e2save problem (merged threads)

wolfman

The missus is signed up to a cashback deal. We've been looking at the dates for it though and it's very slim.

Cashback date - 20th November
That gives her until 20th December to send them the correct bill.

However the bill covering that period (6th Nov - 6th Dec) doesn't arrive till around the 14th or so of each month (maybe later with Xmas arriving). That only allows 6 days to send in the bill.

We called them up, and they mentioned signing up online and printing the bill, and sending that print out.

Is that ok? I've heard they can be fussy and only accept the original bill. Is it worth compaining too. 6 days is certainly not long enough. In fact working out the dates it's nearer 4 days on the later cashbacks.

mobilejunkie

There's tons of information about the so-called "price match" t&c. You obviously haven't read the threads or the actual t&c.

wolfman

mobilejunkie wrote: »

There's tons of information about the so-called "price match" t&c. You obviously haven't read the threads or the actual t&c.

Errr, I didn't say that it was a price match deal. You obviously haven't read my post properly.

I was merely asking if they're ok with printed out statements. I have read the terms and it asks for originals. They however said printed versions are ok, I was just wondering if anyone has had any problems regarding this, as they often say one thing and do another.

And also would you consider 6 days too little with which to get each claim in? Given how the dates are setup and when we receive our statement it only leaves 6 days. I've done previous cashback deals and always had much longer.

g33za

wolfman wrote: »

Errr, I didn't say that it was a price match deal. You obviously haven't read my post properly.

I was merely asking if they're ok with printed out statements. I have read the terms and it asks for originals. They however said printed versions are ok, I was just wondering if anyone has had any problems regarding this, as they often say one thing and do another.

And also would you consider 6 days too little with which to get each claim in? Given how the dates are setup and when we receive our statement it only leaves 6 days. I've done previous cashback deals and always had much longer.

You would definitely need to have something in writing that says copies are permitted. Remember you need to ensure that legally you have fulfilled the written requirements of the cashback contract that were supplied to you. I believe a telephone call is a lot harder to verify in a court without a recording and permission of the other party to record the conversation.

mobilejunkie

Who wants to BET it's a price-match deal and that Wolfman hasn't even identified the FULL t&c relating to it? In order to read a post properly it's rather essential for the writer to be precise other wise it would be impossible to to identify if it isn't (but it is!) and ignoring the basic groundrules when ordering a phone is asking for trouble. See:-

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=558661&page=1

Although if it were NOT to be a price-match deal the section explaining THAT wouldn't be relevant. This company's t&c are now a complete and utter mess - there are several different versions which change by the day and the ones which count are ignored (seemingly by both company and some customers). Without obtaining, reading and fully understanding the t&c you are doing these deals by the seat of your pants and the company is waiting to take advantage. Reading and understanding the t&c - especially the legal ones which some people are clearly missing - is an indispensible starting point otherwise these threads will become littered with reproductions of them and long answers to individual questions.

In this case the legal t&c are unequivocable and entirely clear about orginals, copies and internet bills and anyone relying on what the company says one day on the phone instead is simply asking for it. You can no longer rely on this company's honesty or "goodwill" - a term it is now using when forced to pay up after wrongfully denying customer's claims. It's all on these threads (apart from one problem which is inevitable but apparently not cropped up yet - but there's plenty to be getting on with!).

I could say several more things about the case in question. 1) You don't appreciate the full way the company is working if you follow what you've been told (which is - today but maybe not tomorrow - how they are in fact working) in order to give yourself more options. 2) You have failed to realise that the legal t&c are entirely different and if you rely on THOSE there's no way you would be forced to follow the ones now made up at the company's convenience. These deals are not what they seem and the company isn't what it was. From the start others have warned about accepting the so-called "price match" deals (and again, that IS what this is even though Wolfman appears not to realise even that!). The warnings originally were for other reasons - based on the written t&c stolen from a competitor. Since then the company has ignored those and invented its own versions - even writing new ones for contracts which have been running for up to 10 months. This is extremely complicated - made so on purpose through deceipt and incompetence - so if you're not 100% clear don't touch these deals!

wolfman

Ok, it is a price match deal. I've been aware of that since before we got it though. And we fully know the pitfalls and understand when to send bills etc... I was merely picking up on you assuming something and being rather blunt in doing so.

