Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks very much BankFodder, your help is invaluable and I will read through it more carefully this evening.  At this time I am not aware of any information I have left out. And thanks to jk2054, I realised after sending it about the third party rights, you are absolutely correct and I will proceed as standard BOC claim. I'll come back with any questions once I've had a thorough re-read and so I hope to get the letter emailed and posted early this week so I can start the 14 day clock. Thanks again, M
    • The original LOC is wrong. You are nothing to do with third party rights.   you placed the order on EVRi's website so there is no third party rights in it, its a standard BOC claim
    • nike pre provide the labels arguably here the easiest target is nike because they will give in very easily.  
    • @BankFodder have you seen the first paragraph of this defence on the name. Am I missing something?
    • TBH: it does matter whats asked of you. you goal here is not one of denial nor say incorrect/missing paperwork, which is the usual reason to refuse mediation when they ring 9/10. you goal here is to achieve a consent order. i would pers outline this ASAP to the mediator so you dont waste eveyones time. have a figure in your head £PCM that you are agreeable too, halve it, then offer that, but be prepare to jink upwards slightly toward you org £PCM figure. do nOT be bullied stick to your guns. if it doesnt look like your £PCM is going to be accepted, then close mediation and await it to be allocated to a judge, as he wont be too please lowell refused the consent order over £5/10PCM more. have you done a budget sheet? dx   dx  
  • 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

Ofcom rules you can now opt out of mobile contract price rises


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3888 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

Consumers and small businesses should be allowed to exit their landline, broadband or mobile contract without penalty if their provider increases the cost of their monthly deal, Ofcom announced today.

 

Ofcom is telling providers how to interpret and apply current telecoms sector rules2 in relation to price increases during fixed-term contracts. Ofcom is also confirming the cancellation rights it expects providers to give consumers following price increases.

 

This Guidance sets out that:

 

  • Ofcom is likely to regard any increase3 to the recurring monthly subscription charge4 in a fixed-term contract as ‘materially detrimental’ to consumers;

 

  • providers should therefore give consumers at least 30 days’ notice of any such price rise and allow them to exit their contract without penalty; and

 

  • any changes to contract terms, pricing or otherwise, must be communicated clearly and transparently to consumers.

http://media.ofcom.org.uk/2013/10/23/protection-for-consumers-against-mid-contract-price-rises/

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this could be why some like O2 are now splitting there contracts in two first part to pay for the phone and second part to pay for the actual mobile calls and data etc.

 

Example IPhone 5s £0 today then £25 a month for 24 months with Unlimited text and minutes and 4 gb data is £27 a month Total £52 a month

 

dpick

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just upgraded my phone with a new contract. I paid £200 up front for the phone and £26 a month. Presumably the £26 covers the cost of the balance owing on the phone, which costs in excess of £600, and the cost of the calls, text and internet.

 

How would I stand if the charges were increased? Surely I cannot just cancel the contract without penalty as the monthly payment covers part of the cost of the phone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it's possible that the provider could ask for the return of the handset since it hasn't technically been entirely paid for, though in that case they should also have to provide a partial refund as well. Whatever you have paid towards the handset cost minus a small amount for the time you've had it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...