Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Probably to do with the Creditor accepting the reduced payments claim as part of the IVA. - Thats my guess anyway.  As for the mount outstanding... 60k is incredible and im pretty sure a DRO wouldnt cover that much even after the new legislation.    For you @Alfy - Please stay headstrong and stop worrying. My viewpoint on debt with debt collectors is simple. You are a figure on a spreadsheet loaded into a database for them to run a collection cycle through.  They dont care about emotions or your situation, they just care about paying off their shareholders and trying to turn a profit.  They use varying tactics to increase the pressure on you to the point where you will break. People then fall for this an either cave in to DCAs before doing their own due diligence on the debts that are purchased or turn to IVAs like you have.    They are better ways to handle this and Im glad you feel better after a good nights sleep - I hope you can keep it up. 
    • Good afternoon,    I am writing in reference to the retail dispute number ****, between myself and Newton Autos concerning the sale of a Toyota Avensis which has been found to have serious mechanical faults.    As explained previously the car was found to be faulty just six days after purchase. The car had numerous fault codes that appeared on the dash board and went into limp mode. This required assistance from the AA and this evidence has already been provided. The car continues to exhibit these faults and has been diagnosed as having faults with the fuel injectors which will require major mechanical investigation and repairs.    Newton Autos did not make me aware of any faults upon purchase of the vehicle and sold it as being in good condition.    Newton Autos have also refused to honour their responsibilities under The Consumer Rights Act 2015 which requires them to refund the customer if the goods are found to be faulty and not fit for purpose within 30 days of purchase.    Newton Autos also refused to accept my rejection of the vehicle and refused to refund the car and accept the return of the vehicle.    It is clear to me that the car is not fit for purpose as these mechanical faults occurred so soon after purchase and have been shown to be present by both the AA and an independent mechanic.   Kind regards
    • Commercial Landlords are legally allowed to sue for early cancellation of the lease. You can only surrender your lease if your landlord agrees to your doing so. They are under no obligation even to consider your request and are entitled to refuse. You cannot use this as an excuse not to pay your rent. Your landlord is most likely to agree to your surrendering the lease if they want the property back in order to redevelop it, or if they wants to rent it to what they regards as a better tenant or at a higher rent. There are two types of surrender: Express surrender in writing. This is a written document which sets out the terms of the surrender. Implied surrender by conduct. (applies to your position) You can move out of the property you leased, simply hand your keys back and the lease will come to an end, but only if the landlord agrees to accept your surrender. Many tenants have thought they can simply post the keys through the landlord's letter box and the lease is ended. This is not true and without a document from the landlord, not only do you not know if the landlord has accepted the surrender, you also do not know on what basis they have accepted and could find they sue you for rent arrears, service charge arrears, damage to the property and compensation for your attempt to leave the property without the landlord's agreement. Unless you are absolutely certain that the landlord is agreeable to your departure, you should not attempt to imply a surrender by relying on your and the landlord's conduct.  
    • I had to deal with these last year worst DCA I have ever dealt with. Just wait for the constant threats of CCJ and how you'll lose in court and how they won't do mediation and they want the judge to question you with a load of "BIG" words to boot with the letter. My case was struck out in the end, stupidity on their part as I admitted to owing the debt in the end going through the court process was just a formality as they wouldn't let it drop despite me admitting the debt regardless. They didn't send the last part of the court paper work in so it ended up being struck out     .
    • Well, that's it then. Clear proof of the rubbish cameras. Clear proof of double dipping. G24 won't be getting a penny. Belt & braces, I would write to the address LFI has found, include the evidence of double dipping, and ask Fraser Group to call their dogs off.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

google checkout distance selling act


tonedogg
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5551 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,

new to these forums so hello everybody.

I recently bought a guitar using my credit card through google checkout, I tried getting a refund for the guitar using the distance selling act, to cut a long story short the guitar is a counterfeit, the company i got it from won't give a refund and have pulled their website and won't answer anything, they have given what seems to be a false address. my credit card issuer says they won't do anything as section 75 doesn't apply because it went through google checkout and google checkout won't do anything because they say they are not responsible for anything the seller does.

trading standards have been informed about the seller.

