Ifonic Claims Ltd Swansea - 86yrs old apparently £990 out of pocket!

[dx100uk]

40 cal days

 

dx

[CerberusSco]

-Update-

 

Well that's 2 dates that have expired with Ifonics telling me that a full refund has been sent out via cheque. I think it's time to pursue this with the MoJ & I'm going to contact my local MP & MSP.

 

My in Laws are making themselves very poorly with worry and are also into a sizeable chunk of their overdraft. I cannot allow these people to get away with this and I cannot allow them to contribute to the stress, worry & panic that my in Laws are going through, after the disappointment of twice being promised a refund via cheque and twice being let down.

Edited June 3, 2013 by ims21

[Cliff Stanford]

Well that's 2 dates that have expired with Ifonics telling me that a full refund has been sent out via cheque. I think it's time to pursue this with the MoJ & I'm going to contact my local MP & MSP.

No dates were missed. You appear to be living in a dream world. Under MoJ rules, we have until 12 June to process the refund. The refund was, in fact, processed today, the 3rd.

 

after the disappointment of twice being promised a refund via cheque and twice being let down.

I can see no evidence of your in-laws ever being told that a refund would be made by cheque. Also I can find no evidence of your in-laws having sent us a SAR, despite your previous posts.

 

You appear to be intent on libelling my company on this and other forums with your lies. Please don't.

 

Cliff.

[CerberusSco]

I have proof with a tracking number that a SAR was sent to your companies address! It was sent recorded delivery so as it's been signed for I'm accepting that as being received.

 

I also was told by 2 of your customer service agents that a refund would be issued. So you seem to be living on cloud 9 Mr Stanford, not me. As for libelling your company, I'd love to know where you get that from. I am stating FACTS and what I have been told by people that work for your company. I was told that a refund was authorised on 15th May & would take 14 days to arrive to my in Laws house. I suggest you get your advisors to actually tell the truth and not fob people off with conflicting stories. As you have said in other posts/threads, there clearly needs to be some training issues resolved at your company.

 

I suggest you find that SAR that has been signed for, otherwise it's off to the ICO with a complaint Mr Stanford. I suggest it's you living in a dream world. Oh & I'm still waiting on your fictitious lawyer serving me with a writ.

 

The fact of the matter is that you got caught [EDIT] elderly & vulnerable people out of £990 and you don't like it Cliff! Find the SAR as it was sent and stop making me out to be a liar and making libellous comments on forums. That must be your favourite word Cliff!!!!

 

See you come across as being nice as pie & willing to help on other posts/threads, but in fact it's the exact opposite with you Cliff.

Edited June 3, 2013 by CerberusSco
.

[ims21]

To the OP

 

We have mentioned before that we have had to edit some posts. I have done so again with the latest posts you have made.

 

While this situation is frustrating and infuriating for you, please take more care with your wording before posting.

 

On the subject of the SAR, if it has been received, payment cashed etc. then failure to comply is also actionable in court to force compliance.

[CerberusSco]

Apologies ims21 I am indeed infuriated with him & his company. I'm also infuriated that he's making me out to be a liar. I am going to check now if payment was cashed and if it was then indeed I will have NO hesitation in seeing this go to court.

[Cliff Stanford]

I have proof with a tracking number that a SAR was sent.

If you would care to forward this to me by email (or post it on here), I will look into it. As I said, I can see no evidence of it.

 

I also was told by 2 of your customer service agents that a refund would be issued.

As indeed it has been. You invented the bit about the cheques and the missed dates though.

 

As for libelling your company, I'd love to know where you get that from. I am stating FACTS

I get it from your two posts above.

 

Oh & I'm still waiting on your fictitious lawyer serving me with a writ.

Having looked into your finances, we realised that any victory would be empiric only. If we won damages, you wouldn't pay. Lawyers are expensive.

 

The fact of the matter is that you got caught [EDIT] elderly & vulnerable people out of £990

Untrue. We provide a service; There are many people here who do not see it as a valuable service and that is opinion. Nevertheless, it is a service.

 

Cliff.

Edited June 3, 2013 by ims21
.

[CerberusSco]

2 letters were sent on 17/05/2013 -Tracking numbers are KF019362465GB & KF019362457GB. Both signed for by Tim. I suggest you look into that with urgency as I've said, failure for you to comply WILL result in court action. I do note that the £10.00 Postal Order for the SAR hasn't been cashed as of yet.

 

You've looked into my finances without my permission? I'm sure that is wrong Cliff, especially without my permission. What gives you the right to look into my background and anyway, with very little information you have on me? Anyway, you wouldn't win any case as NO libellous comments have been made by me or any member of my family. I have had the posts checked and if there was anything libellous on this thread, then I'm pretty sure the admins would be extremely quick to let me know. Same applies to MSE forums as well Cliff.

 

With regards to Facebook, I think you'll find and agree that no libellous comments were made by me. Maybe my friends, but I'm not responsible for anything they post via social media.

