Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello, I am a private seller and recently sold a pair of trainers on eBay.  Everything seemed fine until just after the eBay 30 day mbg had expired.  The buyer contacted me with photos showing me that both shoes had ripped.  He wanted his money back, and after refusing to refund him, he then left me retaliatory and defamatory feedback on my profile to the effect that I had sold him fake trainers (this was removed by eBay).  He then initiated a chargeback via Paypal.  Invariably, the outcome was in his favour, and I have now been charged for the cost of the trainers.  I would have also been stung for the chargeback fee, but eBay refunded this.  Incidentally, I do have the email receipt of the trainers from when I bought them from a well-established and bona fide online retailer.  The susbequent conversation with eBay followed its predictable course, i.e. the chargeback is out of their hands etc. I have been in contact with citizens advice, and my bank.  Citizens advice told me that as a private seller I'm responsible for the "Title and description" of the goods, but not the performance, or the fitness for purpose.  To me it is clear; if you receive something that's not as described, you don't then use the goods, and more than 30 days later claim 'not as described'.  In my mind, this makes the claim fraudulent.  He's used the 'they're fake' card to give credence to a 'not as described' claim here, obviously, without any evidence.  My understanding is that the chargeback is unlawful, because the trainers were shipped as described.  However, I read something on an eBay forum regarding sellers having no statutory rights, i.e. no right to appeal against a chargeback decision, or to complain to the financial ombudsman.  Does this mean that if my bank disputes the charge on my behalf, it will be to no avail, even if it's recognisably a fraudulent chargeback?  I have reported it via the Actionfraud website. Any advice, anyone?  Would be most grateful!
    • Thank you, I have drafted my letters and started to complete the reply form, printed from this site and not using the one they provided.    2 questions, on the forum link it says to tick box D & I, the reason for box D will be given on my thread, what would my answer be to "I dispute the debt"?  Do I send anything for the Vodafone debt they have included?  I've only done 118 loan s. 77 & capital one credit cards so. 78    Thank you  
    • It'll be something to the effect of:  "I am in receipt of your letter before claim.  I was awaiting a passenger as a licensed cab driver on the Locton estate who subsequently cancelled the pickup after me waiting a while and will fight this in the small claims court if necessary. Plus I have friends who are experts in contractual law and make it their business to defeat these spurious PPC claims.  So issue the claim form or go forth and multiply, up to you"
  • 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

M&S / BeValued Home Insurance Claim approved, then refused, now pending...?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4311 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

My first ever home insurance claim...

 

Hi, my DS managed to crack the TV screen last night. I called M&S this morning and my claim was swiftly approved. A couple of hours later I had a call from BeValued and after a couple of minutes on hold they said they would replace it. They found the exact model on the Argos website and offered me the current selling price minus excess (£230). Pretty swift I thought.

 

Roll on a couple of hours later and I receive a call from M&S who now tell me they are refusing the claim based on details from back in November.

 

(What happened in November, my other DS chipped the screen. I called to enquire about a claim but decided against it as the excess wasn't worth paying for the minor annoyance of the chipped screen. You couldn't see it with the TV on anyway.)

 

Back to today and M&S have obviously found these notes and explained they were refusing the claim as the damage from November had progressed and caused the damage I now have. I queried this, asking who decided the incidents were related and basically are they accusing me of insurance fraud. There were a few more words than that but that's the gist of it. M&S went away to speak to BeValued and after an hour or so I called back for an update. I asked for a complaint to be raised and was informed it had already been done, the calls would be listened to, their supervisor was involved etc etc

 

Current status is that I have a phone appointment at 10am on Friday with BeValued to speak to a claims handler, and Maintenance Direct are going to contact me to arrange to either inspect the TV or collect it. They assured me this is normal, but I'm not so sure given that at 1030am this morning they had already offered me a settlement. I get the feeling this whole phone appointment/ inspection thing is on the back of the notes from November.

 

Is it normal to have a phone appointment and inspection when you make a claim, or is it a case of guilty until proven innocent?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds all a bit silly to me. The people handling the claim need to have a think for a few minutes and realise they are being stupid. It is a relatively modest claim for a replacement TV. So what if the recent accident had caused the previous damage to be made worse, to the extent that it now needs to be replaced. We are not talking about a claim for a TV that is worth say £2000, where the original damage could have been repairable. No inspection is going to reveal that the latest damage has caused the un-repaired TV to now need replacing, rather than repair. The different between the cost of replacement and repair would probably not be that different anyway. Plus now they are adding extra admin costs, which are totally unnecessary.

 

In this situation, I think I would try speaking to the claims manager about the way their department is dealing with the claim.

  • Confused 1

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a response to my complaint and they said the representative i spoke to was wrong to flatly refuse the claim. They assured me it's standard practice to inspect the TV and have this call with the claims handler etc, but I'm beginning to doubt that.

Is it standard practice to inspect every claim, or do they think i'm trying to make a fraudulent claim? If it isn't standard practice, I may consider escalating my complaint regarding the way it has been handled and complain to the ombudsman if you think it's worth it.

 

Also, they originally offered me a settlement pretty quickly, but M&S told me they were wrong to do that. Again I think they're lying.

 

For such a minor amount of money (in the grand scale of things) it's actually left me feeling sick :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a TV or other damaged items inspected is standard practice and therefore you have no basis for a complaint about that. The only reasonable complaint you can make is about the way they have handled the claim to date. i.e giving you the wrong info. But that complaint can easily be handled by M&S and in my opinion perhaps say £50 in vouchers would be adequate compo.

 

Some Insurers arrange for their preferred replacement company to inspect items and then replace the item with a set period of time. Gone are the days, when you make a claim and the Insurers just pay out.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Each company has different proceedures, the fact that your claiming for a tv which was probably beyond ecconomic repair after claim no.1 has allowed confusion.

Really they should be telling you claim no.2 would be unsuccesful, but go ahaead and reopen claim no.1, don't let them rip you off with paying 2 excess's, but let them inspect, even if you went to the FOS, the FOS would not get in their way of investigation, just probably award £50.00 like UB67 has suggested.

Were they also offering a lesser replacement model as per your first headline?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...