Beware of Mobiles.co.uk

mobilejunkie

For those who are genuinely interested in the truthfulness and honesty of this company, I am now personally aware of a THIRD cashback claim which has been unjustifiably denied. Needless to say they will pay up - albeit it kicking and screaming - and it will be without the "help" of any representative from this company who appears on here merely to sing their praises and claim that NO proper cashback claim has been denied.

Once more - you have been WARNED!!

Guys_Dad

mobilejunkie wrote: »

For those who are genuinely interested in the truthfulness and honesty of this company, I am now personally aware of a THIRD cashback claim which has been unjustifiably denied.

As Ben will no doubt dispute this, and as always there are at least two sides to the story, a few details would be most helpful.

I don't for one minute disbelieve you, but as per your post, despite registering innumerable posts against the company, this is only the 3rd cashback claim that you are aware of that hasn't been honored, so this would seem to be out of character.

That being the case, as I said, details would be of interest. (A minor that I took out a contract for is due a cashback from them in a few weeks, so I have an interest.)

mobilejunkie

"only" the third I am personally aware of. For one so pedantic it would help if you read what I wrote more carefully. That's a high percentage and rather more than the "none" constantly claimed by Ben. There's nothing "out of character" at all; it is all too common with all cpw clones.

Whilst I am sure details would show that this is a totally unjustified (and - according to "Ben" - a non-existance occurrance) I am not going to provide them. Either people believe me or they believe the blatant and long-proved lies from the "other side of the story". I learned years ago how to best deal with things like this - and the person concerned will certainly get their money (and whatever costs Mobiles.co.uk care to incur should they fight it).

OneADay

mobilejunkie wrote: »

"only" the third I am personally aware of. For one so pedantic it would help if you read what I wrote more carefully. That's a high percentage and rather more than the "none" constantly claimed by Ben. There's nothing "out of character" at all; it is all too common with all cpw clones.

Whilst I am sure details would show that this is a totally unjustified (and - according to "Ben" - a non-existance occurrance) I am not going to provide them. Either people believe me or they believe the blatant and long-proved lies from the "other side of the story". I learned years ago how to best deal with things like this - and the person concerned will certainly get their money (and whatever costs Mobiles.co.uk care to incur should they fight it).

So whats the point of whining - if you think you are right go ahead get your cash.

If you want sympathy and support, post the details and let people make a judgement.

Guys_Dad

mobilejunkie wrote: »

"only" the third I am personally aware of. For one so pedantic it would help if you read what I wrote more carefully.(and

As "being aware of" is generally a condition that one experiences personally - I hadn't come across delegating awareness to a 3rd party before - ................................

The purpose of writing is to communicate and if the reader doesn't read the message they way that you wished it to be read, then that does not make them pedantic, it makes you a less than perfect communicator.

If you actually mean that this is the 3rd claim of yours - or one of the people that you seem to provide a service to - then clearly that is a higher percentage of refused claims than if it related to all of the customers who ever did business with them.

As I wrote, I do not disbelieve you but with your vendetta against the company, if you can't see that whatever you write about them is severely tainted, then you must be one of a very small band. And if any MSE members think that I am on this company's side, then just look through my recent posts on them and you will see that this is definitely NOT the case.

What I don't subscribe to is a MSE member whose arrogance is such that they demand unquestioned acceptance of their word as law without any back up and, when asked for a few details, refuses to provide them.

It doesn't make what you wrote wrong, but it patronises MSE members who might want to make up their own minds based on evidence or facts.

mobilejunkie

I have no expectation of ever convincing you and one or two others that this company is dishonest. Your logic is wrong, your interpretation is wrong and your acceptance of giving Ben and this company the benefit of the doubt over such a long period (only now growing impatient with them because (surprise surprise) their words and promises neither match their actions or the facts) is your privilege.

My warning is based on real events (as are my other warnings) and I am not looking for assistance. Had I not warned against other cpw companies for the last three years I have no doubt quite a lot of people would have lost money with them.

In fact, three of the people I guide through the maze have now had legitimate claims denied by cpw companies - two of them by Mobiles.co.uk; two of them have been forced to sue in the past (not mobiles.co.uk thus far) and the other came as close as a whisker. All three got all their money but would have failed if they had accepted the rubbish the company came out with on each occasion. I know of many others on here who have encountered similar problems with cpw companies. I believe that the knockers who claim that all you have to do is follow the rules etc. do a disservice to people who actually belive that and think the rules are set by the dealer - they aren't.

