Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I don't know the answer to that one. Should I do the portal thing or call Drydens?
    • Update. They increased the offer to 100 and today I heard (finally) from a senior manager. It was basically a repeat of what we were told before.  This was what we sent. Before sending a formal letter or intent to take legal action (do we do that as a business - or is that just for consumers?) I have replied as follows: Note that the replacement books we had to send to the school cost more, as well as the shipping to replace.    Dear XXXX   The contract to deliver the parcel was with DPD/ Parcel2Go.com Ltd, regardless of who you choose for any section of the delivery.    DHL confirmed the delivery with DPD when initial investigation opened after I contacted you in September 2020. The parcel shows as having been delivered August 28th at 11.30am.  Our customers reported non delivery.   DPD had the courier details and tracking number, in order to confirm the delivery when an investigation was opened by DPD in October.   We’re pleased to let you know that your parcel DPD4227962 has been located. This enquiry has been closed as your parcel has received new tracking events or has been delivered. DPD closed the case, and we were not given the courier details or local tracking number. The courier details (DHL) were not given to us until Dec 2nd, and we have never been given the local tracking number. When we contacted DHL in Dec that was the first thing they asked for; the information we had been requesting since September. DPD failed to provide the information that would have enabled us to get information from DHL, even if DPD were unwilling to assist and carry out the service with reasonable care and skill. As the contract was with DPD we would always expect to be given the local tracking number when requested. When booked through Parcel2Go.com there is a Live Chat option to request this, and we have been given this information on numerous occasions. Why did DPD not give us the local (DHL) tracking?   The compensation is irrelevant, as you are only entitled to exclude liability for negligence if the exclusion is reasonable in all circumstances, and in any case, you have not sent proof that the parcel was lost or damaged. Regardless DPD is legally obliged to carry out the service with reasonable care and skill. Protection is not to give DPD full and unlimited protection against negligence - this would be an unfair term under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977.   We have had to send a new set of children's books which cost us approximately £50 more to buy, and the shipping was also more - shipping (same service) cost  £157.85 The situation created significant inconvenience in addition to substantial losses. We have been asking for the declared value of £425 plus shipping £116.80 and even with this we will have suffered a financial loss. There are no 'unforeseen' circumstances I can think of; no DPD representative would give us the local tracking number (requested over 35 times between September and December) and as a result DHL couldnt help us work out what has happened.  They may have delivered it to the wrong school with the same post code. Without the tracking they could not help us.  You have stated in your email that the parcel was not delivered, but because you haven't given the tracking details we will never know if this is the case or not. The investigation you are referring to in November was the SECOND investigation. And at no point since shipping the parcel has anyone given us the local tracking number. This should have been a straight forward request, and with this information this situation could have been avoided.  Please refund the  £425 plus shipping £116.80 as requested; by accepting this we will still suffer a loss due to your negligence, but can avoid litigation.    Elliott Hartnell-Baker    On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 at 11:52, DPD Local® <claims@parcel2go.com> wrote:
    • Worth a phone call or email at the least....this is not like dealing with a catalouge debt.....it's a serious threat which you can't treat like bluff.   Andy
    • Cheers Brassnecked ...going to go to town on this letter...ha 
    • used too? thats not right if it was there then the CCJ would have shown then... addresses and CCJ dont just get removed on a whim.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1238 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi All. Apologies if this has already been covered.

 

Last year I signed up with BT Infinity, using their Homehub 3. The wireless was appalling, with all of our devices having bandwith and connection problems.

 

It was obvious that this was not a fault, just that the home hub 3 is useless. I raised several cases with BT but of course there was no way they could fix the issue. I asked to try a Homehub 4 but they wanted to charge me extra. Out of principal I refused.

 

As they couldn't fix the problem I moved provider. Since then my wireless has been seamless.

 

So, BT are trying to charge me for coming out of my contract, so far the money owed has been racked up to be around £450 with debt collection fees. But I refuse to pay out of principal, I will not pay for a service they did not provide.

 

We reached deadlock and I went to the ombudsmen, and surprise surprise they gave the old chestnut "BT do not guarantee a wireless service" etc... my argument is that their advertising, on TV and on their website, strongly suggest that the wireless service provided by their home hub 3 is strong and robust, which its not.

 

Is anyone else in a similar position ? What further steps can I take now that the Ombudsman Services have made their decision ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the only thing you can do is to sue BT for breach of contract. BT guarantees are subject to supervening statutory protections. In this case you should look to SGSA which imposes conditions as to the quality of services which are provided buy companies such as BT.

BT will try to hid by their "no guarantee" claim - but it is inconceivable that you will be required to pay for service which you have not received. BT's no guarantee may be valid in respect of the speed of connection - but if the connection keeps on dropping out so that you are deprived of service then BT are liable.

