mobiles.co.uk issue, items not delivered - please advise

WychWeird

I've scanned through and I think this is the post I was thinking of:

Mobiles.co.uk_company_representative wrote:

...In your own words Silk, we are going above and beyond the legal requirements of the DSR because our phones are only supplied with a contract already active and therefore we aren't even obligated to provide DSR returns at all (I believe T-Mobile don't give you a cooling-off period any more, for instance)....

Post 44 on this page:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=2199761&page=3

rolo1_2

Keep us updated Jarvester. If I was you I would let mobiles.co.uk do all the running about. No goods = No contract in my book.
Good luck

Silk

Mobiles.co.uk_company_representative wrote: »

Based on what you're said here I can only apologise on behalf of DHL and assure you we will get this resolved as soon as possible.

Thanks,

Whats DHL got to do with the problem Ben ?

Is it DHL thats not responding to all the emails that the OP has sent ?

Is it DHL that's refusing to cancel the contract as is the OP's right ?

Is it DHL that replied to the OP's email saying he was too late to cancel after not replying to earlier emails ?

Is it DHL that consulted the mobiles.co.uk management who still refused to cancel the contract ?

Is it DHL thats the company Rep that chose to ignore the thread untill talk of TS's and OFT etc ?

Why don't you try apolgising on behalf of mobiles.co.uk and start taking ownership of the problems instead of passing the buck all the time.
Its quite alarming to think of how many customers who are unaware of forums such as this one get duped by the lies and tactics of your staff.

It's a disgrace Ben that your customers are treated this way and no surprise you have the poor reputation you do !!!

Guys_Dad

Silk wrote: »

Whats DHL got to do with the problem Ben ?

Morning, Silk.

A little harsh with that particular point as it seems that DHL either have security problems internally or their driver delivered to the wrong place. They appear to have lost the parcel !!!


It seems clear from what the thread contains that the carrier has let both the customer and vendor down. ( I had the same problem a couple of years ago when 3 PCs and a server supposed to be delivered to our work premises were "signed for" by a non-existent employee. Not the PC manufacturer's fault, except for using that carrier, I suppose)

However, it is right that the rep takes ownership of the incorrect correspondence from his company which I hope he will do after internal investigation. Incorrect application of the law by a company that should know better can't really be defended.

mobilejunkie

Why do you always excuse/defend the dealer? They plainly don't deserve any "benefit of doubt" after so many examples over such a long period. They are consistently awful and threat their customers that way! It wasn't DHL which did all the things listed by Silk. How many customers (unaware of this site) get conned and stuffed by this company which only ever actually puts anything right in a few cases (after legal procedings were actually commenced in at least one case) where the innocent customers actually go public? It's been clear all along that is the Rep's only true purpose on here; it has absolutely nothing to do with improving the company and everything to do with propaganda and amateur PR. Even you have recently seen through some of that at last!

OneADay

mobilejunkie wrote: »

Why do you always excuse/defend the dealer? They plainly don't deserve any "benefit of doubt" after so many examples over such a long period. They are consistently awful and threat their customers that way! It wasn't DHL which did all the things listed by Silk. How many customers (unaware of this site) get conned and stuffed by this company which only ever actually puts anything right in a few cases (after legal procedings were actually commenced in at least one case) where the innocent customers actually go public? It's been clear all along that is the Rep's only true purpose on here; it has absolutely nothing to do with improving the company and everything to do with propaganda and amateur PR. Even you have recently seen through some of that at last!

Why do you always attack others for giving an opinion which goes against your campaign against CPW?

This thread will get closed no doubt. Its gone from being a problem about a contract phone being delivered (perhaps to right address, perhaps not) to the usual anti CPW campaign. We DO NOT know the true facts. DHL have a part to pay in this and mobiles have the responsibility. The customer has the right to decline paying anything since there is no contract.

Only the customer, DHL and mobiles can sort this out between themselves - so rather causing more worry to the customer, let them deal with it in their own time (or when they come back to report on it). End of story.

mobilejunkie

If that were the case, why bother coming on a thread in the first place? As you should know (the penny should have sunk in for you as well by now) the dealer doesn't actually sort anything out unless it gets a pasting publicly on here. That also has another function - it serves as a genuine warning to others. You will plainly never "know the facts" - even when they bite you in the proverbial. I have substantial personal dealings with this company and have read all the responses and blatantly untrue statements from the representative on these threads. Your choice of ignoring the untrue statements for some strange reason and attacking actual customers who hold the dealer to account is not the "end story" even though you would like it to be.

OneADay

mobilejunkie wrote: »

If that were the case, why bother coming on a thread in the first place? As you should know (the penny should have sunk in for you as well by now) the dealer doesn't actually sort anything out unless it gets a pasting publicly on here. That also has another function - it serves as a genuine warning to others. You will plainly never "know the facts" - even when they bite you in the proverbial. I have substantial personal dealings with this company and have read all the responses and blatantly untrue statements from the representative on these threads. Your choice of ignoring the untrue statements for some strange reason and attacking actual customers who hold the dealer to account is not the "end story" even though you would like it to be.

The penny has sunk and I cannot be bothered reading your derisory comments.

Guys_Dad

mobilejunkie wrote: »

Why do you always excuse/defend the dealer? They plainly don't deserve any "benefit of doubt" after so many examples over such a long period.

Hold on. Read my comments on this and other threads. I don't defend the dealer when he is wrong, but let's face the facts here.

1. DHL did not deliver the phone to the right person. Whether it has been stolen by one of their staff or if they have delivered to the wrong address, that is down to them. That is why I challenged Silk's comment about it being nothing to do with DHL.

2. Mobiles.co.uk have accepted that there was no delivery and are tryining to send a replacement phone whilst investigating what went wrong. So fair play to them for that except

3. Buyer has said "since your chosen carrier didn't deliver the phone, don't bother - I am going elsewhere" as is their right, but mobiles.co.uk don't seem to accept that - so far..

4. Where mobiles.co.uk have overstepped the mark is in their reply trying to claim that the 7 day period had expired, which is blatantly incorrect and I have posted at least 3 times on that score in this thread.

Now that is hardly defending the dealer.

Once again, I only challenged the point that DHL had nothing to do with it.

Having re-read that, I am sure you will at least agree with that single point and want to take the opportunity to correct your critical post.

If you do not accept that DHL have any hand in the problem, then any objectivity that may still reside somewhere within you has clearly evaporated.

Silk

Guys_Dad wrote: »

1. DHL did not deliver the phone to the right person. Whether it has been stolen by one of their staff or if they have delivered to the wrong address, that is down to them. That is why I challenged Silk's comment about it being nothing to do with DHL.

Hi GD,
The point I was making was that DHL did not deliver the goods for whatever reason.
We have no idea why that was whether it was a mistake on their part or a mistake on mobiles.co.uk's part.
I find it rather a coincidence that an order placed on the 21st of last month is still unknown to Vodafone which again I'm sure DHL cannot be held responsable for either.
We also know that it's not the first time DHL have carried the can for mobiles problems, remember when Ben swore black is blue they no longer collected from customers and yet lo and behold the item was collected by DHL.
All of which is immaterial as the OP cancelled well within the time limit and they are saying he can't.
The OP had stated there was urgency in the matter and placed many emails to them and he had to wait 15 days to get a reply ....rather a joke considering Ben's always banging on about replies taking 3 hours !!!
From what I can see DHL have only played a very small part in this farce and it's rather unfair to pass the blame over to them !