Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice is change. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been reading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. On mediation form you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee that you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.  
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
    • I am sure the resident experts will give you a comprehensive guide to your rights.  The responsibility lies with the retailer. I have dealt with Cotswold before for similar. And found them refreshingly helpful.   Even when I lost the receipt for one item I had bought in Inverness. The manager in Newcastle called the store. Found the transaction and gave me a full refund. 
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
      • 160 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
  • Recommended Topics

Supanet final payment


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1754 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

Hi all. My daughter signed up with supanet 18 months ago on a 2 year contract. Something I was horrified to hear because they are the only company I know that are promoting 2 year contracts!! It's obvious why though as they can't keep customers any other way.

 

Anyway, she is moving house and has taken my advise to cancel and just pay the fee but supanet have told her that the only way to pay is via a text message link that has been sent to her for something called go2pay.

 

Now me being the suspicious character I am I wanted her to pay by a traceable means. Neither I or anyone I know has ever heard of go2pay and I don't trust it or supanet for that matter. I've read plenty of horror stories about people being chased for fictitious unpaid bills with this company.

 

Anyone advise where she stands with this? Is she entitled to demand a different payment method?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the links. I've already read 2 of them from ispreview. Quite frankly it's shocking that this company still exists.

 

That link about go2pay is quite worrying and further reinforces my opinion that my daughter should not use it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can  payment not be made online or by phone ?

 

Are they charging an early exit fee for not completing the 2 years ?

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does she have a online account and can payment be made through the portal ?

 

https://myaccount.supanet.com/login

 

 

12.9 If notice is given to terminate the Contract before the end of any relevant Contract Minimum Period (except where notice is given by Supanet in accordance with condition 12.5 or 12.6 or by you in accordance with condition 12.3) then you are required to pay us compensation for ending your Contract early. The amount of compensation you must pay (referred to as an Early Termination Charge) will not be more than the Charges you would have paid for the Service(s) during the remainder of the Contract Minimum Period (assuming you would have used the Service(s) to the minimum extent contractually possible during this period) less any costs that we are able to save as a result of the early termination, including any cost savings made as a result of us not having to provide the Service(s). Full details of how this charge is calculated is in the Price List, which can be found at www.supanet.com/info. 12.10 You may, in addition to the Early Termination Charge, be required to pay a Cease Charge in respect of any broadband service, details of which are set out in the broadband Service Terms.

 

 

https://www.supanet.co.uk/documents/supanet-residential-terms-and-conditions.pdf

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Luna and Welcome to the Forum.

 

So it looks like your limited on payment options ....Im sure if you spoke customer services and requested an alternative payment option they wouldn't refuse your payment.

I take it this is for Broadband services at your current address and your happy to pay the penalty fee to exit early from the contract ?

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have already asked for other payment methods but they say that that is the only way they do things, we more than happy to pay the penalty fee to exit early just dont want to do it over this pay2go as it is not a reliable method 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmmmm wonder how their customers with no internet or mobile app go on with regards to payments ?

 

Have you got it in writing that they refused ?

 

Point 7.4 of their T&Cs....

 

7.4 You agree to pay the Charges by Direct Debit or by debit/credit card. For payments made other than by Direct Debit additional charges may apply. These charges are set out in our Price List.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Andyorch said:

Mmmmmm wonder how their customers with no internet or mobile app go on with regards to payments ?

My thoughts exactly. I know most people have internet these days but it's a dangerous game to assume that everybody does!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Point 7.4 of their T&Cs....

 

7.4 You agree to pay the Charges by Direct Debit or by debit/credit card. For payments made other than by Direct Debit additional charges may apply. These charges are set out in our Price List.

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Andyorch said:

For payments made other than by Direct Debit additional charges may apply. These charges are set out in our Price List.

Isn't this just stating that they can accept other payment methods though but there may be additional charges?

 

We're not concerned with paying via debit card, just the method they are use to collect and process the payment with no alternative options

Link to post
Share on other sites

I appreciate that I was just making the point as per their T&Cs and no mention of go2pay...so it must be possible

  • Like 1

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

update on the whole supanet saga,

we have been emailing back and forth to attempt to resolve this situation and find a suitable payment method

 

this weekend I found that supanet had just taken a larger sum of money from my daughters bank account, even though the direct debit had been cancelled.

 

I advised her to go to the bank and request the money is returned to her under the direct debit guarantee as the amount was disputed and they had taken £197.98 instead of £162.50.

 

The bank have informed her that it wasn't taken by direct debit, it was a card transaction from a card that was used for a one off payment some time ago!!!

 

The bank have given her a number to ring to resolve this. I

have told her to report the transaction as fraudulent as supanet have clearly held card details without authorization and used them!

 

I am assuming the next logical step would be a complaint to ombudsman services and to report supanet for fraudulently charging a card without authorization.

 

Thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

CCP ...continuous card payments.....did you cancel this ?

 

https://www.fca.org.uk/news/news-stories/continuous-payment-authorities-it-your-right-cancel

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for replying, it wasn't a continuous card payment it was a one off as all bills were paid via direct debit.

 

There was never an agreement for continuous card payments to be set up so supanet should not have had any authority to take an additional card payment.

 

My daughter has just messaged me saying that the card payment is going to be reversed by the bank and they'll have the payment back by tomorrow by 6pm. They have also been advised to take the matter to the ombudsman and make a complaint to trading standards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've just tried to complain via the ombudsman service but apparently we either need a deadlock letter which supanet have already tried to suggest they do not issue, or it needs to be 8 weeks from the original complaint and it's only been 3.

 

Looks like I can't escalate the complaint yet but I am sure trading standards will be happy to hear about supanets abuse and misuse of debit card details.

 

I used to enjoy this complaining lark, I'm starting to get that buzz all over again!!😂

Link to post
Share on other sites

supanet has failed to mitigate the debt and as they have refused other payment methods then the debt is no longer due.

This means your daughter should be in no hurry to settle this as they are starting from a position where nothing is owed to them, thanks to their own T&C's ( and consumer law)

The fact they refuse to send a deadlock letter whislt also refusing to engage will go against them. She might want to inform the Ombudsman (and OFCOM)of this refusal to engage

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK thanks for that information. I am not up to date with consumer laws as many things seem to change rapidly these days but that is certainly good news.

Based on that though surely them helping themselves to money from a bank card they have no rights to use is just plain theft and fraud??

 

Hopefully TS will shed more light on this when they speak to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...