 

Anyway, enough chat with you Cliff, you're beginning to bore me and annoy me, just get the refund sorted and then we can put an end to this sorry story.

Edited June 3, 2013 by CerberusSco

[leigh04]

I had a cold call last week off these lot, and after about 10 mins the caller asked me for my card details;

My reply was why do you need them for

Oh we need payment upfront

oh right hang on then please.......

Before i give them over can i have your full name, your debit card number and security number on the back please

 

called me an impolite name and put the phone down on me, havent heard from them since

[citizenB]

Your item with reference KF019362465GB was delivered from our SWANSEA Delivery Office on 20/05/13 .

 

There is a signature and the printed initials TIM

 

Your item with reference KF019362457GB was delivered from our SWANSEA Delivery Office on 20/05/13 .

 

This one also has a signature with the printed initials TIM

[CerberusSco]

Your item with reference KF019362465GB was delivered from our SWANSEA Delivery Office on 20/05/13 .

 

There is a signature and the printed initials TIM

 

Your item with reference KF019362457GB was delivered from our SWANSEA Delivery Office on 20/05/13 .

 

This one also has a signature with the printed initials TIM

 

So, 40 calendar days from the 20/05/2013 as the letters have been signed for?

 

I'd be very interested to hear from anyone at CAG to check the legality of checking my background and/or finances before issuing a writ, especially without any permission or consent to do so from myself.

[citizenB]

 

You've looked into my finances without my permission? I'm sure that is wrong Cliff, especially without my permission. What gives you the right to look into my background and anyway, with very little information you have on me?

 

 

 

 

 

I'd be very interested to hear from anyone at CAG to check the legality of checking my background and/or finances before issuing a writ, especially without any permission or consent to do so from myself.

 

I think you might need to speak to the Information Commissioner regarding this. I find it very worrying indeed if, without your giving your permission, this company has been digging into your Credit files.

 

I would think that you would be entitled to send a Subject Access Request in your own right in order to establish just what data has been obtained without your authority.

[CerberusSco]

Will do, thanks

[CerberusSco]

I have contacted the ICO with my contact details, via email, with links to Mr Stanfords posts above,

asking about the legality of performing both background and/or financial checks (as per Mr Stanfords post #82) prior to issuing a writ without

1. my consent &

2. my prior knowledge.

 

I too would be interested to see what the ICO have to say and any advice they have to give regarding the above.

 

Should it transpire that it is illegal,

then I will happily submit a SAR to ascertain what data Mr Stanford has accessed about me

and look to proceed with this matter further.

[CerberusSco]

Right, t

his is off my own bat and I HAVE NOT been prompted to do this by anyone at Ifonics or in relation to Mr Cliff Stanford.

 

However, I am going to apologise for my earlier tone, especially to Mr Stanford.

 

Whilst he believes that I may have made libellous and/or defamatory statements about himself & Ifonics,

I believe this clearly wasn't the case and we can argue until the cows come home about who's right or who's wrong.

 

However, I believe that if I had the opportunity to speak to Mr Stanford directly,

then all this could of been avoided as I'm sure things wouldn't of been misconstrued in what was probably the heat of the moment.

 

I was deeply shocked and upset to hear what had happened to my parents (in laws) and hence this is why I became involved

as they had no one else to turn to regarding this matter.

 

Whilst this is in no way an admission of guilt on my part about allegedly making any libellous and/or defamatory statements,

I do not wish to continue having a public slanging match in public with Mr Stanford any longer.

 

Whilst I also believe I was right in highlighting my concerns here at CAG,

 

I'm sure Mr Stanford will appreciate why I felt the need to do so and that no malice was intended on my part.

 

I hope now this sorry situation can be put to bed, my parents are refunded and then we can all get on.

 

I also hope that Mr Stanford will act on his previous comments both in this and other threads about the need to identify which individuals

need further training in the hope of situations like these never happening again.

 

I hope Mr Stanford will accept this apology and we can deal with this matter further in a calm and amicable manner.

[dx100uk]

going by the other reports here and elsewhere

 

I don't think its 'one' person that needs retraining, but the WAY they are trained.

 

CMC's must be compelled by law / MoJ or whomever

to

 

not be allowed to take ANY money until they have WRITTEN to the client

and the client WRITES BACK agreeing to the EXACT figure they take.

 

dx

[CerberusSco]

going by the other reports here and elsewhere

 

I don't think its 'one' person that needs retraining, but the WAY they are trained.

 

CMC's must be compelled by law / MoJ or whomever

to

 

not be allowed to take ANY money until they have WRITTEN to the client

and the client WRITES BACK agreeing to the EXACT figure they take.

 

dx

 

There is definitely a lot of room for improvement, there is no disputing that.

 

I reflected on this whole situation last night and I just want to put this issue to bed.

 

If truth be told, I would advise anyone to not give their details, especially card details (not that CMC's should be asking for them given the MoJ guidelines) in advance

and to really reclaim any PPI themselves.

