Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sweatband.com I like many of these online retailers – and also retail shops – which sell their goods, make all sorts of claims for their customer service et cetera – but when things go wrong they refer you to the manufacturer. Of course this can be a very sensible arrangement because the manufacturer is better placed to deal with the problem – but we tend to find that very often the manufacturer is pretty reluctant and of course because they are not the retailer, there really not too bothered about their customer-facing reputation. So as has been suggested by my site team colleague above, you are being fobbed off. Secondly, any attempt now to start saying that the treadmill should not be used in the garage – when this has not been referred to at all when it was being sold to you, is in effect introducing a new term into an existing contract. This means that it has no effect whatsoever and is not binding. Sweatband.com are bound by the law of contract and also by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. You are entitled to purchase a treadmill which is of satisfactory quality and remain that way for a reasonable period of time – and you are quite right, it hasn't matched up to those standards and so sweatband.com are in breach of contract. It has nothing to do with the manufacturer. If the manufacturer really want to say that it should be kept in a garage then that's between them and sweatband. It's especially telling that according to you sweatband have actually said that this is a great thing to keep in your garage. I would suggest that you go around the Internet – trust pilot et cetera putting up reviews about sweatband – who as I have said after fobbing you off and letting you down – but also you should put up separate reviews about this particular brand of treadmill and make sure everybody sees that even the manufacturer is saying that it should be kept in a garage and that they won't stand by their product when it breaks down after three months. I can imagine that the person who said this to you from the manufacturer will get a bit of a talking to. Maybe you can tell us the make and model number of this treadmill so that references to it will come up in Google hits in the future. The situation as advised by my site team colleague is that as it has failed within the first six months, the retailer is entitled to one single opportunity to carry out a repair and failing that they are obliged either to replace the item or to give your refund at your option. These are rights which have been created by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. These rights should be asserted in writing You should write to the retailer immediately and put them on notice that you are asserting your rights under the 2015 act and you are giving them a single opportunity to repair the treadmill. Tell them that given its size and its weight, it will have to be repaired at your home unless sweatband.com want to take responsibility for picking it up and selling it to whoever they want to get it repaired by. I can imagine sweatband won't be happy about this and you are going to find everybody's going to start dragging their feet. I can imagine also that sweatband would try to up the ante by saying that it is your responsibility to return the treadmill to them. That would be wrong. The treadmill is defective. Sweatband are in breach – and it is up to them to deal with the problem. I think you will need to be quite assertive and I would suggest that your letter to them should give them a seven day window to let you know what the arrangements are and that the treadmill should be repaired or replaced in any event within 14 days. Please keep us informed as to what happens. Just so you know what we will advise if sweatband don't step up to the mark – if they don't let you have a satisfactory response within the first seven days then we will be suggesting that you begin the claims process by sending them a letter of claim – which then leads to a small claim in the County Court. This is not something you should worry about. Your chances of success are much better than 95% and I can imagine that at the end of the day sweatband.com don't want this kind of trouble and once they realise that you are happy to confront them, they will buckle down. Of course you never know – maybe they are going to act brilliantly and respond correctly immediately – in which case it will be kudos to them. Let's see  
    • Simple answer to that is gambling and having borrowed way too much previous to 2018 and simply not being in a position to meet all debts so always robbing Peter to pay Paul. From last year it just began to catch up. Then covid came and made it worse. Income reduced and job changed and dealing with mental health issues. That’s really the long and short of it. 
    • The UK's inflation rate surged to 0.6% in December from 0.3% in November despite Covid curbs. View the full article
    • Fears had grown over the Alibaba founder's whereabouts because of pressure from Chinese authorities. View the full article
    • I felt outmatched to be honest. Lowell probably did identify me on here and decided to send one of their more experienced. The guy they sent to last hearing didn't sound half as competent. The solicitor and judge were pretty much talking amongst themselves. That's how it felt. The Judge understood and accepted what the solicitor said at every point. She accepted fresh start as a brand name only. She accepted all the evidence were copies. She accepted I entered into a valid agreement. She accepted the error on the default notice was a typo. Felt like I lost before the hearing. If not, I wasn't able to express my points well enough. Not like the claimant who I'm sure was giving a law lesson. Completely out of my depth. I didn't ask to appeal. I'm upset understandably but grateful for all the help and support I received here. I've learnt a hell of lot but hope to never need it again.
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Diary: gunnboy21 vs Halifax


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 5235 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

Hello everyone...

 

I joined the forum back in March and after reading many many posts and the FAQ section... (all my questions were answered and some I didn't think of... anyone reading this... go there first!!) ...I decided in August to begin.

 

I have a note of my bank charges going back to Feb 2005 (I use a money management programme from a large software vendor - you figure out who). The total amount of charges is ~£1,500.

 

So armed with the letters from the library, I sent the Halifax the preliminary letter on the 31st August. Here is what happened:

 

2nd Sept - Reply letter saying, we will look into your complaint and get back to you within 4 weeks... blaa blaa.

 

7th Sept, 1400 - Call from Halifax called to discuss letter regarding bank charges, he said the law I refer to is for credit cards, not bank accounts, although he was prepared to make an offer. The offer was £230, I said that was great, could he put it in writing, but that I would not be accepting it as full and final settlement. He then said he could go a little higher, I asked how much, he said £300. I again said, that I would accept thet offer but not as full and final settlement. He said he would confirm the £230 in writing, I corrected him, the amount was £300. He agreed and will send a letter confirming.

 

9th Sept - Letter received from Halifax offering £300 as full and final settlement with response form on back asking for us to sign away the rest of the money.

 

11th Sept - Letter before action posted in their own reply paid envelope (ha haa) requesting the full amount be repaid.

 

18th Sept, 1825 - Halifax called in response to the letter before action asking if there was an amount of money I would accept as full settlement othert than the full amount. He said they were not prepared to pay back the full amount because they felt they were entitled to something to cover the costs. I said I would accept "one thousand four hundred and sixty two pounds and seventy five pence, please".

He said that the most they could go to was £691, but if I wasn't prepared to accept that we would reach an impass.

I said I had already told them in the last paragraph of my letter what I would do if full settlement was not offered and that I would begin a claim against them.

He said he would write and confirm the amount offered.

 

20th Sept - Letter received from Halifax saying I have declined to accept the offer of half the charges and they are not prepared to repay charges dating back 6 years. (Please note, I am claiming back to Feb 2005 - shows how much attention they pay to what you write) if I want to take it further to contact the financial ombudsman.

 

So now I am beginning a court claim. However, I live in Scotland!!! The rules are different up here, small claim limit is £750 per case compared with £5000 in England.

 

I hope this is useful to someone. I'm off to research the Scottish section of the forum.

 

Bye for now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done - keep on going! :)

Jeep (The Wife & I)

Halifax joint a/c (£3800 charges + £40 interest on charges over 11 years) - paid in full 23/06/06

Halifax joint a/c new charges £1100 - LBA sent 02/08/06

Halifax 2nd a/c (£1500 charges + £150 interest on charges) - partial payment received 13/07/06 (no s69 interest) - AQ filed 07/08/06 - Court awarded 50% of s69 interest (Bank didn't turn up!)

Halifax Visa (#1) Data Protection Act sent - statements arrived - £350 so far

Halifax Visa (#2) Data Protection Act sent - refunded £170

DONATE - Support this site, it supported you!

Follow the route: FAQs > Template Library > Parachute Account > Bank Forums > Spreadsheet

All advice given in good faith and without prejudice or liability, to be taken at your own risk!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...