Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
    • Steam is still needed in many industries, but much of it is still made with fossil fuels.View the full article
  • 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

No complaint department for Dell computers UK!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4795 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

There is, apparently, no complaint department anywhere in the world for Dell - the website address only gives the phone number for tech support, so I thought I'd express my dissatisfaction about not having someone to send a letter to by plastering it over the internet instead! If you're looking for a horror story on why NOT to buy from Dell, read on...

***********

I am writing to formally complain about the extremely poor support I have received at the hands of Dell since purchasing a new laptop from them recently. Dell have consistently failed to meet an acceptable standard of customer service, have delivered a faulty product straight from the box, have failed numerous times to honour a promise to call back, have failed to show up at my home on two days (in the process costing me two days work), and now appear to think that offering me a replacement machine in a couple of weeks is a ‘reasonable’ method of dealing with the problem.

 

On 14th February I purchased a reconditioned laptop from the Dell Outlet, and my credit card was immediately debited for the full amount. At no time up until the point where funds were taken did Dell make any reference to a date for delivery, and I was annoyed to find that my computer would not be with me for nine days. However, on 25th February it arrived.

 

Issue 1 - Computer failed to boot after starting up for the first time and running a number of automated processes. The error message indicated that the recovery partition had failed to initialise. I had to search out a phone number for support online, since the box that Dell delivered to me contained a laptop computer held in place by plastic film, and a power lead. Nothing else was in the box at all, not even so much as a remittance slip or a piece of paper confirming the specification of the machine. On phoning support, we spent some time running through memory and hard drive tests before a faulty hard drive was diagnosed. An engineer was booked for the following day.

 

Issue 2 - I was very disappointed to find a newly-reconditioned and checked machine should be faulty ‘out of the box’, necessitating a second day working at home (I’m only allowed a few of these per year) but waited patiently for the engineer to arrive, and he failed to show up. At 5pm I contacted Dell by phone to be told he was definitely coming, but he still failed to materialise.

 

Issue 3 - First thing the following morning I phoned Dell again and was told that he would definitely be coming today now instead, meaning my third consecutive day not going in to work. I waited until early afternoon and then decided to call Dell back yet again. This turned out to be fortunate, because Dell told me that an engineer was not coming after all - they didn’t have one of the parts required to fix the machine. Dell were unable to explain why they had let me wait for two days for this fictitious engineer to arrive when they knew he wouldn’t come.

 

Issue 4 - the missing part was a hard drive, and now Dell informed me that not only did they not have one with the engineer, but they didn’t know where another one might be. They said that they would definitely “expedite” getting a hard drive to me, but they were unable to suggest when that might be - it would just be “as soon as possible”. A day? Two days? A week? Dell said they would hope that it would be within a week but they were unable to guarantee that. Unsurprisingly, I wasn’t thrilled about the idea of waiting a further week on top of the ten days I’d already waited before getting a computer that actually booted up, and told them this wasn’t an acceptable response.

 

Issue 5 - Dell insisted that I would just have to wait until they found a drive and then sent it to me direct, and were quite happy that it was perfectly reasonable to expect a customer to wait seventeen days from the point where Dell took his money until they gave him a working machine, and when I asked for contact details for Customer Services I was told I was already talking to them, notwithstanding that they’d just told me they were in Technical Support. I asked instead for contact details for a Complaints Department, and was told that there wasn’t one(!).

 

Issue 6 - After a further series of phone calls on Dell’s premium rate phone number, I was eventually told that “as a gesture of goodwill” I could have a refund. I said that I was very grateful, but I didn’t want their ‘goodwill’ since I had a much more reliable statutory right to return the goods for a refund anyway if that were my chosen remedy, and that I didn’t need Dell’s ‘permission’ to do so. Dell said that my purchase was exempt from the DSR 7-day ‘cooling off’ period since it was a machine built uniquely for me, but couldn’t answer how that could be the case when I had bought it from them ‘second-hand’ via the Outlet and it had already been configured for its *original* owner. The DSR issue was irrelevant anyway, since the machine was faulty ‘out of the box’ and so could be rejected as unfit.

 

Issue 7 - Dell said that if I wanted a refund, they would “action” this only once the machine had been returned to them. They suggested that a collection of the computer would happen within five working days from today, and that it would then take up to a further ten working days to arrive back with them. At that point they would authorise a refund, which would take up to ten *more* days. I said to Dell that this process stank of mistrust on their part, which I found ironic since it was Dell who had failed to deliver on their promises, not the customer. Dell said that “a manager” would call me back within a few hours.