 

I hope that I have made people aware of this, but I wanted my apology to Mr Stanford on record and I hope a repeat of this scenario never happens again.

 

I have been dealing with Tina in Ifonics Complaints and she seems more willing to deal with it directly

and address this issue and on reflection I think I could of done this directly with Mr Stanford in the first instance.

 

Yes some of his accusations and comments have upset me and made me pretty irate and I personally don't think a person with his position should be doing that.

 

I sincerely hope lessons are learned.

 

It may seem I'm relenting somewhat, but that isn't the case.

 

It is my view that Ifonics should not be doing what they are doing/have done and I seriously hope Ifonics changes their ways going forward.

 

There are many issues here to be addressed, but that is a matter for Mr Stanford and his staff to address.

 

I won't be happy until my parents are refunded, the cheque has cleared and the money is back in their bank.

 

As a result of this, my father in law is no longer answering the phone during the day and we have installed TrueCaller to block out any further sales calls.

 

They now apparently have my SAR with postal order and I will await receipt of that before deciding to go any further.

Edited June 4, 2013 by CerberusSco

[CerberusSco]

My parents (in-laws) have finally received their refund of £990.00 via BACS yesterday, but weren't aware of it until they checked their account today. I will now await the SAR and then take it from there. I'm pleased that they have finally been refunded.

[citizenB]

Thanks for updating this Cerberus. It is very sad that your FiL no longer feels able to answer his own phone, without the call being screened first. Although I imagine you are happier that he does now have this level of protection.

 

Because of cold calling, I always leave the answer machine to pick up first. It is very frustrating when people register with TPS, tick all the right boxes to prevent their data being sold, yet somehow.. these companies still have access to our private space via the telephone.

[CerberusSco]

Aye, it's frustrating, but I feel they shouldn't be in a position where they shouldn't answer their own phone in their own home. So this to me is another way of protecting them from something like this happening again.

 

Another thing I forgot to post earlier and I sincerely must apologise for, is a big massive thanks to everyone here that has helped and given me advice. It really is very much appreciated. I also extend these thanks on behalf of my in laws as well.

 

I'll await to see what I get from the SAR and I will be updating this thread as and when I get that information. It will be interesting being able to listen to the original call. Not a transcript of it, but the actual call as I've requested so in the SAR.

 

Once again a big massive thanks.

[citizenB]

[dazza12]

It's good to hear that it's finally sorted, but they've still caused damage. They've left your FIL in a state of worry and you are out of pocket from your costs. On top of that they've libelled you.

 

To answer an earlier point (if you still wanted to follow it up):

 

Cliff suggests that he has knowledge of your financial health. The statement has been made on a public forum. He needs to establish whether this statement was based on opinion or whether this is based on an investigation.

 

If this is based on an investigation, firstly this investigation into your finances should not have been carried out without your permission. Secondly, broadcasting the results of this investigation on a public forum is a clear breach of the DPA.

 

Whether based on an opinion or based on fact, your character has been damaged on a public forum. You have been made to look like you are in poor financial health and that you are unlikely to repay a debt. This is a libellous statement, and also one that breaches the DPA. To establish your financial health, companies have to go through a strict procedure involving a search of your credit file. This information is not available to the public.

 

I would be tempted to request a fresh copy of your credit reports. This shows an audit trail of searches and will indicate if a search has been performed without your permission.

 

Finally if they don't actually know your financial health, this is a clear case of bullying. As it's on public record a referral to the MoJ would be worth considering.

[CerberusSco]

I have just had word back from the ICO and they have told me to request on how Mr Stanford has obtained this information and allow him a full 28 days to respond. As of this minute I have sent him an email requesting this information and I have also given him the opportunity to inform me if this request needs to also be put in writing. If it is found that he has obtained this information illegally and/or he hasn't responded after a full 28 days, then I will submit a complaint to the ICO.

 

I have checked Noddle and there is no search showing that would imply that my financial information has been looked at. I will in due course be requesting a copy of both my credit records from Experian & Equifax.

 

Again, if a breach of DPA has been committed by either Cliff Stanford or any companies that he has a direct connection with, then I will submit a complaint. With regards to making a libellous statement then I am considering my options in which to seek damages for this. However, I have to weigh up the fact would this be successful in court. I think it would have a good chance. If anyone has any further advices regarding damages, then please feel free to submit a PM and I'll be happy to discuss it there.

 

Thanks.

[CerberusSco]

Just had it confirmed by Mr Stanford that he has used Google Maps to look at my home to make his decision. Poor show Cliff, it really is.

 

Whether based on an opinion or based on fact, your character has been damaged on a public forum. You have been made to look like you are in poor financial health and that you are unlikely to repay a debt. This is a libellous statement, and also one that breaches the DPA. To establish your financial health, companies have to go through a strict procedure involving a search of your credit file. This information is not available to the public.

[citizenB]

Yes, google maps has a lot to answer for. I cant believe our government permitted this over the objections of the people !!