conducted a comprehensive speed test and my current bandwidth is 18kbps.

When i joined your service there was a delay as you told me you wanted to ensure that i will receive the best possible service of 8mb on my line despite the fact that BT had already told me my line would only be capable of 4.5mb at that time. I told you that i would be quite happy with 4.5mb but you insisted that you would enable an 8mb service for me.

I have been in contact with your technical support team several times in the past to try and resolve the issue and i have followed all the steps they have advised but the problem was never resolved. I recently learnt that a neighbour of mine who is a BT Broadband customer enjoys speeds of 7-8mb, this prompted me to contact you technical support team again as i am indeed paying for such a service. My technical support request has now become a farce, i will now explain the sequence of events so far:

5th Feb: Issued support request from your online support centre.

6th Feb: Received standard reply advising the steps to perform.

6th Feb: I advised that the problem remains.

8th Feb: Received reply telling me that they are unable to assist me at this helpdesk and i should telephone Technical Support on 0870 744 2922.

9th Feb: I telephoned technical support as advised and the operative was unable to solve the problem, he told me some tests would be carried out and he took note of my mobile phone number and said i would be updated with the progress of the tests.

9th Feb (10.07am): Received text message from you telling me that the problem was being investigated.

10th Feb (10.34am): Received text message from you telling me that BT were unable to detect a fault and i would be contacted shortly.

10th Feb (10.34am): Received text message from you telling me that you have been trying to contact me.

10th Feb: I telephoned you and was told that the problem was still being investigated.

11th Feb (9.38am): Received text message from you telling me that BT were unable to detect a fault and i would be contacted shortly.

12th Feb (9.27am): Received text message from you telling me that BT have detected a fault and i would be contacted shortly to arrange an engineer visit.

13th Feb (9.35am): Received text message from you telling me that BT have detected a fault and i would be contacted shortly to arrange an engineer visit.

14th Feb (8.08am): Received text message from you telling me that BT have detected a fault and i would be contacted shortly to arrange an engineer visit.

15th Feb (8.35am) Received text message from you telling me that BT have detected a fault and i would be contacted shortly to arrange an engineer visit.

15th Feb: I telephoned technical support to find out what was going on and to inform you that my connection was now unusable. The operative said he would arrange an engineer visit. I was told that the engineer would arrive between 10.30am and 1pm on 16th February 2007.

16th Feb (8.36am): Received text message from you telling me that the fault is still being investigated by BT and i will be updated within 24 hours.

16th Feb (10.15am): BT engineer arrives and conducts tests on my line. His tests confirm that by current bandwidth is as follows, downstream: 7kbps, upstream: 458kbps. He informs me that the line is free from faults and fully operational.

In the meantime i received an email from your online support informing me that as they have not heard from me concerning my request for support in the 72 hours since they sent me a response, and consequently, they have changed the status of my question to SOLVED. I replied informing them that the problem was not SOLVED and asked what would be done about it. I replied each day following this asking what would be done and i have been ignored on every occasion.

This morning i have attempted to telephone your technical department three times to find out what is going on and each time they claim they cannot hear me, same with your customer service line yet if i try any other number they hear me perfectly.

So, as the situation is as of now, i have an unusable internet connection despite having a fully capable telephone line. I cannot contact technical support or customer services as they claim they cannot hear me. I am still paying you for an 8mb internet connection that in reality is only a fraction of that speed and as of the last few days, is unusable.

The Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 requires a supplier of a service acting in the course of business in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to carry out that service with reasonable care and skill. I do not believe your supply of service is without breach of this legislation.

I telephoned you yesterday to complain about the situation and was told by your customer services operative that if i ring you on 22nd February i will be entitled to obtain a MAC without being liable for any fee with respect to incomplete contractual term which i find acceptable if not for the fact that the problem remains that i have no usable internet connection and i am now unable to contact you, and indeed that i have been paying for a service that it has become apparent, you simply cannot provide.

Please advise me how you intend to resolve this sorry situation,

Yours Faithfully,

Simon POwell

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...