As for your own claim, why would you worry? You are content that this dealer honours its cashback and if you don't know what to do should they not you shouldn't have ordered from them. The bottom line is simply this; people should only order from this dealer if either a) they are prepared to lose their cashback on the company's whim, or b) they follow the groundrules (not the dealer's) and are prepared (and able) to take whatever appropriate action as required to recover their money - as the three people in question have. In fact, two of those people had more than one legitimate claim denied until the dealer was forced to cough up. If people want to ensure they get paid they must start out with the right medicine with Mobiles.co.

OneADay

Well give us some details of these "real events".

Why do you have to do things for others? What makes you so great that you want to think and get mobile deals for others through a company that you yourself do not trust or condemn on here.

Preaching to people is no good - if you have specific problems then complain to Ofcom or something. Simply going on about "Once more - you have been WARNED!!" - yeah we heard last time you warned, the next you will warn and the time after. We got the message.

Oh hang on I saw a good deal on mobiles the other day, hmm I might go for it you know given my main number is coming to an end in a month. There I was warned.

mobilejunkie

You will never "get the message". Others no doubt will. When I have given details they have been ignored - so what's the point where you are concerned? I have no need of Ofcom as I have also repeatedly stated. The why is no concern of yours but is for those involved - and since they are more than happy I have absolutely no requirement to gratify your curiosity. I'm only surprised you didn;t order from this company months ago when you first sprang up to defend them and justify their appalling and repeated lack of customer service, since you seem to admire them so much. You can't warn or convince people who have only one purpose on here; however, there are many others who will heed the warnings and either avoid or cover themselves from day one. What you do is of no consequence one way or the other. It's your money, just as it is the other people who may avoid getting sucked in by false promises and complacency.

Guys_Dad

mobilejunkie wrote: »

I have no expectation of ever convincing you and one or two others that this company is dishonest. Your logic is wrong, your interpretation is wrong and your acceptance of giving Ben and this company the benefit of the doubt over such a long period (only now growing impatient with them because (surprise surprise) their words and promises neither match their actions or the facts) is your privilege.

It is not the honesty or otherwise of the company that I posted my comment on this thread. If you read my original post again, I said that I didn't doubt your word, but wanted a few more facts to make a judgment as to why a company that didn't have a bad reputation for failing to settle cashbacks ( and you must concede that compared to some of the other CPW companies of old that this is true) decided not to honour the case you quoted. I think that was a fair point.

I am 100% behind comments about poor customer service, slow payment and some of Ben's promises failing to be met - perhaps even most of them. This is something different, however, and it clearly hasn't been fully resolved yet.

My main complaint is the way in which you seem to think your are the only mobile phone guru and we, as grateful followers, should hang on your every word and accept the word of the master without challenge or proof.

Guys_Dad

mobilejunkie wrote: »

Y You can't warn or convince people who have only one purpose on here; however, there are many others who will heed the warnings and either avoid or cover themselves from day one. What you do is of no consequence one way or the other. It's your money, just as it is the other people who may avoid getting sucked in by false promises and complacency.

Apply some logic, MJ. There must be more people who are getting a good deal and are satisfied with it than those who aren't otherwise the company would go bust. Some of their deals are very good indeed from a £££ point of view.

What is the point is the level of complaint. Now 80% would be bad, but 98% satisfaction would still produce a lot of complaints given the number of sales that the company does. Are you really saying that the majority (i.e. over 50% ) of the customers are being ripped off?? Somehow, I don't believe that.

It doesn't make it any better for those who do have problems, though, and that I happily concede. But by far and away the overwhelming majority of bad posts against this company are on misleading repayment timescales, non-existent Customer Service and the rep's promises not being kept.

mobilejunkie

Whatever proof I were to give would draw the usual reaction. Besides, whatever the "reason" for this particular denial of a valid claim it is unlikely to be the same for the next. It is different to the others which have come to light; but there could be many more excuses for not paying. Since the representative on here likes to go unchallenged why should I accept it from people who will never be convinced? There are others on here who are "gurus" - but some of those are attacked for their efforts to warn those many more who definitely are not.

People are free to believe or not to believe; I would not have drawn this to their attention if it was a mistake with the claim in any way - it is not. I have seen before how this company deals with this sort of issue - rather differently than is portrayed on here by the rep. The rep has given many false statements as I and others have shown; yet they are still believed by a few.