Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have a problem, a serious one. On mid November 2023 my boiler (installed 10/21) failed and flagged up the code 29.10: blocked flue. The EB engineer came out and replaced the fan, said it was unusual, put it down to storms. On 16/12/23 the same thing happened. Another WB engineer came 18/12/23 and fixed it, but said it isn't the boiler, it is the flue, and that he would mend it this time under the guarantee but they would not do that again if it failed unless I got the installers to reinstal it. On 27/12 it failed again. 29.10. I did not call them because of their saying I would have to pay. I contacted the installers who responded, then stopped when they saw the WB report of 18/12. By February I had had no central heating or hot water since Christmas, so I posted a job for a heating engineer to give an opinion on the flue installation. He found the flue blocked with vegetation from the trees my neighbour planted near the wall, and which I have been desperate to get uprooted. He gave a report and photos, and agreed the flue needed reinstalling. I got nothing from the original installers, so I contacted the Gas Safe Register. They sent an inspector, who gave a full report and had the original installers down and they reinstalled the flue as instructed, and notified LA Building Regulations.   On Friday I received a certificate from the Gas Register saying the reinstallation of the flue had  been carried out by a registered heating engineer.  It was from the installers, and the certificate does say that it is 'not conclusive evidence' and they had notified the local authority Building Regulations on my behalf.  As I only received it Friday, I have not yet pursued it. On Thursday, as the installers said they had reinstalled and there was nothing wrong with the flue installation, and that the boiler was not working, I wrote to WB and asked them to come and repair the boiler.   During all this time I have been in contact with various people, including Citizens Advice.  I had hoped they would refer it to the Trading Standards because you cannot contact Trading Standards yourself.  I am hoping they will.  I have other serious issues to deal with.  I don't think elderly people are helped as much as they should be.   I had an email from them Friday - yesterday - demanding I deposit £200 with them before they come down to repair it. I told them I query that, and said I will consult on my consumer rights, sending copies of that to all concerned. This is their response: Thank you for your email. The £200.00 is reserved to ensure the work has been completed correctly – in the case where remedial work has been resolved, no charge will be taken. This is due to the amount of calls we have reattended in the past where remedial work has been said to have been completed but hasn’t been. If the issues detailed in the report from our previous visit have been issued, the money will not process and will simply go from reserved back to the customers account without ever leaving it. Under our Terms and Conditions: 6.1 Assignment and Subcontracting. We may at any time and without any notice to you assign, transfer, charge, subcontract or deal in any other manner with all or any of our rights or obligations under these Terms. You may only transfer your rights or your obligations under these Terms to another person with our prior written consent, which we will not unreasonably withhold or delay. Please refer to our website for full terms and conditions." Can they demand the money up front like this?   It is a week's state pension.  Would anyone give a whole week's pay for something which should be under guarantee?  I can copy and paste the various reports I have had from Worcester Bosch, including the one of 10/2021 when it was installed and failed 24 hours later.  The boiler worked until November 2023.  Also, I cannot understand the terms and conditions, because the boiler was given under the ECO3 scheme.  I have been on disability benefit - DLA - since 1992 and I don't remember signing anything with Worcester Bosch.  I am not sure if I am allowed to attach all the correspondence here.  It will take time, because the page keeps being unresponsive and I have to keep clicking 'wait'
    • for how many weeks/months/years have you been using it twice a week for...roughly?   she will have to request a new card, it wont be reissued or sent back to her if it was retained by the inspector.  
    • Liz Truss says Tories are part of a Blairite attempt to silence her. Reform UK leader Richard Tice said the Conservative Party is 'socialist' and suggested Rishi Sunak is not a 'real conservative'.   .. says the definitely NOT real Conservatives   Lets also hope that Starmer implements a clause where bringing the UK into disrepute, or breaching the requirements of ex UK PMs results in the permanent withdrawal of ALL UK taxpayer funding of them    
    • let 'em get on with it. they nor you have actually read what consequences under CONC mentioned in our SB letter mean under the law. dx  
  • 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
      • 161 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

Letter from Retail loss prevention now Scott & Mears


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 136 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

Advice please.

Letter received from RLP stating that they have proof of a family member scanning cheaper bar codes on a self scan till. Family member was recently challenged in store, denied the incident and left the store abandoning all shopping, verbally advised that they’re never to return. Police were not called.

