Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You're ignoring the most difficult issue in a trade agreement. It's not the tariffs or the lack of them  which is the tough part to reslove but the regulatory standards of the goods to be imported & exported that needs to be decided.   For example the EU banned the import of chlorine washed chicken since 1997 which of course hurts the US, and who are going to be very keen to include it in any new agreement with the UK and will use it to barter prospective concessions in exchange . As a nation we're going to first have to decided whether that is acceptable or not and that alone will be difficult enough to resolve. And that's just one product.   This has all the makings of a category 5 $h1t storm that will last an eternity. 
    • 28 of the 32 wealthiest countries in the world reside within the EU.  Realistically we will need the US because they are one of the few remaining countries outside of the EU that would be worth doing a deal with, but as discussed on here previously, the exact agreement we strike with the US is open to debate.  Should we still want a trade deal with the EU we would need to align our standards with them, which makes a deal with the US harder.   Also 80% of our economy is services.  Try selling financial services to a person in India... or try sending engineers half way round the world just because some numpty has decided trading with the countries geographically closest to us wont work anymore because of immigrants and sovereignty. 
    • If an Aspirin cost a penny from the US and two pennies from the EU only a fool would buy the EU tablet.
    • you can't add anything to your ws. the beavis case is somewhat immaterial and does not apply to your case...red herring they always role out.   i think you can issue a skeleton argument, or use these as notes at the hearing:   the claimant are incorrect in their assumptions stated in their WS point 45 sub sections 1-4 , in that the defendant as the registered keeper is by default liable for any charge they claim. I was not the driver at the time of the incident, I did not enter into nor read by any terms and conditions of any parking contract, nor could i.   the claimant has provided no annual proof of payment that their contract signed with the land owner to manage car parking in 2009 was still current at the date of the incident in 2015 under contract law.   the claimant has provided no proof their signs and anpr camera equipment have the required planning permission from the council to be erected upon the land in question at the time of the incident in 2015   the claimant has provided no proof, they, any resident retail outlet, any managing agent or the owner of the land can or have successfully varied the original granted parking provisions and restriction to ONE hour only from those permitted and stipulated by the council at the time of the original grant of planning.
    • Sadly no he wont   remember Theres no plan for no deal as we will get a great deal No way would he or any Conservative allow any form of border in the Irish sea No way would he put the NHS up for sale     Well he says his proposals are the great deal The border in the irish sea is a non-border border not a border border, and the required documentation and searches just like other borders dont make it a border and trump doesn't want to buy the NHS, just have US drug corporations bleed the UK taxpayer dry through it       and regarding my non-English English LOL https://www.france24.com/en/20191126-johnson-no-deal-brexit-uk-elections-conservatives
  • Our picks

DuWolf

Quidco Problem & Virgin Trains

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3648 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I recently took up an offer on quidco regarding Virgin trains. The deal stipulated that every tick purchased would result in £5 cash being generated in your quidco account. So over the xmas period I decided to use the train instead of driving purely on the basis of this offer. Rather cheekily the cost of the tickets was £5 so infact buying them and getting the cash back would result in the tickets becoming free.

Ideal way of trying it out for the 2 weeks and a perfect incentive to see if it was worth my while doing it this way. So I bought them and they have arrived.

 

Now here lies the problem, Quidco did in fact credit my account for each of the tickets purchased over that period with £5 per ticket. The tickets arrived and that was that, so I thought. Upon looking @ Quidco I find them have rescinded the previous offer and nullified all the earnings from this offer. Now putting me out of pocket of £50 for the tickets.

 

The reason I purchased these tickets was because of the offer, now knowing the offer wasnt going to be upheld or honored I would have been reluctant to use this method of transport and feel slightly cheated into buying the tickets.

 

If there not honoring there end of the offer then what would be my options in regard to getting a refund as the only reason I purchased the tickets was because of the offer.

(btw on Virgins website they state that if you want a refund you have to pay a fee of £10 per ticket)

 

Cheers in advance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having watched other stories about non-payment of cashback through Quidco unfold, I am certain that there is no comeback if your cashback is not validated or declined.

 

The offer of cashback is not part of the 'contract' you have had (in this case) with Virgin trains. Cashback is an incentive but is never a guaranteed component of a transaction with a merchant who offers cashback through Quidco. Better put, it's a bonus that is subject to availability. They do state that they promise to give you 100% of the cashback that you earn (minus the £5 annual membership deduction) but they cannot guarantee that a retailer will pay the cashback to them (for them to pass on to you).

 

Have you raised a 'ticket' with Qudico regarding the declined payments? They quote that they will look in to all disputes and raise them with the vendor / merchant but again cannot guarantee to reverse / reinstate declined cashback.

 

I recently had £10.50 cashback due from an on-line purchase declined. I was a bit ticked off but not a lot I could do so just wrote it off. Like I put it above, it's a bonus not an entitlement. On the other hand I have just had £150 cashback from Sky validated and £50 from o2 - and would have hit the roof if these had been declined, but thankfully they're due to be paid the end of this month.

 

Good luck if you do decide to pursue this.

 

EDIT: From their website:

We will not be liable to you or anyone else, whether in contract, tort (including negligence, breach of statutory duty or other tort) or otherwise:


  1. for any loss of revenue, business, anticipated savings or profits


 

Edited by GreatWonder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just missed out on £30 of cashback due to six Virgin Trains transactions being declined. This feels like some form of deception to me as I would not have bought my tickets through Virgin Trains if it were not for the Quidco offer...

 

I can't help feeling Quidco have more liability than they would like you to believe. Would this fall under false advertising or something similar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems this is quite rife.

I took out my car insurance by clicking through Captain Cash News of the World cashback site.This was in February 2009 following an offer from More Than Insurance.The cash back was showing as pending for weeks,but was not released.I contacted NOW who asked lots of questions and said they were dealing.My concern was that the time limit for seeking the credit was approaching.

weeks followed with 5 more emails telling me they could only think that I had not clicked through their site for this (even though it was showing as pending for weeks)...

I have sent NOW a letter advising them that their website was instrumental to me choosing to go through them for the insurance after seeing the £45 cashback.

They maintain that they cannot be held responsible for a supplier/service provider not releasing payment,and cite their terms and conditions bla bla bla.

I am not leaving it at that,I am looking into it further.

We need to get some clarity on these things.:mad:


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.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...