Jump to content

You can now change your notification sounds by going to this link https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/index.php?/&app=soundboard&module=soundboard&controller=managesounds

 

You can find a library of free notification sounds in several places on the Internet. Here's one which has a very large selection https://notificationsounds.com/notification-sounds

 

 

BankFodder BankFodder

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • As a former NHS manager in a mental health trust... I agree 100% with the actions recommended by stu007.  And I would make especially clear in your letter(s) of complaint that you are extremely concerned about the whereabouts of any confidential letter that was intended to be sent to you in the handwritten envelope.  (Indeed, the fact that a handwritten envelope addressed to you was used would suggest to me that they definitely had something to send you.  It also sounds a bit odd to me that the envelope was handwritten).   As well as complaining in writing to them, I'd contact the clinical team by 'phone first thing on Monday, explain what's happened and tell them to ensure that any confidential information about you that has been sent to a third party must be recovered immediately, and you want confirmation of that.  Well that's what I'd do - see if others think it a good idea or not.  If that had happened at my trust, heads would roll.   There's another poster on these boards called "think about it".  They're involved (I think) in GP practice management and may have some comments too about patient confidentiality.   Oh - I think I would include a photocopy of the handwritten envelope in my complaint to the trust and the ICO.   (I've got to ask - can you say what trust it is?  Don't say if you don't want to.)
    • Hey, thank you very much again for your replies!   - We go to the branches and ask for business accounts, but as I give them my personal name they register them as sole trader accounts in their systems, regardless of my company name being on the agreement.  Suspended our services for high volume messaging -- that is not explicitly covered in terms and conditions Send us letters referencing wrong terms and conditions that we did not sign Terminate the contract and come with a random balance number. We argue unsuccessfully, but they don't follow up with the requested deadlock letter. Pass our account to Lowell in 2017 I pick the account back up when I notice it is affecting my credit file in 2020 I work on the case for about three weeks and file a complaint with CISAS I give Lowell my contract and they see it is my company's name on it so they pass it back to Vodafone Vodafone wants to settle my account quoting they should not charge me anything on the first place and they offer £250 as a compensation for distress. I mistakenly accept the offer because of confusing wording and thinking that the third party adjudicator was already involved in the case, although they would basically get involved on the later stage.  I make a complaint as per CISAS and try to reverse the settlement in the system and have third party adjudicator having a proper look into my case and hopefully reward me a much fairer compensation for all the damages.    I have made a SAR request with both Vodafone and Lowell so far, but still waiting for the Vodafone to send it.    I am now waiting for CISAS to respond, but because I am still upset how much damage this has caused me I am considering taking them to small claims court.  For that I am researching what are the acts I would have to reference in that case.   Obviously Consumer Rights Act 2015 and then Data Protection Act 2018 and perhaps some acts regarding entering into contractual agreements -- can you help with that maybe?        My main concern at the moment is to how to express claims well in a legal language, because £250 they offered feels just patronizing given that there has been everything clearly written in black and white, yet I have had to go though this damaging and humiliating experience. 
    • Cooling off periods do not apply to faulty items. The cooling off period relates to a distance purchase of an item which is of satisfactory quality. Where an item is faulty then it become subject to the rules under the Consumer Rights Act
    • I understand the cooling off period for online purchases, but this is a little different due to the item being collected/paid in person.    A used item was recently sold by auction on eBay. The seller inspected, paid with cash and collected the item in person.    The buyer is now claiming the item to be faulty.    If this transaction was completely remote and the item posted, I would absolutely expect the buyer to be entitled to a refund.    But as the transaction happened in person would the point of the money changing hands be when the contract is made? Therefore not giving the buyer any cooling off period?   I think this is the key information; Used item Paid in person Working when collected Private sale   Thanks!
    • This article has some useful information on how things are working during the Covid crisis.   https://www.theguardian.com/money/2020/jun/06/a-guide-to-probate-everything-you-need-to-know   HB
  • Our picks

ChrisS1968

Damages claim/accusation of loyalty card abuse

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

My son in law to be has gotten himself in a pickle with his previous employer (Stonegate Pubs Ltd)

When he was employed by them as a barman he had a MORE card, Stonegates version of a clubcard.

 

Now he admits to me that he used to swipe it and collect unclaimed points at the bar and yes he had a few free beers and plates of chips when he was out of work and in one of their pubs but since he left they have come after him with a bill which greatly exceeds what he thinks he should owe.

Now I don't have any idea just what his liability is in this instance.

