Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • when is your mediation? honestly I don't think that the ups case is much use actually because it concerns third party rights BUT  as we know now the contract for packlink is direct and there are no third parties rights at all so you don't need it, and frankly the really helpful one will be from @occysrazor case but I don't know if they have it. expect evris mediation to be a complete fail yes
    • jk2054: I have ensured there's not reference to the third party rights in the updated letter of claim. BankFodder: thanks for the edits and information. I understand the Consumer Rights Act prohibits EVRi's attempts to avoid liability in their duty and care of accepting to deliver my parcel according to Section 57.  They have accepted to carry my parcel even though I have identified it as a laptop and specified the value so they must take reasonable care to deliver the parcel or face the consequences if it were lost as it seems to be in my case! I hadn't originally referenced Section 72 because of EVRi didn't offer any insurance whether free or for me to purchase. I understand that if I were to have any sort of insurance from EVRi then Section 72 refer to the rules of such secondary contracts. Is this section indicating that the insurance may reduce my rights or remedies to recourse to full compensation if I had been offered and purchased such insurance?  Is it beneficial to include this in the letter of claim (and subsequently reference both Section 57 and 72 in the MCOL?) although it might not be pertinent in my case?  Perhaps this is just to reinforce that in general EVRi and other couriers are taking such liberties with their customers so it is to send a message that they are breaching both sections? I made a few minor edits to the letter of claim but mainly grammatical type stuff and to keep consistent font, black colour, but the edits you provided are included and are extremely helpful and are putting me in a good position to email and post the letter to EVRi this week and get the ball rolling. Thanks. Evri letter of claim.pdf
    • Thank you for getting back to me I will do my best to get hold of the claim form tomorrow  When I spoke to MCOl on friday I asked for the extra 14 days so penty of time Onlymeagain
    • Hi, From everything I've read about how EVRi handle mediation, and given I intend not to budge on my position, I am preparing for court. Having read the the full WS and court bundl @occysrazor kindly supplied, I am wondering what value adding the Jamie Bradbury v UPS Limited has?  Obviously this case was lost by the claimant and the ruling clearly goes against the Farooq case and more recently @occysrazor's.  Is the case to include it simply to showcase my argument as being well rounded? Interested in your opinions. Many thanks, Sam 
  • 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 
        • I agree
      • 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

Passport on line Application be very careful


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3796 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 son had to apply for his first adult passport and decided to do it online.

 

After using the Google search engine he logged onto what he thought was the official passport website.

 

He filled it it in and paid the fee of £62.50.

 

3 weeks later he got the form back there were issues with the form and they wanted the fee.

 

After contacting the passport office we were told that it does happen all the time and these websites are not official.

 

So now my son has now to finish the form return it and now pay a further fee of £72.50.

 

It was his mistake and unfortunately I do not think he will be the only one.

 

Lesson learned but he doesn't have the £72.50 to now pay the fee for the passport.

 

I googled problems with companies who charge for an online application service and found an article in the Guardian by Miles Bignal

who also got stung by thinking he had filled in an official form.

 

We are gutted for my son who innocently thought he was doing the right thing,

the form is identical to the official form.

 

This post is to warn everyone just to make sure they don't make the mistake we have !!:sad::sad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

How was the initial fee paid? If by debit/credit card you may be able to do a Chargeback to get the £62.50 back.

 

I recall seeing something on TV last week that there's an almost identical [problem] going on with Driving License websites. The websites basically charge you a fee to fill in the form for you, by using the information you put into their own form. It's almost money for nothing really. Unfortunately these websites pay a bit for advertising, so they show up as the top result in Google as Ads.

 

I just googled "Passport Application" myself, of the first three results (all in the Ads box) one of them is for the Post Office, the other two are for these [problem] websites.

 

My advice for anyone who is applying for a passport but is a little unsure on the form is to pop to the Post Office. I believe they only charge £4 (though it might have increased, this was a few years ago when I did it) to check your form is correct and send it off for you, which is actually more than these websites charging £40-70 do, since they don't even check the information, just copy and paste it from one form to another.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Maxxpower we have had an email from the company today and this is what they say "Thank you for your email. I am sorry to hear that you are not happy with my response.

 

I'm very sorry but as we have completed our service which we clearly state upon our website you would not normally be offered any sort of refund, however we are willing to offer you a 50% refund as a gesture of goodwill, if you wish to contest the payment with your bank that you have mentioned then I'm afraid we will defend our position with vigour.

 

Should you wish to accept our offer please provide the full name and address you would like the cheque made payable to.

