Mobiles.co.uk cashback problems

Quentin

Beware - the rep won't like it if you refer to his company as a "white label site", coming here bent only on some free advertising!

Mobiles.co.uk_company_representative

Quentin wrote: »

Beware - the rep won't like it if you refer to his company as a "white label site", coming here bent only on some free advertising!

Hi,

If you feel I'm touting for business please report it via the link in my sig.

Regards,

OneADay

Quentin wrote: »

Beware - the rep won't like it if you refer to his company as a "white label site", coming here bent only on some free advertising!

I never mentioned the rep - the use of links can be done be any person who wishes to make profit through such means - hence the policy of not allowing links me thinks.

thommy

mobilejunkie wrote: »

lily_bovine :- "My contract didn't start in January. It started in February."

It couldn't be much clearer - and the t&c ARE t&c. Thus the company hasrejected the claim without ANY justification whatsoever - JUST like so many rections with E2Save. It has nothing to do with a Saturday delivery; they have simply not complied with their own t&c on a valid claim. If this ends up with them being sued they still won't have any legal judgements registered against them because of refused but valid cashback claims - it will be against cpw if they are stupid enough to let it go to court.

thommy:- " appreciate that you may be saying this with a sense of humour...but at least he/she has had the decency to reply and write this post!third party companies are at the mercy of the big boys too!is it not orange, o2 etc that determine (arbitrarily??!!)billing dates that add to all the cashback confusion....."

This is nothing to do with any other organisation than Mobiles.co.uk. You misunderstand the t&c yourself. This is NOT to do with the billing date, but the connection date. Not much point in the rep having the "decency" to answer when they fail to sort so many probloems out. Silk's still high and dry after how long???

You still don't get it; Mobiles.co.uk is proving to be a crap company full of incompetence, dishonesty, broken promises, false reassurances and which ignores its own t&c except when it suits. How many people with problems who can't get them resolved via the proper channels have to come on here before that's plain to everyone? There is now yet another thread on someone's experience with this company. You simply can't afford to give this dealer ANY benefit of the doubt. There is lots of evidence already to show why and their pedigree (cpw, like that or not) is showing through quite clearly on hear. There's none so blind...!

here we go again......:wall:

read my previous posts, you idiot. (like the top of the page....)

mobilejunkie

Dear Rep, please indicate which of my statement isn't factual!

"It couldn't be much clearer - and the t&c ARE t&c. Thus the company has rejected the claim without ANY justification whatsoever - JUST like so many rejections with E2Save. It has nothing to do with a Saturday delivery; they have simply not complied with their own t&c on a valid claim. If this ends up with them being sued they still won't have any legal judgements registered against them because of refused but valid cashback claims - it will be against cpw if they are stupid enough to let it go to court."

Go ahead - prove me wrong!

As regards my own claims, yes I have. The current one is now 40 days from receipt and still no cheque - that is however quite normal - which totally disregards (as you do) your own t&c. I have also had another problem as previously mentioned - but which I am not prepared to outline on here or to you for reasons also prveiously given. I am also aniticipating another problem which will affect a lot of people in a few monthys time - again, I will not explain it on here and even if I were to your responses would plainly make it a waste of time!

Rep: "Please refrain from making potentially libellous comments like this. The only facts (as opposed to opinions) you have are those related to your own order(s?) with us and if your experience leads you to believe the above then you either need to contact me, contact a solicitor or cease attempting to damage our reputation."

I don't need to contact a solicitor and I certainly won't be contacting you for "help". How's Silk doing by the way??

I will gladly continue warning people against you. When you stop ignoring your own t&c and actually act like a decent company I will make appropriate comments. Since that looks more than unlikely you will get still get the comments you deserve but not the ones you appear to accept. If you don't like them ignore me. I am perfectly able to back up all my comments in a court of law and you most certainly aren't, so sue me!

mobilejunkie

thommy wrote: »

here we go again......:wall:

read my previous posts, you idiot. (like the top of the page....)

Are you sure you're not after joining rep et al? Seems like you have the right qualifications!

Guys_Dad

mobilejunkie wrote: »

Are you sure you're not after joining rep et al? Seems like you have the right qualifications!

Well, as the promoter of Phones4U sites as paragons of virtue, you will no doubt be slightly gutted with the new post that has just appeared re problems with them. Let's see which company eventually settles fairly with the OP.

So far, we have mobiles.co.uk conceding all the claims on this forum - (yes I know they haven't all been processed yet but they have conceded in writing which is a very foolish thing to do if they intend to renege) - Phones4U are not admitting, which may be, of course, because the OP was mistaken.

mobilejunkie

One person on here with one a problem with Phones4U is fairly insignificant compared with the masses of basic (and sometimes more substantial) problems a great many people have with Mobiles.co.uk. Compared with Mobiles.co.uk a politician would be a "paragon of virue".

As for Mobiles.co.uk conceding all claims on this forum - not sure if we're reading the same website! Not sure Silk and a few others would agree with you!

Guys_Dad

mobilejunkie wrote: »

One person on here with one a problem with Phones4U is fairly insignificant compared with the masses of basic (and sometimes more substantial) problems a great many people have with Mobiles.co.uk. Compared with Mobiles.co.uk a politician would be a "paragon of virue".

Ok. Going back, say, 1 month or so, from the posts on this forum, just how many are "how many" ?

And which would be better - 5 people with problems that were acknowledged and hopefully resolved or 1 that was not?

You see, this is where you and Quentin lose support. You are unable to factualise your posts and go way, way over the top with your attacks and the irony is that instead of gaining the respect due to you for some of your previous helpful posts, you alienate people who can almost see the bile pouring out of you.

Yes, I agree that the rep has failed to deliver so far in a number of posts and i can undertand the frustration of people who want things solved NOW. But the reality is that sometimes, particularly when businesses are stretched or lines of communication are less that they might be, things don't always happen as quickly as they might.

That does not make the company or the individual a liar or crook.

mobilejunkie

I find it quite mystifying why a handful of people rush on to defend this company and its (rep)s. So far they have denied their own t&c (my initial, main and still ignored concern), made lots of promises he/they haven't kept, contradicted themselves as to how long it takes to receive a cashback cheque from the time they receive it, done nothing to actually indicate that the company is either competent or trustworthy and make great claims about their fairness and how no-one gets denied rightful cashback claims when plainly some have.

I rather doubt Silk will accept that they have dealt with his problems or not made false promises OR told lies. HIS case is closed as far as the rep is concerned - but appears to have left him more angry with them than ever. That's despite having masses of patience with them and doing what some people say I/we should do - giving them the benefit of the doubt (probably a dozen times by now!).

Any support I or others (you seem to see Quentin and myself as one - we are not and have own substantial and separate experiences of both this company and cpw in general) lose from those who for some reason bindly defend the rep is made up for as far as I'm concerned by those who shy away from using a company where they can now plainly see that they are likely to have a lot of problems.

Many didn't listen when I warned about E2Save long before the s**t really hit the fan; apparently those people haven't the lessons some of them had to undergo!