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.
Going the legal route with cashback sites that don't pay up
etherz
Posts: 105 Forumite
What are your thoughts on this. I have claims of over 6 months old at a couple of cashback sites, and have proof of purchase/signup.
Can I take them to the small claims courts (they owe me a couple of £100) as they have offered me cashback for clicking through them, then not paid up. Icontacted Quidco about a couple of claims I had and they said they had not recieved the cashback form the network but I argued that my agreement was with them, not the network...
Thoughts?
Can I take them to the small claims courts (they owe me a couple of £100) as they have offered me cashback for clicking through them, then not paid up. Icontacted Quidco about a couple of claims I had and they said they had not recieved the cashback form the network but I argued that my agreement was with them, not the network...
Thoughts?
0
Comments
-
I bought something in April, and finally it's showing as a pending payment this week on one cashback site. Think it was the retailer being tardy.0
-
I thought cashback site rules stated that payments aren't guaranteed so i'm not sure if your claim would be taken seriously.
I can say without a shadow of a doubt that any such terms would be unlawful exclusion clauses under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. The contract with the cashback site is therefore enforceable just like any other contract.
Obviously if those kind of terms (where one party says "this contract is not binding on us" :rotfl:) were allowed to prevail, all contracts would be a completely meaningless farce, which is why those pieces of legislation exist.
In reply to the OP, you're absolutely right: your contract IS with Quidco and and you have a valid claim against them.0 -
I suppose if the cashback site can prove it has not recieved the money from the affiliate network/retailer and has taken reasonable steps to chase this up then you would have problems winning ??
but then again I'm no legal expert
suspect this thread should be in the "Vent" area of the fourmEx forum ambassador
Long term forum member0 -
do the T&C's state that payments are not guaranteed? if you agreed to them then i can't see a winning argument for non payment.Never put off till tomorrow what you can do today!:mad:
Cos if you do it today and like it...You can do it again tomorrow..
Bookworm's Thread 2019 reading Challenge total :- 1/600 -
I put the thread in this forum because this is where the threads discussing the individual cashback sites were.
I had already read the Quidco T&Cs which state:After a Member successfully completes a Qualifying Transaction, and once we have received the resulting Cashback for that Qualifying Transaction, we pass that Cashback on to the Member through his/her Cashback Receipt Method.
We deduct an annual membership fee from the initial Cashback a Member earns in any Year; a "Year" is a twelve-month period commencing the date you become a Member, and each anniversary of that date
Please note that there are various circumstances in which a transaction with a retailer may not constitute a Qualifying Transaction, or Cashback may not result from it. Our help pages provide further information about these circumstances.
There are various circumstances in which Cashback will not be payable to the Member, and will be forfeited to us, namely:a. where the cashback payment that we receive is not attributed to a Qualifying Transaction or associated with an Account (such as where the Member is not logged-in to the Quidco Service when making the relevant purchase)Our help pages provide further information about these circumstances.
b. the transaction to which the Cashback relates is cancelled after it has been entered into (whether under the right of cancellation that applies to some sales made at a distance, or otherwise) the Cashback is attributed to a Member or Account that has been:a. suspended by us under Clause 8 of this Agreement;c. where the Cashback is held in, or attributable to, an Account that has been inactive for more than twelve months;
b. associated with any fraudulent activity or any breach of this Agreement;
c. used to make purchases on behalf of, or for the benefit of, any other person
For example, I had cashback track with Quidco for a company I purchased from. The company left the affiliate network before paying my cashback, so Quidco could not pay me. Its Quidco's job to chase up these debts with its supplier, not just say 'sorry mate' and not pay me.0 -
I agree, you are paying for a service. And sometimes your decision to go with a certain company is because of the cashback incentive. So i think their T&C of not paying does not hold water with me.
I would like to see someone challenge this and see the Judge's ruling.0 -
I can say without a shadow of a doubt that any such terms would be unlawful exclusion clauses under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. The contract with the cashback site is therefore enforceable just like any other contract.
Obviously if those kind of terms (where one party says "this contract is not binding on us" :rotfl:) were allowed to prevail, all contracts would be a completely meaningless farce, which is why those pieces of legislation exist.
In reply to the OP, you're absolutely right: your contract IS with Quidco and and you have a valid claim against them.
I can say without a shadow of a doubt that you are not a judge of one of the higher courts, and therefore anything that you appear to state as fact is actually only your opinion.Gone ... or have I?0 -
I agree, you are paying for a service. And sometimes your decision to go with a certain company is because of the cashback incentive. So i think their T&C of not paying does not hold water with me.
I would like to see someone challenge this and see the Judge's ruling.
I agree that the wording of the clause could by itself be seen as unfair, however as Browntoa notes, if Quidco were to demonstrate that they made best efforts to get the money from the retailer, this could be a valid defence.
The problem with taking something like this to court is that it is unlikely to set a precedent. If it was just one person making a claim for a few hundred pounds, Quidco would be likely to settle, just to make the problem go away. Even if the case went to the small claims court, any decision would only be persuasive to other courts, and would not set a precedent. In order to get a meaningful result, the case would need to go to a higher court, which is unlikely to happen, as the costs involved would far outweigh most claims.Gone ... or have I?0 -
I suppose if the cashback site can prove it has not recieved the money from the affiliate network/retailer
But has it "not received the money from the affiliate" though....?
Call me a sceptic but I can't help but think that cashback sites deliberately decline cashbacks / pay out very slowly..... afterall how many people wouldn't bother to query / fight their decision...
Funny how i've only ever had two big(ish) cashbacks be declined and as soon as I threatened legal action / speaking to the retailer to see why they declined, both companies paid up. :rolleyes:0 -
i think legal action is my only way forward now. I've had a £70 and £50 turned down and have raised tickets, spoke with Jules and have gotten no further forward.
Where do i go now?!0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 346.6K Banking & Borrowing
- 251.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 451.4K Spending & Discounts
- 238.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 614.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 174.7K Life & Family
- 252K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards