Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Your page numbers should run through your WX and exhibits so im concerned its page x of 9.
    • Paragraph 18 – you are still talking about Boston stolen items. About time this was fixed??? Paragraph 19  In any event, the claimant's PS5 gaming device was correctly declared and correctly valued. The defendant accepted it for carriage and was even prepared to earn extra money by selling sell insurance in case of its loss or damage. New paragraph 20 – this the defendant routinely sells insurance in respect of "no compensation" items (a secondary contract contrary to section 72 CRA 2015) new paragraph above paragraph 20 – the defendant purports to limit its liability in respect of lost or damaged items. This is contrary to section 57 of the consumer rights act 2015. The defendant offers to extend their liability if their customer purchases an insurance cover for an extra sum of money. This insurance is a secondary contract calculated to exclude or limit their liability for the defendants contractual breaches and is contrary to section 72 of the consumer rights act 2015. New paragraph below paragraph 42 – the defendant merely relies on "standard industry practice" You haven't pointed to the place in your bundle of the Telegraph newspaper extract. You have to jiggle the paragraphs around. Even though I have suggested new paragraph numbers, the order I have suggested is on your existing version 5. You will have to work it out for your next version. Good luck!   Let's see version 6 Separately, would you be kind enough to send me an unredacted to me at our admin email address.
    • UK travellers have been turned away at airports because their passports are not valid for EU travel.View the full article
    • i think theres been MORE than amble evidence of that and am astonished that criminal proceedings haven't begun.
    • Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be: 1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment) 2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)
  • 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

Vodafone - Lost SIM - requested replacement but never received.


salimnina
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1099 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,

 

I am with Vodafone, I lost my SIM and requested it over the phone twice, but after a month I have not received it. I complained to them, and all I am getting are emails requesting me to fill out forms to pass security checks first in order to look into the matter.

 

I cancelled my payment and I want to end my early contract for their failure to provide me with a SIM.

 

I sent them a letter today with 7 days to reply or take the matter with the Ombudsman.

 

I am wondering if there is any ground for ending the contract for their failure to provide me with the SIM.

 

If not, can I request compensation for the loss of usage and being without a phone for more than a month now.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Failure to provide you with the same is excellent grounds for ending the contract. If you have given the reasonable notice that you need a new seven and they have failed to provide it then they have effectively deprived you of the entire purpose of the contract and that amounts to, what is known in law, as a – fundamental breach. This effectively can terminate the contract.

The big problem is that Vodafone don't recognise this kind of reasonable behaviour or the legal rules. As you have stopped your payment, you can be certain that Vodafone will go into debt collection mode and will blight you and eventually blight your credit file.

Make sure that you have got everything in writing. Don't rely on phone calls unless you have recorded them. Read our customer services guide.

Before you fall out with Vodafone completely, get your PAC code – go to GiffGaff and get a Sim card there and transfer your number there. GiffGaff is probably the best as they are monthly and you could alter your monthly contract to suit your usage month by month and you can leave anytime you want.

Be careful about Vodafone. They are like dinosaurs and they are more interested in crushing you then providing a decent service.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that there was now a website link where you simply clicked and entered your number and got a PAC code

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-48816459

 

I see, you're saying that as you can't access your text, you can't retrieve a PAC code.

How about going online? Surely if you go to the Vodafone website you will be able to access your account

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I took the matter further and this is what's happening,

 

I am getting an adjudicator to decide on it, but Vodafone argues that I do not exist because of data protection the information does not match, this is because I moved address and they did not update it accordingly, obviously to use it as an excuse, so bellow is what i received :

 

++++++++++++++++++

 

 

We are contacting you regarding CEDR Resolution Centre Case: 6.....

The adjudicator has reviewed and upheld the company’s objection to this application for adjudication.

The adjudicator has provided the following comments:

"I have reviewed the company’s objection under Rule 2.2.1.

 

Rule 2.2.1 details that a case cannot be dealt with by the Scheme where it is “brought by someone who does not fall within the definition of a ‘customer’ under Rule 1.5”.

 

Rule 1.5, in turn, states that a ‘customer’ is “an individual, or business with no more than 10 employees, who receives communication services from the company”.

 

The company appear to submit that the claimant is a customer, but object as it cannot satisfy its DPA requirements.

 

I have reviewed the claimant’s application. I note the claimant’s evidence, where they have provided a message sent from the company’s customer relations email dated 5 October 2020, which includes the claimant’s account number.

 

I find this is satisfactory to show that the claimant is a customer under Rule 1.5.

 

However, though DPA checks do not form part of the CISAS eligibility criteria, I do find it may be useful if additional evidence (such a bill or contract) could be provided, showing the claimant’s details as specified by the company, addressed to the claimant.

 

Therefore, at this stage I will be upholding the objection, to allow the claimant an opportunity to provide this information.

 

However, as mentioned above, I do not find Rule 2.2.1 applicable, therefore, irrespective of the customer’s comments, the claim can proceed in regards to Rule 1.5.

 

Lastly, I take this opportunity to note that CISAS is an evidence-based Scheme and it is for the customer to show their case is eligible, particularly when challenged by the company. Seyi Fowles, In-House Adjudicator."

The customer is welcome to provide comments to be considered by the adjudicator before their decision to reject the application is confirmed. These comments must be submitted within the next 10 working days.

Kind regards,

Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution
70 Fleet Street, London, EC4Y 1EU, United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)20 7520 3814

 

 

I need to respond and I need help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Well done and thanks for concluding your topic......title updated.

