We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

They wont give me Cashback!

1235»

Comments

  • Guys_Dad
    Guys_Dad Posts: 11,025 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    edited 9 October 2009 at 6:21PM
    Quentin wrote: »
    Unfortunately, the OP took your incorrect advice and wasted his time again contacting ben's lot!

    He should have accepted the advice given by the contributors who knew what they were talking about!

    Well, Quentin it looks like you may have to swallow your words if Mobilejunkie is correct on what he says here and his other post. And I would NOT bet 1p @1,000 to 1 against him being wrong.
  • Guys_Dad
    Guys_Dad Posts: 11,025 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Actually, Quentin merely looked on the site and quoted from the t&c, whilst I was referring to the original ones which he won't have access to. He is also of the same mind as I in terms of ignoring any advice to pm "Ben". What I am now advising is rather different and an approach more akin to Quentin's. i.e. send a formal written demand based on the t&c (they have shot themselves in the foot as is sometimes the case when dealers attempt to muddy the waters) and follow that up by a LBA. What is important is that the t&c currently displayed on the website (and actually clearly labelled as applying to the OP's particular contract) do in fact act in the OP's favour - so they should a) print them off in case they are changed once more) and hold the dealer to them. I am willing to play dealers at their own game when their actions misfire - and that is precisely what has happened here. However, they can also go against the customer - it all comes down to watching your own particular t&c and subsequent changes like a hawk.


    That is why I asked if you would check the original ones. But I must be missing something else. The new t&c pre-Sept 09 surely have 30 not 60 days in the wording.
  • mobilejunkie
    mobilejunkie Posts: 8,460 Forumite
    edited 9 October 2009 at 6:42PM
    Damn. You're correct. That means the OP has no recourse at all I'm afraid. I will delete my previous post advising he contact them - he will have to write this claim off. Looks like you'd have lost that bet!

    They have still changed the payment timescale and the starting point from the original t&c at the time though. That will be helpful to some and lead others into the same difficulties a couple of people had on here (i.e. claiming correctly but - according to the dealer - a month too late). It is important for anyone in that position to claim a month early (if they read this in time) or to have a copy of the original t&c should the correct later) claim be unjustly denied - as is likely. Should it be necessary for anyone to sue, showing that they have changed the payment timescales (and still don't even stick to the new ones) would help their case potentially. Such practices won't impress a judge.
  • Freefall
    Freefall Posts: 431 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker
    Damn. You're correct. That means the OP has no recourse at all I'm afraid. I will delete my previous post advising he contact them - he will have to write this claim off. Looks like you'd have lost that bet!

    They have still changed the payment timescale and the starting point from the original t&c at the time though. That will be helpful to some and lead others into the same difficulties a couple of people had on here (i.e. claiming correctly but - according to the dealer - a month too late). It is important for anyone in that position to claim a month early (if they read this in time) or to have a copy of the original t&c should the correct later) claim be unjustly denied - as is likely. Should it be necessary for anyone to sue, showing that they have changed the payment timescales (and still don't even stick to the new ones) would help their case potentially. Such practices won't impress a judge.

    I have got an e-mail from March 2009 which shows that you have 60 days to claim.
  • mobilejunkie
    mobilejunkie Posts: 8,460 Forumite
    Are you sure it's Mobiles.co.uk? Unless it was a reply to a specific question they aren't in the habit of sending claim instructions upon ordering (which may be just as well, since E2Save had a standard of practice of doing just that - BUT with significantly different t&c to the ones you signed up to! E2Save DID have a 60 day claim window then though.

    Further, the t&c only changed in the last few weeks to 60 days - and immediately before that on these threads the Rep was sticking to their 30 days and only saying they would be changing it to 60 when their systems permitted. I got a contract in Masy and THAT is definitely 30 days too!
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 259K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.