 

Whilst I realise that this is not the response you were hoping for, I hope I have cleared matters up further for you, if you do wish to discuss this further please do not hesitate to get back in touch.

 

Yes we have contacted the Nat West bank relating the charge and they have more or less said that it can't be done because he agreed to pay. Its a lesson learned and we shall be going to the post office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

   Domain name:
      passport-uk.co.uk

  Registrant:
      IQ Channels Ltd

  Registrant type:
      Unknown

  Registrant's address:
      111 Buckingham Palace Road
      Victoria
      SW1W 0SR
      United Kingdom

  Registrar:
      Fasthosts Internet Ltd [Tag = FAST
      URL: http://www.fasthosts.co.uk

 

To be fair in their website they say:

Our services are not in any way affiliated with any authorised Government body including HM Passport Office . We provide a reviewing and submitting service for all UK passport applications charging a minimal processing fee. You can apply autonomously to HM Passport Office , avoiding costs for processing, by logging on to their authorised website. Please read our Terms and Conditions before using our website and services.

 

IQ Channels Ltd is registered to collect personal data under the Data Protection Act 1998 for the purposes of United Kingdom Passport Application Services.

ICO notification number: Z3604031. Incorporated in England and Wales, Company number: 07699328.

Registered Address: IQ Channels, 111 Buckingham Palace Road, Victoria, London, SW1W 0SR, United Kingdom.

 

This doesn't excuse them.

"Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for Poundland"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at their website, this part in particular stood out to me,

 

Your application will not be checked. You will incur HM Passport Office fees.

 

It's 'Option 3' on the front page. To me, that implies that if I use the Passport Office service I'll be charged a fee that using the passport-uk site wont charge me. They are quite clearly implying that using their service may avoid certain fees.

 

It also doesn't make it at all clear that their own fee does not include the actual cost of the passport. Infact nowhere on the front page does it specify that additional fees will be payable for the passport itself over and above the administration fee.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

I was under the impression that the site disclaimer should be in a prominent position (although I could be totally wrong)

 

Having their disclaimer at the foot of the page, to me, is hiding the fact that they are not 'official'

 

The option 3 gives the applicant the option of linking direct to the official site but by the way it is worded, it would appear that they are saying that HMPO would not check the application? Misleading? Possibly

 

Also the fact that they charge the same fee as HMPO would make a novice think that was the official fee.

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

go get you money back by a chargeback all of you

 

they CANNOT STOP 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

  • 5 weeks later...

Why did he not use the official .gov.uk web site. Okay, you cannot pay for your passport via the website but they send you a print of the application along with all the information you require. You sign the paperwork and return with the other required documents to the processing office. You can also select the Passport Office that you wish to attend for your initial interview

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Because like many others have made the same mistake je mistook the site for being the genuine one. If you type in passport it is the first page you see. I got involved half way through and I thought it was the official website. He is 19 and thought it was a correct page. I am 47 and I didn't know the difference. The page has been set up to replicate the official page, this is why they have mislead people into believing what they are completing is a official site. We are a whole lot wiser now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a common [problem] and is also used for driving licences and euro health cards, if you google something the top redults are coloured slightly yellow background abd these are ads paid to be at the top, the official gov.uk sites will be listed below.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For once, the Mail on Sunday actually printed a story worth reading.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/guides/article-2519839/Online-sting-charges-1-000-service-FREE.html

 

..and they didnt blame immigrants !

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Unfortunately I was caught with the same [problem] earlier this month unfortunately there appears to be very little anyone can do to recoup their loss it’s time the Government stepped up to the plate and took some serious action!

Action Fraud, ASA, and Trading Standards and the Banks simply don’t want to know. As a last resort I have sent the following to my MP.

 

If someone was to knock at my door and show me an official looking ID from the “Water Company”, and I allowed him into the house and was subsequently robbed would a crime have been committed?

Geoffrey Laffoley-Lane was fined £175,000 back in 2009 when he was operating Plaza Telecom a premium rate phone [problem]. He is currently ripping people off (operating IQ Channels LTD who are trading as passport-uk. and estavisas.org).

The Advertising Standards Authority adjudicated on both trading companies on the 4th and 18th December 2013 and all the complaints were upheld. Why has this LOW LIFE been able to get away with these [problem]s for so long?

IQ Channels latest accounts: - Net Worth £3,047,671, Cash £315,340, Assets £405,463, Liabilities £357,792.

When a company can accumulate a Net Worth of over Three Million Pounds in such a short timescale (2011 - 2012) some sort of crime must have been committed. Perhaps a “Distraction Burglary” of my Bank Account!

Link to post
Share on other sites

depends how you paid

 

there is redress

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...