Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Has anyone that you have known or posted on this forum received knocks on doors from them or received a ccj and been sent to court or have sent bailiffs or gave the debt to another company. if they don’t have any legal powers why do they threaten with court action 
    • Ok, so just been to see my friend, she still has her head firmly in the sand and had a pile of unopened post, thankfully nothing serious apart from this case!    In answer to your question it says N24 General Directions Order at the bottom of the page, then on page 2 where the line says "As a result of an order made on the 1 May 2024, this claim has been transferred to the county court at ##### (friends local court) " this is N271 Notice of transfer of proceedings.  Within the stack of letters I found 2 from Kearns Solicitors,    02-12-2022 Document pack with covering letter stating under the s78 CCA please see enclosed  1) A copy of the executed Credit Agreement, 2)  A copy of the terms & conditions 3) A copy of the varied terms & conditions applicable at termination / assignment, and  4) A statement regarding the conduct of your account as requested by s78(1)(a) to (c)  (Would you like me to describe the documents attached?)   18-02-2023 Generic letter asking for her to contact them to discuss settlement or they will take to court for further legal action. 
    • well you made the cardinal sin by phoning these scammers at least once so their persistence could go on. however you are new so there you go. you never ever ever phone any of these likes of scammers on these fake schemes that seem plausible.  just like a DCA chasing any old debt .. they are NOT BAILIFFS and have  ZERO legal powers to actually do anything. dx  
    • Okay understood now just based on personal experience how long does this go on for 
    • civil recovery schemes run by the likes of RLP DWF etc etc are a scam. totally IGNORE EVERYTHING. no if's or but's dx  
  • 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

Talk Talk engineer charges


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4468 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

  • 1 month later...
  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I have to agree with the OP, the faceplate where the D side of the network connects to the faceplate including the test socket belongs to the network operator, the removable lower half which plugs into the test socket belongs to the customer which is where any customer installed extension connect.

 

My hubby worked in telecoms for years. And I sadly worked for Virgin Media Faults when they were known as Telewest many moons ago.

 

Dig your heels in that rear plate isn't a consumer servicable part as well as the wiring and polarity issues what come with it.

 

This sort of explains it

 

http://www.clarity.it/telecoms/nte5.htm

 

I have to say I have no affiliation with the link above, however it does show what you can do and what you can't.

Edited by nicolee2931
typo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I am a researcher currently looking into how mobile phone companies/broadband providers deal with customer issues.

 

I read your blog and would be so interested to hear more about your experiences with Talk Talk.

 

Do contact me at

 

info.harrietsergeant

@gmail.com

 

Many thanks

 

Laura

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I started up with TalkTalk a month ago and they promised a good deal but then charged me for things that should be free.

 

I have had to ring them twice saying I want to cancel before they gave me the deal they said in the first place.

 

They tried to say the offer was out of date and that it was for 6 months not a year.

 

They also tried to charge an engineers fee. Luckily I kept the special offer pamphlet that came in the post and I scanned it and emailed it to them as proof.

 

They have now agreed to honour the deal.

 

The broadband itself is good, what a shame they try to rip you off (my son had the same thing with them and he did cancel because of it).

 

- dj

Benefits rules are complex, and although I do try to inform and support people, I may get it wrong because the rules apply to individual claimants and their particular circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

Hi folks

Sorry to drag up an older thread but I am intersted by the point made earlier that anything before the faceplate is the responsibility of the provider. We had an engineer out due to loss of signal. He was here for fifteen minutes and it cost us 129.99.

 

We have a wire that comes into the house, then surface wiring along the skirting board up to a faceplate. The fault was before the faceplate.

 

He was vague about cost, saying we "may" be charged. Nothing happened for a few months, then today they took the fee as part of our regular direct debit. As you can imagine we're a bit peeved about the cost about the level of cost, the delay in processing it and whether we are actually liable. Any thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was the fault yours? Had you tripped on the wire and snapped it or something? If so you will be charged. If not, complain. Maybe the TalkTalk rep will pop in here and offer some assistance.

