Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm afraid you won't get a complaint drafted before tomorrow morning - and I think most others here think it would be a waste of time anyway and that the police decision won't change.  I would ask for a review and make a complaint on principle, but I suspect you are better off concentrating your effort on your other thread and direct complaint against Aviva.   Unless you are out of the country for an extended period I'd wait until your return before considering futrther whwther to complain about the police.   [ By the way, just so that you don't mislead yourself as it's a mistake many people make, ALL agreements are "verbal" in that they are composed of words.  Some agreements are in writing and others are oral, spoken or vocal.  The law recognises oral or spoken agreements just as much as ones that are written down.  The only practical difference is that oral agreements can be difficult to prove in a dispute]
    • Just to add there is a scheme called the Victim's Right to Review.  It basically applies to decisions made by the CPS not to go ahead with a prosecution.  It doesn't apply to decisions made by local police forces, but it does say:   19.  Decisions that are not eligible for VRR include: ... iii where the police or other investigator exercises their independent discretion not to investigate or not to investigate a case further (whether in consultation with the CPS or not) and the CPS have not been requested / have been unable to make a final decision to charge. Requests for review of such decisions should instead be addressed to the relevant police force/other investigator; [My bold] Victims' Right to Review Scheme | The Crown Prosecution Service WWW.CPS.GOV.UK   I'm not familiar with the scheme so can't advise - but other posters here may know about it or have experience of it.  You need to read the above link but note that it talks about things that seem to fit your situation.   eg a victim is defined as ‘a person who has made an allegation that they have suffered harm, including physical, mental or emotional harm or economic loss which was directly caused by criminal conduct’.   If you have not already requested that the police review their decision not to pass the case onto the CPS, then I would do so.  If you are not happy with the outcome of that, complain.   I can't advise you definitely to go ahead and ask for a review or complain, but if I were in your situation that is what I would do.  But I tend to agree with BankFodder that you'll get nowhere and, if you are sick and tired of all this and just want it to go away, then just drop the police.  However, if you don't try...   [Apologies for the italic typeface/font - it's the above link causing it.  The italics should have stopped at the end of the third para above ending ' ... criminal conduct'.  I can't change it.  Very annoying]
    • @Manxman in exile I eloped to get with my husband si my husband and siblings never sat together in the same room .   Hes claiming a verbal agreement was made but a verbal agreement doesn't hold any water in the eyes of the law..no agreement was made I was in Leeds with my toddler.    He has made use of the policy , had the luxury of the insurance and reversed the money back and now Aviva are coming after me.   You've summed it up well is there anyone in the group that can help me draft the complaint to the police as I'm flying out first thing tomorrow and my head is all over the place.   My husband me Mr z , my late father and eldest brother were at this meeting supposedly when the verbal agreement was made but yet the officer took a statement off the eldest brother and didn't take it off the husband and based the final decision on the eldest brothers statement and Mr Z and all other evidence which is in written form has been completely dismissed    I'm fighting it all alone coming from an Asian background I am getting taunts and salt is bring rubbed on my wounds its not been a pleasant experience yo say the least trying to prove my innocence and having to listen to the b******* being spouted out by everyone whilst Mr Z is walking away not guilty 
    • I would complain to the police - even if I thought it would go nowhere.  I can't see that you have anything to lose.   I can't tell you the grounds of your complaint because I don't know the details of everything that has happened (you know better than I do)  and because I've found much of the story too difficult to follow.     But - based on everything you have told us - it seems to me that your brother has clearly committed fraud by obtaining the benefit of an insurance policy by falsely misrepresenting that he was opening the policy on your behalf and also by falsely misrepresenting himself - or a third party - as being your husband.  If your brother could not have taken out that policy without making those misrepresentations, then he has committed fraud.  It doesn't matter whether the victim was Aviva or you  and it doesn't matter if the victim realises they've been defrauded or not - the police should investigate it properly.  In this case you are the ultimate victim of the fraud because Aviva are saying that you owe them for the premiums on the policy your brother fraudulently took out, so whether Aviva consider they were the victims of fraud or not is irrelevant - they don't care because you end up as the fall guy.  Point out that this may have ended in a civil dispute over a debt between you and Aviva, but that that debt directly arises as a result of your brother's fraud in claiming to be acting on your behalf and by impersonating your brother.   One of the reasons the police seem to have dropped this case (and this needs to be one of your main grounds of complaint I think) is that they have accepted without question your brother's statement that your husband was somehow involved or in some way agreed to your brother taking this policy out in your name, and the police have simply and uncritically accepted your brother's word on that without ever speaking to your husband, who would vigourously deny it.    (I can't make any better suggestion than that because, to be honest, I don't follow what has happened.  If you never authorised your brother to open this insurance policy at all then I don't understand why the police would place any importance at all on your husband being present at a meeting with your brother.  What did your husband's presence have to do with the insurance policy?  Even if he had been at such meeting (which you say he denies) then how could he authorise anything on your behalf?  None of it makes any sense to me and I can't see why the police would think it did.)   Challenge the police to explain to you why they believe there is insufficient evidence to pass this on to the CPS   I would follow the published complaints procedure of the police force in question and I would also send a copy to your local Police and Crime Commissioner.   I think the main problem here is that (despite what the nice woman PC may have suggested to you) the police have never considered you to be the victim.  You need to demonstrate to them via your complaint that you are the victim here.   One other question: is your husband and are your family supporting you through this, or are you going it alone?
    • The number of firms going bust in September was at its highest since March 2020.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

