Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • resolvecall are a powerless dca and a dca can never be a bailiff.   go chase that SAR, they only had 30days!!        
    • thread tidied   thats not a PDF.   where does their paperwork state it's a fine please?    
    • Hi, the bank is tesco.    I don't remember ever missing a payment and never had to reinstate the direct debit or anything 
    • 1 The date of infringement? 19.1.19   2 Have you yet appealed to the parking company yet? [Y/N?] Yes   has there been a response? They did respond but pursued the fine by sending letters roughly once a month    have you received a Notice To Keeper? (NTK) [must be received by you between 29-56 days] I honestly can’t remember    what date is on it I don’t remember the date   Did the NTK provide photographic evidence? I seem to recall a photo of my car   3 Did the NTK mention Schedule 4 of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 (PoFA) [Y/N?] Don’t know    4 If you appealed after receiving the NTK, did the parking company give you any information regarding the further appeals process? [it is well known that parking companies will reject any appeal whatever the circumstances] I can’t remember    5 Who is the parking company? Premier park ltd   6. where exactly [Carpark name and town] did you park? Planet ice Gillingham, Gillingham Business Park, Ambley Rd, Gillingham ME8 0PU     I’ve attached the letter I’ve just received after six months of hearing nothing . It’s like they’ve sold the debt onto CST law for them to try.  Unfortunately after all this time I didn’t think I’d ever hear anything more.    thanks in advance for your help    Molliemoo14 …….... in either case scan up bothsides of any letters/tickets in or appeals made out to ONE MULTIPAGE PDF ONLY  
    • to set aside a judgement you must satisfy 2 criteria: have a good reason why you did not receive & act upon the initial claimform and a basic defence as to why you do not owe the debt. ( paperwork wriggles are not a reason as the existing CCJ nulls any paperwork requirement)   should lose, you would be liable not only for your fee (£255), you could also be liable for the claimant legal costs, this could be £100's or more, knowing link and the value of this claim, they might hire a barrister whom are expensive.   IF the set aside is successful (it is only a very short brief hearing) the CCJ is removed from the register and this resits things to as if you had only just received the initial claimform. you can also ask for your fee back from the claimant.   At the same set aside hearing...the judge, or the claimant can immediately set a hearing date for the 'new' claim, whereby you will each have to exchange statements by a set date.   should this not happen, the claimant can latterly request a hearing that will follow the normal small claims process,   The longer they leave it the harder this becomes in regard to statute barring. The issuance of the initial claimform stopped the SB clock, the default judgement - reset it too 6yrs, however the set aside removed the CCJ and the SB clock resumes from the time it stopped - so SB date of 6yrs advances again from last payment or use of the credit as if no claim was ever raised.  
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 4 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Calling Customer Services - the Consumer Rights Directive


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 768 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

Greetings all!

 

I could trawl around the net for the answer to this for a few hrs. However, as you guys are usually clued up on this stuff. I though somebody may like to offer some wisdom for the rest of us.

 

It was my understanding that the the Consumer Rights Directive made using Premium rate numbers a no no for calling "Customer Services" and that these call's should be at no more than "local rate".

 

I can't find the legislation though. Was this just a proposal, or a proper 'unfair business practice' and has anybody got the reference/Act etc.

 

The reason I ask, is that I notice that a number of car hire companies only offer "customer Services" via their reservations numbers which are often premium or service rated e.b. 0870 or 0844.

 

Thanks for your help

 

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks,

 

I know there are sometimes alternatives, but I'm interested in knowing/confirming that there is legislation so your second link is much more valuable.

 

Companies sometimes 'hide' their Customer Services behind something else such that they make a revenue out of you calling to request your consumer rights. So they win even if/when they loose. Company give bad service, then profits from your complaint.... Doesn't seem quite fair. Probably why those who proposed that part of CRD or Consumer Contracts Regulations thought it was a good idea to make companies offer Customer Services at no more than local rate. I feel a letter to one or two CEOs is required to politely ask them to conform. (and ask for my 7p/min extra back :lol:)

 

Thanks again!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to answer my own thread as it were, but this may be useful to others who, after complaining about something, find that they have 'lost' out via phone charges. This is a prohibited business practice. Always check the number your calling and bypass the Service and Premium rate numbers where possible.

 

The legislation is:

 

The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 (SI:2013/3134)

 

Section 41

 

Help-line charges over basic rate

41. (1) Where a trader operates a telephone line for the purpose of consumers contacting the trader by telephone in relation to contracts entered into with the trader, a consumer contacting the trader must not be bound to pay more than the basic rate.

 

(2) If in those circumstances a consumer who contacts a trader in relation to a contract is bound to pay more than the basic rate, the contract is to be treated as providing for the trader to pay to the consumer any amount by which the charge paid by the consumer for the call is more than the basic rate.

 

Complaints about this 'practice' can also be directed via Citizens Advice.

 

There are a few business sectors, e.g. gambling, purchases from vending machines, which are exempt (No idea why??), but I think it's worth proper complaints if anyone finds themselves having to 'pay' to report bad service.

 

There are a few organisations who offer Customer Services via 0800 numbers and wouldn't it great if all had to!

 

Hope this helps

 

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...