 

I have attached a copy of the letter he received from BLP  but the one thing I note within the wording is they have used the word "estimate" when arriving at a sum of money. This I am fairly sure wouldn't hold water in court on that alone.

 

Also they claim to have gone through CCTV showing him swiping his own card.

Again, I find it difficult to believe that they would sit through hours of CCTV for what is IMO a trivial matter.

 

If it were me I would treat this much the same way as a private parking fine and let them whistle without contact but being a bit green he has replied to them and although not admitting the full amount he has acknowledged there is a problem.

They are already playing hard ball and insisting in full and final payment!

 

Now would he not be entitled to see a breakdown of their "estimate" and also copies of the incriminating CCTV?

 

Any help greatly appreciated.

 

Chris

 

BLP letter.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ive converted you image to PDF so we can zoom and read.

 

1st..private parking speculative invoices are not fines

 

2nd much the same as above

its a clever letter that doesn't say WILL anything and all these ambulance chasers are doing is trying to line their own pockets with free money that the retailer won't see a penny of.

 

it is safe to ignore them totally.

 

should the RETAILER wish to proceed with this he would get letters from THEM not this bunch of fleecers.

 

please comeback should he, but pigs don't fly!!

 

dx

 


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi DX,

 

Thanks or the reply.

 

The original contact was made by the brewery, he failed to mention this.

 

I will paste the email in below leaving out personal info.

 

From: Stefan Sroczynski <Stefan.Sroczynski@stonegatepubs.com>
Sent: 14 February 2020 10:54
To:
Subject: Fraud Investigation
 

14/02/2020

Dear

In my role as Fraud Manager for Stonegate Pub Company I was carrying out a scheduled visit to your former place of work, The Bloomery in Sheffield. The purpose of my visit was to investigate till transactions that had flagged up on our IntelliQ system in your name regarding MORE card usage in site.

Your name in particular flagged up as it could be seen that a MORE card registered in your name was being scanned on shift with your Zonal till log in. I have a long list of transactions of this happening. I began to align these transactions against CCTV where you can clearly be seen scanning your MORE card in a fraudulent manner, gaining points from customer’s rounds whilst you are on the bar working. I have a large bank of CCTV evidence showing you take your MORE card from your pocket and swiping it on the till whilst on shift.

As you will know this is against many company policies and is not allowed. Gaining points fraudulently and spending them is treated by Stonegate Pub Company in the same way as someone taking cash from the till.

Your card in question (number ********************) has had a lifetime spend of £4126, £3527 of which has been put through on your own till card. This equates to £352.72 of spendable points that have been fraudulently earnt. At time of investigation the remaining balance on the card was £3.37, leaving the fraud total at £349.35. Stonegate will therefore be looking to recover this money plus the costs of the investigation (£177.60) making the total amount payable by you £526.95.

We will give you the opportunity to pay this back to within 14 days of receipt of this email – should you choose not to do so the case will be passed to our partner County Court debt recovery company, Business Loss Prevention Limited who will recover the money on our behalf.

Please contact myself or ER Support (ER.Support@stonegatepubs.com) stating how you would like to proceed.

 

Many Thanks

 

Stefan Sroczynski | Fraud Manager Midlands

Email: stefan.sroczynski@stonegatepubs.com

https://www.justgiving.com/fundraising/StonegateLTC

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another clever letter, intended to put the wind up the recipient.

 

But the devil is in the detail - if your son-in-law doesn't cough up, they threaten to ... get a powerless DCA that can nothing as it's not their debt to, er, send him a letter.  But it'll be a big letter.  That will take ages to open.  

 

He should never have replied and should now start ignoring them. 


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

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can i just say that your son is one of 100's a month that this kind of issue arise.

 

even outside of todays climate, there are no examples of employers taking court action, and, his sum is tiny in comparison to others

shame he responded at all

 

Dx


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again folks for the advice. The general consensus seems to be to ignore this and leave it to them to follow up if they choose to. I guess we;ll just have to wait and see if they are are just out on a punt or if they mean it. If its the second we''ll cross that bridge when we het there.

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they being Stonegate Pub Company

 

they must abide by the Pre action protocol and send a 30 day letter of claim. before they can ever issue a court claim (never seen one)Stonegate Pub Company

 

if you get a letter of claim from a SOLICITOR not powerless BPL who state their client as Stonegate Pub Company comeback here


please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nermina Webster is a solicitor but the company she owns isnt a regulated business so THEY cant act on behalf of Stonegate if it is decided that court is the route to take.

Investigation costs are a moot point- the person doing the work will be employed anyway so unless outside auditors used just for thsi job (for example) they cnat charge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...