Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no need to use it. it doubles the size of the thread and makes it very diff to find replies on small screens too. just like @username it - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread already inc you ...gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.
    • Hello all,   I ordered a laptop online about 16 months ago. The laptop was faulty and I was supposed to send it back within guarantee but didn't for various reasons. I contacted the company a few months later and they said they will still fix it for me free of charge but I'd have to pay to send it to them and they will pay to send it back to me. The parcel arrived there fine. Company had fixed it and they sent it via dpd. I was working in the office so I asked my neighbours who would be in, as there's been a history of parcel thefts on our street. I had 2 neighbours who offered but when I went to update delivery instructions, their door number wasn't on the drop down despite sharing the same post code.  I then selected a neighbour who I thought would likely be in and also selected other in the safe place selection and put the number of the neighbour who I knew would definitely be in and they left my parcel outside and the parcel was stolen. DPD didn't want to deal with me and said I need to speak to the retailer. The retailer said DPD have special instructions from them not to leave a parcel outside unless specified by a customer. The retailer then said they could see my instructions said leave in a safe space but I have no porch. My front door just opens onto the road and the driver made no attempt to conceal it.  Anyway, I would like to know if I have rights here because the delivery wasn't for an item that I just bought. It was initially delivered but stopped working within the warranty period and they agreed to fix it for free.  Appreciate your help 🙏🏼   Thanks!
    • As the electric carmaker sees sales fall and cuts jobs, we take a closer look at its problems.View the full article
    • Care to briefly tell someone who isn't tech savvy - i.e. me! - how you did this? Every day is a school day.
  • 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

REDCATS - Vertbaudet/La Redoute


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4366 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 there!

 

I am just looking for a little advice because the above company are not sticking to timetables - surprise, surprise!

 

My original SAR was sent to them on 20th January 2012 enclosing the £10.00 fee. The cheque was cashed on 27th January 2012 and I heard nothing from them. I used the follow up letter on 5th March advising that further action would be taken if they did not reply within 7 days and then promptly filled and sent the relevant questionnaire to the ICO. I emailed a copy of this to Redcats (trading name for La Redoute and Vertbaudet) advising that my request was being processed and information will be sent to me as soon as possible. They would appreciate it if I would allow them until the end of Marcg to complete this process.

 

I don't see why I should have to wait until then for this information and I have reported it to the ICO. Do I automatically now go along the court route or do I leave it? Would appreciate if someone could advise me of the next step?

 

Many thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,As one of the team managers at La Redoute I am sorry to hear that your query has not yet been resolved. If you could please email me using a 'dot' between my first name and surname at redcats.co.uk I will ensure that this is dealt with as soon as possible. Kind Regards Amanda Grice La Redoute Customer Care Team Manager

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Amanda welcome to the site.Your status has now been updated.The Cag embraces organisations who are passinate about Customer Services,and pro active measures to resolve complaints.Please observe our posting rules,and also that we expect to see our members being able to update and progress whether positive or negative,and that where possible responses to our members concerns or issues are posted openly on the forums.

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Thank you Amanda for your reply and I appreciate that you wish to resolve this for me. I would like to let you know that I have received some information from Redcats but unfortunately not all of the information that I would like. I will email you to let you know what information is missing and I would be grateful if you would email this to me. Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I wonder if anyone can help me with this?

 

I applied for information for two accounts under an SAR on 20th January 2012 (Vertbaudet and La Redoute) and received some information from Redcats on 2nd April 2012 which was obviously late. They informed me that they were unable to provide statements for both accounts as they only hold details for the last 7 years. On 17th April 2012 I sent a letter to them advising that they should provide me with evidence that this data has been destroyed by a registered data controller in accordance with the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and this is the reply that I have received from their Legal Dept:

 

SAR reply - anonymous081.jpg

 

I then received a letter from their PPI complaints person to state that they will not uphold my complaint regarding the PPI because it was sold before January 2005. A copy of this letter is attached here:

 

Total cover reply - anonymous082.jpg

 

Could someone please advise me as to how I proceed with this? I find that their legal dept are a little patronising towards the letter that I sent to them requesting evidence of having destroyed all of my records. If you would prefer to message me privately I have no problems with this as I am aware that this company do read the posts!