Do I have any course to get my money back?

 

Thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the site.

I think this is best posted in general consumer issues,and so will move there.

Have a happy and prosperous 2013 by avoiiding Payday loans. If you are sent a private message directing you for advice or support with your issues to another website,this is your choice.Before you decide,consider the users here who have already offered help and support.

Advice offered by Martin3030 is not supported by any legal training or qualification.Members are advised to use the services of fully insured legal professionals when needed.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't look good. Google Checkout are acting as the Merchant card processor - but I think the response from your bank is incorrect. What difference does it make, it was YOUR money, and in the case of fraud the payment is always recalled and it would be up to GC to seek repayment from their merchant. Who is your card issuer, and was it Visa or MC?

 

Did you WRITE to request a refund? If you did it by phone, get the pen out and do it again. It would appear you still have the fake goods, which may also complicate things - if it is an obvious fake, then it's easy - but if not it becomes an issue of expertise....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

the seller had no phone,so requests were by email, I now know the site was dodgy, I requested a refund and said he could arrange for collection of the guitar which I am allowed to do but they are obviously just bandits, the reponse from the credit card issuer seems correct from other things I have read as using google checkout is classified as similar to transfering cash to a bank account and then writing a cheque. so things look bad, I was wondering if google were liable even though they say they aren't, and as we know some people say they aren't but consumer rights can override that, but I don't know in this case :( oh my credit card was mastercard through Lloyds TSB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Google will only help by contacting the seller but doesn't take any other action according to them. The only so called buyer protection is fraudulent use of your credit card details and not divulging your email addressThe website no longer exists but was MZonline.co.uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Domain name:

mzonline.co.uk

 

Registrant:

ZENG JAMES

 

Trading as:

sammi wang

 

Registrant type:

UK Individual

 

Registrant's address:

76 winpcord Lane

Chester Street

Chester

Cheshire

CH1 4DF

GB

 

 

Neither name is in the electoral roll. The address does not exist in it's form/spelling above, but there is a Whipcord Ln at that postcode.

The only 76 is Cambrian View Whipcord Ln.

 

I would report this to the police as deliberate fraud and to your CC co and demand a chargeback.

 

This is from their Terms and Conditions:

Store shopping cart does not guarantee that its security procedures taken will prevent the loss of, alteration of, or improper access to your information.

 

It is definately a [problem] site set up on a temporary basis that takes orders and then runs.

 

You should report your Credit Card compromised to the company and ask for a new one and at the same time, demand a chargeback even though Google says they don't give you full number to the seller.

 

I believe this makes Google the Merchant so they will know in which bank the money was deposited and the name and address of the account holder.

 

Who were the delivery agents? They say they use Royal Mail. If this is how it was delivered to you, then after you have got your crime number from the police, I would write to Royal Mail, (or the company that delivered) and quoting the crime number, ask them where they picked up your parcel.

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

google checkout is classified as similar to transfering cash to a bank account and then writing a cheque.

 

Sorry to hear your plight, good luck.

 

Google Checkout.

Perhaps this should be looked into as a separate topic and advice posted on the safe use of websites utilising Google Checkout for consumer protection.:idea:

I see it's briefly mentioned on moneysavings website but I also found a couple of links explaining Google Checkout complaints procedure and section 75 with Google Checkout

 

http://consumerist.com/consumer/google/we-interview-google-checkout-says-system-will-protect-consumers-221411.php

 

http://www.wheresmyrefund.co.uk/refunds-when-you-pay-credit-card.html

Edited by juliusceasor
additional info
Link to post
Share on other sites

Google say use chargeback but it does'nt seem to apply in the UK, or at least the banks have a get out clause saying it's not covered. maybe this sort of thing should have to be made very clear instead of being buried in all the terms and conditions, an update lloyds refused chargeback saying they have made their decision, so I have now contacted the Ombudsman, see how that goes.

Edited by tonedogg
update
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...