BT are dinosaurs and they still don't get it. their staff are often very poor and their staff in their chief executives office are unimaginative and seem to see their first duty as protecting their company.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jock

 

Welcome to CAG

 

If customer services weren't addressing you issues, then you should have addressed your issues to the CEO.

 

Write a Formal Letter of Complaint, mark it as such. Explain what's happened, how they have let you down and what you want them to do.

 

Send it to:-

 

Mr Gavin Patterson

Chief Executive

BT Group

gavin.e.patterson@bt.com

 

If you feel that BT has mislead you regarding their marketing literature, lodge a complaint with ASA.

 

http://www.asa.org.uk/

 

http://consumers.ofcom.org.uk/tell-us/telecoms/

 

Totally agree with the following:-

 

'BT are dinosaurs and they still don't get it. their staff are often very poor and their staff in their chief executives office are unimaginative and seem to see their first duty as protecting their company.'

 

Let us know how you get on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response Rebel and Bankfodder.

 

I've already done the formal complaint and got the letter of deadlock from BT, hence escalating to the Ombudsmen Services.

 

After a discussion with the ombudsmen services they say that all broadband providers only gaurantee a service into your home. I.e from the wall socket to your router. Anything other than that they dont garantee. I know, its outdated, its ridiculous and needs to be changed. 95% of peoples devices in the home are all connected wirelessly, for a provider to have in their terms & conditions that they dont garantee wireless that is ridiculous.

 

Sueing BT could be a very expensive and serious situation. Yes I could try and call their bluff and they could crumble. But they could also take it all the way to court and I could end up with a whopping legal bill the size of a small mortgage. Or I could win. Its a risky gamble I'm not really keen on taking.

 

Going to the ASA sounds like a good idea, and Trading Standards as well. I will certainly look into that.

 

There must be hundreds, or thousands, of people in the same position with BT. I know after talking to people at work that they all have had BT Homehub 3 problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is very little risk of costs if you sue BT in the small claims court.

the claim is well under £10,000.

 

If you have good documented evidence then you stand an excellent chance of success.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because they have 'Terms & Conditions', doesn't mean that they are 'fair'.

 

the problem is, I signed their terms and conditions, so legally I may not have a leg to stand on. Morally, thats a different matter.
Link to post
Share on other sites
the problem is, I signed their terms and conditions, so legally I may not have a leg to stand on. Morally, thats a different matter.

You have been with us since 2006. haven't you realised yet that T&Cs are always subject to your statutory rights?

 

You are completely protected. It is really just a matter of what evidence you have.

 

Why don't you tell us about that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please explain ... "haven't you realised yet that T&Cs are always subject to your statutory rights?" , I thought if you sign T&Cs you are entering into a contract, regardless of whether they are fair or not, you've agreed to it ?

 

You'll have to excuse me, I just havent had the time to really dig deep into this and see what options I have available.

 

As for the evidence. The only thing I have is a timeline that I logged of all the technical cases I raised with BT, copies of all correspondance between BT and myself, and the ombudsmen and myself.

 

I have screen dumps of the BT online shop where its pushing the Homehub 3 as a good wireless router... (see below)

 

http://www.shop.bt.com/learnmore/bt-branded-products-and-services/new-bt-home-hub-3/

 

And of course you have the annoying adverts of TV thats been pushing the wireless capabilities of it.

 

You buy something based on those ads, not what the terms & conditions say.

 

I will definately follow up with the ASA and Trading Standards tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack... I agree with Rebel and Bankfodder

You have certain rights under these contracts. You don't throw these away at any point.

 

Could I maybe give a bit of advice... Look through BT's advert history etc :-) Dig some stuff up and use it as evidence :-)

YouTube may have some evidence on it :-)

 

Also... SAR BT... Why?

You'll get your technical case notes which you can refer to :-)

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

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

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 years later...

I have a similar situation where I did not get delivery of the BT eqpt. until the day BT said the service was online; (It took two weeks to be delivered which they said was the time allowed to cancel the order) I was not able to set up for 4 days as it was a bank holiday and the phone line was intermittent so after the bank holiday I phoned them and contacted them online (mobile phone) to cancel within the two weeks allowed (Consumer Rights) When it got to the Ombudsman they ruled for BT saying they did not take Consumer Rights into consideration... So I have been left with £670 as a defaulted account 3 months from ordering BT Services, seriously affecting my Credit rating..I am so disappointed as a disabled 71year old pensioner I will now have a black mark on my Credit until I am 77 (if I get there) So it seems it is conceivable to be expected tp pay for services not provide even though the system is intermittent. Now I need to try to sue them if I can.

Link to post
Share on other sites

threads more than 3yrs old

you wont get seen here

start a new thread

 

 

please

 

 

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...