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi folks

Sorry to drag up an older thread but I am intersted by the point made earlier that anything before the faceplate is the responsibility of the provider. We had an engineer out due to loss of signal. He was here for fifteen minutes and it cost us 129.99.

 

We have a wire that comes into the house, then surface wiring along the skirting board up to a faceplate. The fault was before the faceplate.

 

He was vague about cost, saying we "may" be charged. Nothing happened for a few months, then today they took the fee as part of our regular direct debit. As you can imagine we're a bit peeved about the cost about the level of cost, the delay in processing it and whether we are actually liable. Any thoughts?

 

 

 

As TalkTalk have breached the DD Guarantee I would ask the bank to recall the full amount. TT shoudl have given you at least 10 days notice that the amount on the DD was being altered. Secondly any problem before the faceplate is not chargeable as a consumer is not allowed to interfere with the wiring. They should not be charging you repairing the fault if it was before the faceplate and you can put it into dispute. Get the money back first via the bank and then raise the dispute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for the reply. To be fair to them it was on my bill which came 10 days before. However I do still dispute the charge on the same basis that you say. I was wondering though, if unsatisfied, I will want to switch provider. This will be made difficult if they see me as having an outstanding engineer charge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1st I'd like to clarify if this is before the master socket. If possible and not 2 much of an intrusion, could you take a photo of the master socket? (just to verify that it is a master socket) and upload it to http://imageshack.us/ or photobucket.

 

 

The Direct Debit Guarantee covers you if they've taken the wrong amount. You can go into your bank, explain they have charged you the wrong amount and tell them the DD guarantee says the bank will IMMEDIATELY refund it.

Note the highlighted link above on the words direct debit, and you can also read about this on bacs website http://www.bacs.co.uk/bacs/businesses/directdebit/collecting/pages/customersrights.aspx

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

Righty, I'd report this issue on their "member forum" website. http://www.talktalkmembers.com/forums/index.php and post a link to your thread there in here so we can keep up to date.

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

I rung them last night and they've passed it on and am awaiting a call back by Tuesday. You still reckon posting on their forum?

BT engineer advised incorrectly. The filter is after the box therefore you are liable. Sorry not what you wanted to hear. Normally when you purchase a modem it comes supplied with these filters. Also if you had raised the issue with TalkTalk one of the first things that they should have asked is whether you had a filter in place. If you replied No they should have suggested one. You could argue this point if you did contact them. Who supplied the router?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally would. I've only ever gotten great service from their forum, plus everything is in black and white, so if your complaint does go to "alternative dispute resolution" then you have the info there.

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

The filter is before the box. It's the first thing that the cable comes into. Then from the filter it goes to the only phone point in the house.

There is also an ADSL filter at the box as you can see from the photo, which works fine.

 

Apologies as misunderstood photos and where the filter is located prior to the socket. Anything prior to socket is non chargeable. get the DD back and then argue the point. Rather the money in your pocket than theirs. After a previous experience with them I have no time for TalkTalk.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TT customer services failed to call back, surprise surprise. Recalled payment. Interestingly the bank said that if Talk Talk said they were justified in taking that amount, then the bank would take the money back off me. Scant protection methinks.

Bank needs to prove that TalkTalk were justified in taking that amount when it is being disputed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you post on their "Member forum"?

 

Or contact the CEO [email protected]

If in doubt, contact a qualified insured legal professional (or my wife... she knows EVERYTHING)

 

Or send a cheque or postal order payable to Reclaim the Right Ltd.

to

923 Finchley Road London NW11 7PE

 

 

Click here if you fancy an email address that shows you mean business! (only £6 and that will really help CAG)

 

If you can't donate, please use the Internet Search boxes on the CAG pages - these will generate a small but regular income for the site

 

Please also consider using the

C.A.G. Toolbar

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you post on their "Member forum"?

 

Or contact the CEO [email protected]

 

I did. They were quick to respond (incorrectly might I add) and say the charge stands. Recalled the payment prior to complaint.

Spoke to them today, account was showing up to date so they have said will lift the bar. Am sure they'll change their tune when they realise the payment has been recalled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...