Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes, Hotpoint UK has been a subsidiary of Whirlpool for over 20 years. And unlike some domestic goods manufacturers you can buy from them direct and I believe they employ their own service engineers, Is that your situation? You bought direct from Hotpoint and Hotpoint sent out their own engineer?
    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
  • 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
      • 160 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

Problem with vodafone advice needed please


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5783 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

It started when my girlfriend paid for April and May but the agent on the phone neglected to tell her that if you paid for it within 3 days of the time when the direct debit is due then the direct debit would come out anyway so she was charged twice for April.

 

This lead to her having to borrow £40 off someone so she could pay for a different pending payment for something else but left her unable to pay for the pending bank charge due fortunately she had money coming in the next day otherwise she would have another one.

 

I've been advised by various different people her dad thinks that they should pay now and there is no reason why they can't and that they are just sitting on it for the interest at the moment and if they don't refund the money

 

Can anyone else please give me their opinions on this because her dad reckons that the final bill is not enforceable because they are in breach of contract?

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

They are not in breach of contract for requesting and taking payment for services, and this would not mean that a final bill is not due or shouldnt be paid either.

It sounds like a simple error on the part of the operator not advising your girlfriend that due to the short time before the D/D date it would still be requested from their end, and that the D/D should be stopped at the bank end by your girlfriend.

 

The question is, if two payments were made, for April and May, then why was the normal D/D not taken in April, then in May? if a previous D/D had failed it is normal for a second attempt to be made, so it could be a cross over from a failed payment that couldnt have been stopped anyway!

 

If the phone account is now in 'credit' due to an overpayment, a call to customer services to request a BACS payment back to your girlfriends account will see the money go back to her account in 2/3 days. They would have to have a darn good reason for refusal to do that because if May bill has also been paid then there is no outstanding at all as June bill would not have been generated yet!

Anything I post is my own opinion and views based on experience. My posts may not represent the views of my Employer, work collegues, or my Mum, i thought them up all by myself!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for the advice Orangeprimate :);)

 

Yeah it was taken twice first time DD was taken she had no funds so they took it again but she had already paid for it over the phone by then so the DD came out anyway :shock::rolleyes::wink:.

 

Had them call this morning and the £64.73 has gone in and we are just waiting on the £35 overdraft charge which they said should take 3-8days however her dad thinks that we should threaten to leave and cancel the contract and DD because he believes that they can pay us straight away and that they are just sitting on the money for interest gained on it.

 

What is everybodys thoughts on this ? :-?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I wouldn't listen to the advise her dad is giving you because it is very bad advise and could get her in a lot of trouble with late payments/defsult being recorded on her credit file. PArt of the T & C's will state when payment should be made and if it isn't made on time then that is your problem and not Vodafone's. They work the same as any other lender in that they will try to take payment by d/d, if its returned as unpaid then they will re-apply usually around 7 days later. Her bank no doubt will have informed her that the direct debit had been rejected. Its not Vodafone's responsibility to ensure the funds are there but your girlfriends. As the original D/D had been rejected then Vodafone will have asked for her to clear the current outstanding balance, along with a current invoice if one was due as who's to say that your girlfriend hadn't cancelled the d/d completely with the bank. As they are refunding the bank charges then they are being generous and how long the payment takes to be refunded is a fairly standard timescale (remember she made them wait for their money a lot longer than they are making her wait for her money) - try claiming back from a bank/credit card and you will find it can take up to a month. There has been no breach of contract so she is not entitled to cancel her contract for that reason, she has in fact breached it in the first place by not making payment on time which will be clearly stated in her T & C's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...