89 year old being ripped off-your opinions

trisontana

Damart have got a very poor track-record and have pulled off some very dubious stunts over the years. Last year my wife received what appeared to be a final demand for money from them. On the outside of the envelope were the words (in large red letters) "FINAL REMINDER FROM THE ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT"". This turned out to be reminder that their "special offers" were coming to an end. Over a hundred people complained about this to the ASA and they were censured for this particular ill thought-out mail shot. The MD had to go on television to apologise for causing some much upset to people.

Here is the ASA ruling :-
http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/non_broadcast/Adjudication+Details.htm?adjudication_id=39826

and another one where a complaint was upheld against them :-
http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/non_broadcast/Adjudication+Details.htm?adjudication_id=40613

tee_pee_2

I would write to the local paper even though it is now sorted, co's like that deserve bad publicity, and if it stops one more person getting ripped off by them that's even better.

-=Mr-J=-

moonrakerz wrote:

Don't forget - if you are sent anything you didn't order, you are under no obligation to return it to the sender. Just tell them that you consider the goods to be unsolicited and ask them to arrange collection. If they don't, the goods beome yours after 6 months. Very useful for book and music clubs who keep sending stuff after you have cancelled !
See :- The Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971, (as amended)

The 6 month rule is only applicable for goods recieved before 01-Nov-2000, any unsolicited goods received now automatically get treat as a gift from the sender - for you to do what you like with.

In the OPs case, the 89-year old ordered the goods, so they were not unsolicited.

hollydays

thanks trisontana-the more people that are told how this company operates the better.They were so unbelievably rude when i rang them-as you say their tactics towards their target (old people) is despicable

Cactus_Jack

I'm glad that it worked out okay. These companies are scum preying on the old like that. Sounds like a right scumbag on the phone too if she/he couldn't put a refund through or whatever for an elderly lady. If I worked there I'd do it even if we weren't supposed to. What is with some people?

trisontana

Yet again Damart have been censured by the ASA for their very questionable practices and misleading mail-shots. Details here:-

http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/non_broadcast/Adjudication+Details.htm?Adjudication_id=41029

and here:-

http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/non_broadcast/Adjudication+Details.htm?Adjudication_id=41028

When will this company realize that they are alienating potential customers using tricks like this. They are going to lose trade when people get fed up with all the stuff they keep sending. After that fake "final warning" we received from them last year I made it plain to them we would never buy anything from them again, and to take us of their mailing list . So far we haven't received any more from them , thank God.

hollydays

agree........

Elmer_Dudd

DAMART.

I have just found out that Damart have sold on my great aunts details to a number of dubious companies who have ben bombarding her with junk mail stating she has 'won a bed' and a firm in Toronto ,Canada asking her for £20 admin fee as she has 'Won' £5000.

Damart should be ashamed of themselves.
They themselves have an elderly target clientbase and should know better than passing these details on to such parasites.

Elmer

trisontana

Once again Damart have been censured by the ASA for a misleading mail-shot. Why does this long established company have to resort to tricks like this? Are their goods so bad that this is the only way they can sell the stuff?

You can read the ASA ruling here:-

http://www.asa.org.uk/asa/adjudications/Public/TF_ADJ_42127.htm

trisontana

Toots wrote:

Dear all,

Perhaps when we put threads on this site about companies we should always put the name of the company in the title line. That way if anyone does look for details of the company on the net, the thread will get thrown up and then there's a chance that they will find out about them and avoid them like the plague.

What does anyone think to this? This is the way I managed to find out about the Vitamail scammers.

Toots

I agree . It's much easier to find a thread if the company name is in the title.