 

Issue 8 - no call back arrived that day so I contacted Dell again the following morning. I told Dell that a straight refund was not an acceptable outcome, because if I *were* to have a refund then I wanted it right away so I could go and purchase a replacement computer, not have to wait three weeks for the money back *on top* of the ten days they’d already had my money. I reminded Dell that, as well as them having my money for a total of about a month without giving me anything for it, I would also be out of pocket for the original day waiting for delivery, the two days waiting for an engineer who never came, several hours on their expensive phone number, and a few years off my life expectancy. Dell said again that a manager would call me back, this time within two hours.

 

The person who called me back again said I could have a refund and so had obviously not read the notes on my account where I had patiently explained that this outcome was unsatisfactory *solely* because Dell’s failure to notify me of two failed callouts had already incurred considerable costs to me. After speaking to two further people I was eventually transferred to someone who said he was the “customer care manager within technical support” and that he would definitely deal with my problem. He listened to my explanation that all I wanted was the working computer that I had paid for, but that I wanted that to happen in a much more realistic timescale than had been previously offered. He said that he would authorise a replacement computer instead, and that in view of the wait I had already experienced, the lack of a suitable response from Dell, the two missed engineer appointments, and the dozen or so calls to India, he would authorise an upgrade from the specification I had already purchased.

 

Issue 9 - He said that he personally would not be able to call me back, but that he would ensure someone called me that same day, and that between us we would iron out a specification for a replacement machine. That call failed to materialise, which given the current record is no more than I expected.

 

Issue 10 - I rang, again, the following morning and was eventually passed through to Leena, who asked me what I wanted in my ‘new’ machine. I was initially confused, because she didn’t have any parameters as to what was possible, but it became clear when I specced up a machine as near as we could get to my own. She simply deducted the price I’d already paid from the list price of the replacement, and asked how I was going to pay it. More than a little annoyed that yet another person hadn’t been passed the necessary information, I went through with her what I’d discussed with the previous manager. The new machine was no superior in specification than its predecessor, with the exception that I’d now got a 7010 rather than a 5010, but had dropped from an i5-540 to an i3-370 processor which I thought was a fairly ‘even’ deal.

 

The difference in cost was £150, and Leena was adamant that this was the sum needed to let me have it. I argued that I’d *already* paid for a computer and hadn’t got it, and I couldn’t see why I should pay again. She said that Dell’s position was that they were already ‘doing me a favour’ by letting me exchange at all, and I countered that I had every right to refuse the machine I had as faulty, and demand a replacement. She suggested that they’d knock £10 off the price and didn’t seem happy when I laughed at her. I reminded her that I’d lost three days work so far and would now have to lose a fourth when the new computer arrived, and that I’d spent a lot more than £10 in phone calls alone. After another hour and a half phone call, she got permission from someone to charge me a mere £50.

 

I was still unhappy that I’d had to pay any further amount at all, as it was my position that I’d already paid for a working computer a week and a half ago. I asked her to confirm by email the specification of the machine, and then thought to look on the Dell Outlet again. At the exact same moment as I was doing a deal with Leena, an identically specced laptop was being offered on the Outlet for £26 *less* than the amount that I’d already paid over the two payments (my initial purchase, plus the £50 Leena had taken). I took a screenshot and emailed it to Leena, along with a request that she confirm I was being given a ‘new’ computer and not a reconditioned one, since if I was getting a second-user machine I was effectively being *charged* £26 to have been messed around by Dell!

 

Issue 11 - Leena finally emailed an acceptance of my condition that the computer be brand new, and a confirmation of its specification. Attached was the invoice, with an estimated delivery date of 2nd March. The following day I got a tracking number, and clicking the link gave me a delivery date of 14th March instead. Leena didn’t reply to an email, so I called again.