And my questions weren't typical to what I've seen on this thread and others regarding dates etc...

I don't think 6 days is long enough a window to send in a claim. That's why we called them. They told us to sign up online and print off the online bill and send that (in which case it gives us nearer 12 days window).

As mentioned by g33za we'll try to get written confirmation of this as the terms state otherwise.


Just as a side note I have read the majority of the pages in this thread and others. But if you can suggest a search string for what I'm trying to find out above (given the poor search functionality) please be my guest and suggest something. And if you're getting impatient with repetitive posts, then the simple solution is to ignore it and not respond.

wolfman

mobilejunkie wrote: »

1) You don't appreciate the full way the company is working if you follow what you've been told (which is - today but maybe not tomorrow - how they are in fact working) in order to give yourself more options.

Good point. I know they are out to "screw" me by being on the legal edge, and that their deals if everyone fulfilled them would make them bankrupt.

mobilejunkie wrote: »

2) You have failed to realise that the legal t&c are entirely different and if you rely on THOSE there's no way you would be forced to follow the ones now made up at the company's convenience. These deals are not what they seem and the company isn't what it was. From the start others have warned about accepting the so-called "price match" deals (and again, that IS what this is even though Wolfman appears not to realise even that!).

Again, if you re-read my posts, I never acknowledged or denied that it was a Price Match deal. I'm following the t's and c's that were sent to me upon signing up.

Excellent link, cheers. I'll have a good read for some tips.
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/...=558661&page=1

mobilejunkie

Guess I must have read your post "properly" after all then! I know it's a price-match deal (many on here wouldn't, perhaps); though am not sure why you suggested it might not be. I therefore suggest you obtain and print off the PROPER t&c you signed up to and have a VERY careful read through those; they are substantially different. I have explained in the thread I referred you to how this works. You could send the November bill on 20th November IF you rely on the way they say they are working (will be against the legal t&c though) and if your dates are correct. OR you could send the december bill and pray it gets there. OR you could send the December bill and sue them if it doesn't based on the legal t&c (assuming they subsequently decline the claim and all remaining claims). Of course, they might change their t&c tomorrow and assume they can force existing customers to bend to them. You pays your money and takes your choice...

I agree the search engine on here is poor. I would search for "e2save" on the forums search and then look at the thread titles the posts were placed on, identifying all those of interest. Of course, you would also do well to search for "OSPS", "cpw", Onestopphoneshop" and (possibly) "The Phone Spot". Also "Carphone Warehouse", "price-match" and any others you can think of. Meanwhile, seek out the LEGAL price-match t&c and study those - therein lie all your safeguards.

I decided to start the thread I gave you some time back when SO many people were making (repeatedly) the same old mistakes AND it became clear that ALL the dealers were stacking the deck. I added to it a few times with what I perceive to be very useful and pertinent pieces (e.g. "price-match") in order to attempt to clarify, warn and answer the repeated questions which still come up on the other threads. It remains to be seen whether this was helpful.

wolfman

mobilejunkie wrote: »

I decided to start the thread I gave you some time back when SO many people were making (repeatedly) the same old mistakes AND it became clear that ALL the dealers were stacking the deck. I added to it a few times with what I perceive to be very useful and pertinent pieces (e.g. "price-match") in order to attempt to clarify, warn and answer the repeated questions which still come up on the other threads. It remains to be seen whether this was helpful.

Yeah I'm reading it now. It's very good. Should be a sticky. That'd get it more attention.

wolfman

Arguing away about all sorts with them. I actually messed up a deal (it's pages back), but from reading your thread realised I may have been ok.

Cashback Date - 10th September.

I did as their CS team said I could and sent the 26th August bill, after the 10th, but so that it wasn't a month old. They rejected it. I only found this out late on though.

I then sent the 26th September bill (which they said I needed) and it got there on the 15th October (got caught in the postal strikes!). They rejected it because it was outside of 28 days from 10th September.

But from re-reading my terms. It doesn't say 30 days from 10th September. It says 30 days from the required bill, which in my case is the bill dated 26th September.

So if I understand it correctly, I should be ok, as it arrived within one month from 26th September.