They have not returned to the store since but have now received a letter stating that previous visits (can only assume they used the loyalty card to identify the person) have shown that they have proof of 20 plus till receipts with reduced items. Family member has admitted to me that they have on occasions used a cheaper barcode but they don’t believe it to be as often as they’re stating. 

Family member is worried sick but more so that they’re unsure if the store will report to the police( incident in store happened 3 weeks ago), letter received 1 week after. Family member replied to letter from DLP by email disputing the claim but said they would consider paying a reduced fee to avoid further letters (they regret replying now but panicked). The company responded requesting an offer is put to them for consideration. They have provided as estimate value per transition ie £40 each transaction plus all their additional charges.

When would it be likely that the store would report the incident to the police?  

It likely they have evidence if they’ve been able to provide RLP with online receipts.

Should they block emails and ignore any further correspondence?

Or pay?  

If they pay do some of the funds go back to the store so they’re reimbursed financially?

 

Family member is very remorseful and this has given them the shock they needed not to do this again.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

moved to the RLP forum.

 

ignore everything

 

shame they gave them a bone!!

 

nothing they nor anyone can do to her

 

type in RLP in our search top right and get reading up!!

 

its a scam.

 

dx

 

 

 

  • Like 1

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

Thank you for your reply. 
 

I have researched RLP forums and can see that the advice is to ignore.

 

I can’t see any posts where someone has responded to them and gave them anything to go on and to then ignore them.  Would she be in more trouble for doing this?

 

Is it likely that the store have reported and provided the Police with CCTV following her being stopped by the store manager?  My family member is feeling very unwell with worry and has considered presenting herself at the police.

 

Shes not able to state how often or do what value of goods that she has been deceitful with but at times she was visiting the store daily.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LottieLouLou said:

 

I can’t see any posts where someone has responded to them and gave them anything to go on and to then ignore them.  Would she be in more trouble for doing this? - nope!!

 

Is it likely that the store have reported and provided the Police with CCTV following her being stopped by the store manager?  

My family member is feeling very unwell with worry and has considered presenting herself at the police. - no police cant now be involved ever, store wont waste 100s hours trawling CCTV. FORGET ABOUT IT.

 

Shes not able to state how often or do what value of goods that she has been deceitful with but at times she was visiting the store daily.  - so what!!

 

 

as we do with most of the shopliftin threads,... best to go see her doctor...it's a cry for help..

 

trust me ignore everything do nothing forget about it.

 

dx

 

  • Thanks 1

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

I have shared your response with my family member.  

 

She has stated that RLP have informed her that their client has CCTV footage that puts her at the self service tills and have linked them to the debit card transactions where there are numerous items shown as reduced.  The same reduced barcode for a small value was used each time.

 

It is likely that they may have already trawled through the CCTV before stopping her.  Is it likely that they may still involve the Police with the evidence they have? They did not detain her on the day she was stopped.

Link to post
Share on other sites

police were not involved at the time, so cannot now, nor would they ever have been interested in the 1st place in getting involved.

seriously, they, as the store are only interested in the organised gangs that carry out mass shoplifting to fund further criminal acts.

 

members of joe public, even if they confess to multiple previous events or even if multiple events might be prevalent, are not on stores' radar, it does the stores no favour at all, to compound, what is probably understood through decades of dealing them, to take things further. it's hoped it's dealt with by the person with their family or professional help like a GP.  they recognise it's a cry for help.

 

please, totally ignore the very cleverly worded letters people like RLP and DWF send out, if read their letters CAREFULLY, you'll actually see , just like letters you get from DCA's, that they never say WILL anywhere....every other word BUT that one.

 

it's a scam, the retailers dont see a penny of anything you pay RLP/DWF, their staff run straight down the pub, just like a DCA does if you pay them ANYTHING.

 

tell her to move on..

 

dx

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

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

  • 6 months later...

whatever she has now got from RLP IGNORE IT!

thread re opened.

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

The letter she has received now is from a company called Scott & Mears, this is following receipt of numerous text messages and other letters from them.

They have stated that this is the last opportunity to pay the debt at 75% of the value.  

Otherwise their client will consider legal action. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

my dog considers sitting.

just another bunch of powerless chancers hoping their letter finds a mug 

look them up here.

thread title updated

report the txts to spam 7726.

dx

 

  • Thanks 1

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Letter from Retail loss prevention now Scott & Mears
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...