 

Issue 12 - I spoke, eventually after being passed round lots of people who said they couldn’t help, to Raghuvendra, who apparently was yet another Customer Service manager. He promised that absolutely he’d get that date changed and have the computer with me by the end of this week, and agreed that to delay any further was potentially in breach of the Sale of Goods Act’s requirement that any remedy must be completed without significant inconvenience to the customer. He said that, in his words, he would “without fail” call me back by midday the following day to confirm a new date, if I would just give him that extra day to sort it out. Midday the following day, he hadn’t called back…

 

Raghuvendra was mysteriously unavailable when I finally managed to get through to the department he worked in, but his colleague Dolson told me that the estimated date of 14th was the correct one and that it didn’t matter what Raghuvendra may have said it couldn’t be changed. Why didn’t I get the promised call back to say that? Dolson didn’t know, but insisted that Raghuvendra was in a meeting and couldn’t answer that question himself. I asked why I could make a purchase on Dell’s website and have it delivered in two days, but I was going to have to wait a further 14 days for my new machine. Apparently this was because ‘my’ machine was coming from the Far East, but the ones on Dell’s website were already in Europe. Okay, why can’t I have one of them then? The answer was apparently that Dell were ‘unable’ to interrupt the supply chain and get me one of those. Okay, how about I *buy* one of those, get it in two days, and then you refund my credit card with the amount I paid for it? This was *also* not something that Dell could do. Dolson suggested that it was pointless us talking any more, because I wasn’t going to get any alternatives and I was just going to have to put up with it - I could wait a few weeks for a refund, or I could wait a few weeks for a computer. Tough.

 

So that’s where I am now. Dell haven’t managed to answer ANY of the questions I’ve put to them, and they’re quite happy that all is well in a transaction where they have taken payment for a computer exactly one MONTH before they reckon they’ll deliver one. This international multi-billion dollar company, which can affect the GDP of countries by virtue of its choices about where to work, is apparently “unable” to get a computer to a customer from its retail operation. There apparently isn’t a ‘complaints department’ anywhere among Dell’s global operations, and the only page I’ve managed to find online that mentions complaints, at (can't insert link, not enough posts) has phone numbers which answer with a message saying “The number has changed, please ring…” followed by the same number I’d already used to get through to India. What a complete and utter shambles…

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you paid by credit card do a chargeback and stuff 'em dead!

 

if they want their dead lappy back they can send a courier around to collect it.

 

as long as you make the item 'available' for them to collect - its their problem to come and get it.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the chargeback route, def worth pursuing if you paid by card, if not, I would consider court action, not forgetting to add on costs for wasted days at home and the inconvienence youve had, I doubt whether they would actually turn up (in your local court) to defend such a claim and may well pay up or at least reach some sort of agreement. Dont forget to send them a Notice Before Action giving them 7 days, and on the 7th day start your court claim (I'd suggest handing in papers at your local court but the online service is a bit cheaper).

 

Having said all that at my last IT Support role I regullary ordered Dell PC's and I found the support very good and the engineers often turned up on the same day, but of course this was a big company, perhaps Dell care less about individuals.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt whether they would actually turn up (in your local court) to defend such a claim Andy

 

This would be more than likely because they have no one left as they are attending all the other courts they are being taken to. Dell spends more time in court than a judge, they just don't seem to learn.

 

Send an email to [email protected]

Edited by Conniff
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick update on this bunch of cretins,

When the xxxxxxx, oops sorry I meant support staff member, who took the additional fifty quid off me asked for my payment, I gave it begrudgingly and only because I got a specific assurance that this would expedite matters and get me a computer faster than any other method of resolution. The quote that was emailed to me, the invoice that was mailed to me straight after the payment, and the thief herself, ALL said a delivery date of 2nd March. But as I said in my first post, that then slipped to 14th. And today I got a phone call at 7pm from someone who apparently works in the 'social media department', who's job it is to monitor various forums, Twitter, etc and 'help' customers there. He'd come across one of my rants at their pathetic service and had decided to assist.

 

I say 'assist', but what I meant to say was 'navel-gaze', because his help appeared to consist of looking up my order number (which I have the URL to look at myself) and observe that my computer was still 'in production' and so was not now going to be with me on Monday 14th after all. What could he do about this? Ummm, well he could send an 'expedite form'. Wow, thanks. Because, hey, it's not as though there isn't any expedite forms on my service tag already, is it? Oh hang on, yes there are...

 

The real problem to me now is, there doesn't seem to be a decent way forward. I mean yes, of course, I can have a refund, but as I've pointed out already that leaves me with a stonking loss. And, of course, I'd have to wait several weeks for it. Dell would have caused me severe inconvenience, generally been pathetic with service, and sat on my money for a month, and then they'd make me wait to just get my money back. I want to go out and purchase a computer of similar specification locally and simply sue Dell for the cost of it, and I can't work out whether or not that would be seen as me taking the least-costly way of resolving the issue while at the same time ensuring that I don't suffer any more inconvenience than I already have. Any thoughts/precedents for this sort of thing please?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...