 

Many thanks and hope you can help!

 

Worst Utility

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I don't think the attachments worked on this! Here they are again in the order they are supposed to be in.

 

Worst Utility.

Reply from legal dept - anonymous.pdf

Total cover reply - anonymous083.pdf

Edited by Worstutility
Unable to upload one document properly!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry everyone - I am having a terrible time trying to upload my documents!

 

This is the first letter that I received from the legal dept advising that they did not need to supply evidence that they had destroyed my documents[/b].

 

 

 

 

"Thank you for your letter dated 17 April 2012 with which you enclosed a copy of your email to

my colleague, Amanda Grice, dated 14 April 2012.

Our obligations in respect of "Subject Access Requests" made under the Data Protection Act

I99S are as set out in that Act and in particular section 7 of that Act. I do not believe that any

of the provisions of Civil Procedure Act 1995 are applicable in the present circumstances.

I do, however, suspect that the application of the Data Protection Act 1998 or Civil Evidence

Act 1995 is largely irrelevant here. I believe that all you are seeking from us is confirmation as

to whether you had Payment Protection insurance (""',) on your accounts with details of any

premiums paid. I have asked my colleagues in our Financial Services team to investigate this

and to respond to you directly as soon as they can. As I have previously explained, we do not

hold data indefinitely. Data Protection Act 1998 Schedule 1 Part 1 paragraph 5 (referred to as

the Fifth Principle) states as

"5. Personal data processed for any purpose or purposes shall not be kept for longer than is

necessary for that purpose or those purposes."

My colleagues in our Financial Services team will be in touch within the next couple of weeks

with information in relation to PFi. if you have any other queries please do not

hesitate to contact me at the address below."

 

 

 

 

This is the second letter advising that they did not consider that I had a claim:

 

 

 

 

"I write with reference to your previous complaint regarding Total Cover which we responded to on 20th April 2012.

As part of our ongoing quality review process we have re-visited your complaint and after careful

consideration of your complaint, it appears our initial response was below our usual high standard of

clarity; therefore I am writing to you now to re-iterate the main points of that initial response.

tn terms of your La Redoute account (reference 40HBBR. ' can confirm there has never been

any insurance of any kind, applied to this account.

Regarding your Vertbaudet account (reference 4HMHV)> I can confirm you did have Total Cover;

this was sotd and applied to the account on 4th November 2002

To re-clarify our position in regards to insurance policies sold prior to January 2005, it was after this

date when new legal requirements were introduced for the way in which general insurance was sold

and therefore policies sold after this date were required to comply with the Financial Services

Authority's rules. These ruies include, for example, full discussion of the benefits of the insurance

together with those areas that aren't covered by the policy

Prior to this date, there were no similar requirements, however it was part of our policy to ensure that

all customers taking out insurance before January 2005 would have been issued with the terms and

conditions which would have given them fuii details of how the insurance worked together with details

of what was and wasn't covered.

We still have no reason to believe that this policy was not followed in your sale. After re-visiting your

original complaint, I am sorry to inform you that I will not be upholding your complaint.

I can confirm that Total Cover was cancelled from your Vertbaudet account on the 8th April 2004 when

the account was closed and transferred to a Debt Recovery Company.

If you are not satisfied with our review of your complaint you may refer this matter to the Financial

Ombudsman Service (contact details were supplied in our previous letter); even though our view is

that, as the policy was sold prior to the introduction of new legal requirements in 2005, the complaint

would be outside of their jurisdiction.

If you have any further queries please do not hesitate to contact me on 0845 2701045.

Our opening hours are Monday to Friday 9am to 5pm."

 

 

 

 

If anyone can help me with this and how to proceed I would be extremely grateful.

Edited by Worstutility
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...