 

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

  • Andyorch changed the title to Lost SIM - requested but never received ***Resolved***
  • 3 months later...

Hi,

Previously I thought I won the case against Vodafone, they agreed to give me £250 credit in my account and send me the SIM within a month back in November 20,

 

however I have been battling this since then, they are dragging me, claiming that they sent the SIM, but I did not receive it, even though I involved CEDR for this, who they helped me to settle the matter,

 

they are not interested in making a non compliance case, in other words, after three months of a final settlement, they did not send me the SIM, and they are charging me for the service ...

 

Here is my previous topic, that I thought was resolved:

The question now is, can I just cancel and not use Vodafone even if they send me the SIM? I mean I have been without a SIM for six months now.

 

Can they take me to court for this? and charge me early termination fees?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Threads merged for you

 

voda won't do court no.

if they think there is a debt they'll sell it on eventually.

 

so vodafone are still charging you for an account with no active sim on it? Amazing!!

 

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

Start off by sending them on SAR. It's important to gather as much information as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no downside to getting an SAR. It's completely free of charge. They have a statutory duty to provide it and all you have to do is send in the letter and/or email. They are legally obliged to disclose you all the information they hold on you and in view of the situation, it can provide some useful material.

An SAR is always a good starting point – especially with people like Vodafone.

You should send the SAR today

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vodafone are like dinosaurs. And once they start to get things wrong, they lumber on and just pile error on error – as you are finding out.

One thing they get very good at though is smashing up your credit file and blighting your credit record and going into debt collection mode and generally smashing up your life.

The best thing to do I'm afraid is to continue making payments until it is sorted out. Make sure they have it in writing from you though that they are making a mistake and that the payments are being made under protest.
We will help you get your money back and also some compensation.

The key to this will be information gathering, careful preparation. patience.

You ask what will be the worst situation if you cancel the contract without making further payments. I'm afraid to say that what I've described above is not only the worst situation – it's the only situation.

If you can afford it then keep on making the payments – but make sure that they have got a record of the fact that you are telling them that they are completely wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just looked back at this thread. I don't really know why it's gone on for so long except that you seem to take considerable gaps in coming back – even though you may think that you have a solution.

I don't at all understand what the adjudicator has said. It sounds like a load of gobbledygook.

What I do understand is that apparently you made a complaint and you were awarded £250 and Vodafone undertook to send you a new Sim. You haven't received the SIM but they're still charging you

Have you received a £250?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The £250 were applied as a credit in my account, in which I have two numbers, including the one I have not received the SIM for, in other words, they used the credit money to cover for the costs of both line, this is the decision that we all agreed through CEDR, but they failed to send the SIM once again, they claim that they had sent it already, and now they are saying that I will be getting in the next few days.

 

I wanted to make a fresh claim through CEDR for a non compliance case, but they are not interest, and are just saying that Vodafone will send a SIM in due course.

 

Vodafone  are charging me even for not using the service.

 

Do I have a good leg to stand and void the contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid this is all a bit of a muddle for me.

You have just suggested in your most recent post that there are two lines – that you have two numbers but as far as I can see you haven't mentioned this at all since you started this discussion.

Secondly, I had understood that the £250 was being paid to you by way of compensation – but now I understand that it is being used to pay the charges which have been incurred in respect of a Sim card which was never provided to you. Is this correct?
If this is correct, then this is not compensation. This is basically Vodafone sticking by their stories that you had a valid Sim card and that they were right to charge you for it and that they are now giving you money with their left hand and taking it back with their right hand to settle a bill which should never have existed in the first place.

Where is the compensation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, let me recap, just in case if I confused you a bit.

 

I ordered a SIM in August, the one I lost, when I called them, they said no worries in no time you will get it, and they also advised me to merge my second number that I had with them into one account, rather than two separate  accounts.

 

weeks went by and no sign of a SIM, I complained, then I took the matter to CEDR.

 

We both agreed to settle the matter with £250 payment ( covers £60 past credit for line rental from Sept till Nov ) and they said that it will be a credit applied into my account, technically I will have £190 credit )

 

Initially I thought it was payment, but it appeared that it was credit, which I did not mind.

 

Now I was supposed to get the SIM within 20 days from 16/11/20, till today nothing received.

 

The credit I was given was used to pay for my bill, that was merged.

 

When  I called them last week to find out about my bill, they said that I have to make payment for both lines, this suggest that the £190 credit has been used.

 

The compensation was awarded as a credit.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So we're still in a position where you've been incurring charges for a same which you have not had and the so-called compensation payment has been applied to that.

Does this mean that you are up to date on all your accounts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I don't know if someone else can help – but I'm still a little bit confused.

You had to telephone numbers/Sim cards

You lost one Sim card and you asked for a replacement.

They failed to send you a replacement but kept on charging you for the monthly subscription



Eventually you complained and you won.

You were awarded £250 and Vodafone agreed to send you a new Sim card.

However, this second Sim card never arrived. Despite that Vodafone have still been charging you for this service.

The "win" that you had wasn't really a win because Vodafone would not ordered to remove the charges that they had unfairly applied to your account. Instead, the £250 which they were meant to pay to you was applied to the backlog.

Where is the decision which orders Vodafone to pay the £250?

Also, I asked you if your account was presently up to date and you haven't responded to this

 

also, in all of this confusion, it's not clear to me if it has been agreed by anyone that you haven't received the Sim card.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...