BT refusing to replace malfunctioning router - SOGA?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5110 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

I work for a charity (http://www.ucandoit.og.uk) which teaches people with disabilities how to use computers.

 

One of my students has been having real problems with his BT Voyager 210 router. It seems to run very hot, and then disconnects from the internet.

 

According to my bt voyager 210 adsl router keeps on disconnecting - The Scream! lots of people have been having problems similar to my student's.

 

Since my student is blind this is a huge problem for him, as it's difficult for him to tell when the router has disconnected.

 

I spoke to BT today and they refused to replace the router as it is out of the year long warranty they provide. The warranty ran out in July.

 

Does anyone know if I have my student has any statutory rights which mean that he can get a new router out of BT? It seems to me that the Sale of Good Act would mean that the router should be "fit for purpose" and should work for more than 14 months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is - is this BT saying no or just the person on the other end of the phone.

 

I would write to bt using your charity headed paper and you might just find you get a completely different answer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a very good point - but does anyone know if there are any laws, such as SOGA, that cover this sort of thing?

 

IF BT don't respond to the letter, I'm sure a number of papers would find this story very interesting...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the gentleman you represent pay for the router, or was it provided free with a fixed term contract?

 

If the first then you can argue the product is not fit for purpose under the Sale of Goods Act.

 

If the second, you're arguing the product is not fit for purpose under the Supply of Goods and Services Act.

 

Bear in mind that if you write to them on behalf of your client you make sure you are representing him as a litigation friend and that it is a consumer dispute, just to avoid any confusion about the consumer status of the customer.

 

David

Here to help!

 

Good with employment, disability and welfare/benefit questions :rolleyes:

Just ask!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply David. The router was provided free with a fixed-term contract (which may still be in place; not sure if it was a year or 18 months), so I'll write to them with reference to the SoGaSA (I love acronyms!)

 

And thanks for the advice about clarifying the status of my client.

 

I'll keep you posted!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Keep in mind they will be looking to renew this contract shortly, feel free to point that out to them in any future contact..

And the lord said "come forth and i shall grant you eternal life" I came fifth and got a toaster!!!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so you all know, I've now written to BT demanding a new router/repair under the SoGaSA. It turns out that my student is in contract until January next year! I haven't had a reply back from BT yet but I will give them the benefit of the doubt and assume things have been messed up by the postal strike.

 

It's a good point about mentioning the forthcoming renewal (or otherwise) of the contract. I'm still not sure whether I just want to get the end result sorted, or whether I'm up for a proper fight whereby I try and get BT to stick to the law and admit that they're sticking to the law...

Link to post
Share on other sites

i ended up with some new home phones aswell...bless them.. Dont forget BT vision and anything else you see in the bt shop.. push them, i did

And the lord said "come forth and i shall grant you eternal life" I came fifth and got a toaster!!!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

SUCCESS! I went to see my student last night, and he had a brand new replacement router, sent out to him by BT. I also had a call from them on my answerphone.

 

What's irritating about this, though, is the number of people who don't know the law and who would have just taken BT on their word and paid for a new router. I think it's time that the law is changed, so that BT are legally bound to train their staff to be aware of the SOGA and SOGASA. But I doubt that will happen in the near future...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it is a case of not training them, but more a case of trying to get away with it as often as possible due to the consumer not knowing his rights. Those that persist usually get there in the end. More action needs to be taken against companies who do this, then and only then may the consumer get satisfactory service at the first point of calling.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether their staff know about the law (and are told not to respond when the law is mentione) or they don't know about the law (because they aren't told about it and, in BT's case at least, because they live in India, they would have no reason to know about it), I think it's time that legislation is passed which enforces corporations to go to "reasonable lengths" to work within the law, rather than just trying to shirk it like they do now.

 

The whole point of the law, at least in theory, is to protect less powerful people and institutions against more powerful people and institutions, so I think it should be put to work in this case: kind of like the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Act, which has led to so many people getting their bank charges back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...