3 Mobile failed to pay my cashback, Topcashback will pay half, should I accept?

dbuk44

And I`m not disagreeing with you Mobile Junkie.

I have absolutely no legal knowledge whatsoever, which is why I gave no definitive advice

But look, you'll agree that most of these "not guarenteed" statements are cut and paste directly from the cashback websites themselves.

Do you have examples to share where people have tried and failed to sue providers of cashback?

mobilejunkie

I don't need to - but you'll fail to find any who have succeeded. They are two completely separate contracts and the network has nothing whatever to do with the cashback/dealer one. The same applies with cashback sites. Your contract is with it, not the merchant - and it explicitly states that cashback in not guaranteed but is dependent on their collection from the merchant (or, usually, its affiliate network).

When people fail to get their (mobile phone) cashbacks there's a massive knashing of teeth and accusations against virtually everyone; threats of writing to Watchdog, Consumer Direct and the other usual suspects. It's laughable. Anyone not understanding where they stand in law should not enter into the contract and then expect that they have legal rights which don't exist!

makavelianz

Another customer waiting on topcashback and 3 to get their thumbs out their bums and cough up. Already overdue nearly 4 months, not looking good for both companies on this thread, im waiting on £20 for payg mifi deal.

Old_Gold

The cashback system you are talking about was different than the affiliates. The contract you make were with the company themselves and not with the network even though you paid the network. With the affiliates you are taken straight through to the retailers site. Your contract is with the retailer but make with a promise of cashback. The retailer advertises for affiliates and therefore should take on the responibility of the transaction as long as it follows the rules. The retailer does not give you the option of withdrawing from the sale if the cashback is not given and therefore the buyer purchases on the assumption of the reduced price. All it needs is for one judge to rule that the retailer is using this method to increase sales by offering an inducement which they have no intention of honouring and the floodgates will then open for turned down claims.
Press the retailer they will not want to go to court.

mobilejunkie

All very nice - but very wrong. "opening the floodgates" does not, in fact, set any precedent should it happen - and it won't. The terms of the contract between the user (contractee) and cashback site (contractor) has an explicit term of non-guarantee of cashback; since the cashback has to be received from the merchant and is therefore outside the control of the cashback site any such case brought by the contractee would fail. Of course, anyone wishing to throw good money after bad is quite welcome to do so!

Old_Gold

Because something is written in black and white does not maike it automatically legal. If it was so we wouldn't have so many lawyers.:A

Lynsey

Old_Gold wrote: »

Because something is written in black and white does not maike it automatically legal. If it was so we wouldn't have so many lawyers.:A

I 100% agree and with cashback sites being relatively new the T&C's haven't been tested and could be deemed as unfair - could also be deemed as fair as well.
I know of an instance where a cashback site was threatened with the small claims and settled before it proceeded. Why??
It could have been simply that it was cheaper to pay up rather than spend time and travel to defend. It could also be that if they lost it would open up a "can of worms". That's why it's worth the effort................especially if you live far away from the cashback site.
If you don't mind a small loss, it may be worth a try.......who knows??

Lynsey

mobilejunkie

That's how solicitors get rich and multiply....!

ArsenalFC

Update: I decided to accept half payment simply because the amount is too small for me to go through the small claims. Mobile junkie is right that I was directing my case wrongly to 3, should of been topcashback, which I realised sometime later. If it had been like £100+ declined then I would of pursue it, the only reason TCB offered me half is because I was making a big fuss getting to the root of the problem and not prepare to back down knowing that i had complied with the procedures. I also had a £12 claim which took them 9 months to pay me, had I not kept on their case, it would of got nowhere. I told them as much as that they have failed me as a company on a number of occasions and will not be using them again.

Cashback sites have T&Cs which I dont see it as law. If procedures are followed correctly then payment should be expected. I have been suspicious that the blame are always with the merchants declining payments and these cashback companies just washed themselves clean. My suspicions are that they are both at it.

scottishboi

I had the same issue with TCB and 3 mobile. Was expecting £100 cashback but 3 said that they paid it to someone else. As soon as I said to TCB that I was taking legal advice they offered to pay £75.00 of the cashback.

I dont know if its 3 or TCB refusing to pay but there is something dodgy going on. If 3 aren't giving anyone cashback why are they still allowed to be on there?