Mobiles.co.uk

mobilejunkie

At least it's a PAYG phone; that is easier to correct since there won't be a third party involved to any significant extent (the network). As long as you/they have proof of all the attempts to contact them so quickly it should be straightforward to extract repayment. However, you haven't actually requested a cancellation, so have restricted your options to compensation/exchange because you'll now be outside the 7 days cancellation period under the DSR. On the other hand, they haven't fulfilled the contract by sending the incorrect phone - so you should still have the option of rescinding the contract because it wasn't completed.

swilliam

mobilejunkie wrote: »

However, you haven't actually requested a cancellation, .

The first two emails requested a returns number for a full refund.

However, you dont get proof of sending web based mail .

Silk

swilliam wrote: »

The first two emails requested a returns number for a full refund.

However, you dont get proof of sending web based mail .

Yeah this is the big problem with them with this automated way of doing it as discussed in earlier threads.
The more I read some of the contributions about this company the more I'm convinced this is by far the worst company to deal with :mad:

mobilejunkie

In this case the correct phone was never supplied so they have failed to fulfill the contract. Whether there is or is not proof of the prompt emails a letter to that effect demanding to return and refund because Mobiles.co have not fulfilled the contract should be sufficient in a court of law, backed up by oral evidence of numerous emails sent - provided proof is available of what was actually ordered in the first place against what actually turned up.

Guys_Dad

They ordered a PAYG phone and they received the wrong one, plus they were overcharged by £9

It seems to me that you have a claim under the banks' guarantee for Direct Debits. If they have taken more than was agreed, that is a form of theft. You should get your friend to ask the bank to reclaim the direct debit payment as it was not authorised for that amount.

That might get a better and faster response when they see they have lost the money!!

All this depends, of course, on being able to prove that they supplied the wrong goods.

On another point, though, I can't help thinking that the concerted personal attacks on their rep Ben may have been a mistake. He no longer comes on the forum and, although there may be some dispute as to how effective he may or may not have been - and I accept that there are clearly instances where he was definitely not - at least any comments posted by him and tacit offers to help and sort things out did give the OPs some additional written back up to help any claims - as per Voda reps etc.

So, yes, you guys put a flea in his ear and he retired with his tail between his leg, but since you can't PM Ben and the company's response via email seems poor, in hindsight do you really think that it is any better that he was hounded off now that the forum's avenue to contact him has dried up? If you do, I can't agree.

mobilejunkie

Then we will disagree. I have always enforced my right to payments without Ben's help where required (and it has been) - anyone else is well advised to do the same rather than put up with the piffle and misinformation provided by him.

It wasn't a direct debit either - but a one-off payment on a debit card. That isn't covered by the direct debit guarantee.

mobilejunkie

Do you mean it gets a good review - by THEM? Or perhaps by one of the referral sites which make money from using them? They write the rubbish on the Quidco description. They always blow their own trumpet but woe betide those who take them lightly and believe the hype. Do things right and you'll be fine (most of the time); if not and you HAVE covered yourself they WILL pay you - one way or another. Just make sure you DO follow all the groundrules. I always find that if you are prepared for the worse usually you'll be pleasantly surprised - but when you aren't it's not a problem to extract payments.

Silk

Guys_Dad wrote: »

On another point, though, I can't help thinking that the concerted personal attacks on their rep Ben may have been a mistake. He no longer comes on the forum and, although there may be some dispute as to how effective he may or may not have been

Hi GD,
Why you think disputes with Ben are personal attacks is beyond me however it's probably best to look at the whole picture.
Yes you are right Ben has not logged in for over a month and the last time he posted was over two months ago but I am certain he has been reading the threads
There have been a lot of changes over the last few months regarding CPW and mobiles.co.uk.
CPW have dissolved the old company and started another having split the assets of Talk Talk etc etc. The MD has left mobiles.co.uk back in Feb or March and from what I can gather there has been several changes so whether Ben is still there is open to question.
There have been at least 3 serious complaints to CPW's directors regarding Ben's antics on here, (and yes I was one of them ) it may well be if he is still there that he has been instructed not to post or take part ??? There is no question that he on more than one occasion threw his toys out of the pram and left under a cloud only to return to cause more mayhem than solve any problems !!!
As to being of any use on here is beyond any doubt, he was about as much use as a cocolate teapot and any problems he claimed to have solved would have been done without his interjection or support anyway !!!

Originally Posted by Guys Dad
and I accept that there are clearly instances where he was definitely not

Too right there GD and if you look back at the history of his posts the vast majority of cases he was no use whatsoever !!!

Originally Posted by Guys Dad
at least any comments posted by him and tacit offers to help and sort things out did give the OPs some additional written back up to help any claims

He made many comments and offers of help of which most of them resulted in false promises, further delays, further excuses, further problems and not least distraction for the OP's taking further action.

Originally Posted by Guys Dad
in hindsight do you really think that it is any better that he was hounded off now that the forum's avenue to contact him has dried up? If you do, I can't agree.

You might use the word hounded but I prefer to use exposed
As has been stated on here and elsewhere he was a marketing guy not a CS guy and whilst a few got taken in by his spin many didn't and could see exactly what was happening.
Why you think not having a chocolate teapot on here is a loss is beyond me ???????

Guys_Dad

Silk - Thanks for the info re the reorganisation. Interesting to know the reasons behind that. Did CPW think mobiles.co.uk were (a) too easy to get cashback or (b) too difficult !!!! Or too honest?????

On the point about Ben's comments - (a) he did have some successes acknowledged by MSE members who posted and (b) he did admit liability and promised action, even when that failed to materialise. That did give the OP some hard evidence to use, should it have been necessary.

On the point about personal attacks - come on! How many times was he called a liar and similar?? Even in parliament which is not held in much esteem with the downright dishonesty that has being going on, that is treated as a suspensionable attack with unparliamentary language. And the posts went beyond fair attacks on the company and became personal.

MJ - I might have to disagree that one-off debit payments are not covered by the DD guarantee or simailar. Many years ago, I used my bank card over the phone to buy a laser printer for my company. The outfit I chose tried to claim more than authorised. My bank account didn't have that much in it so it failed. Immediately they tried for another higher sum and that failed so they then chickened out and took another amount that did go through. The printer didn't appear and the company did a runner. The bank refunded me without question.


My friend's cashback claim is currently in and has been acknowledged so we will see.

mobilejunkie

Onestopphoneshop is just another cpw clone; and many had numerous successful deals with them until they turned nasty and dishonest. CPW companies should never be taken lightly - any reasonable (not even thorough) research would soon throw up the fact that Mobiles.co is just another cpw dealer. That is both good and bad; the main good is that they are unlikely to go bust and so you can always sue - IF you've covered yourself at every stage. Dialaphone is now owned by Phones4u - who whilst cpw was turning ino a thoroughy dishonest company were going completely in the opposite direction (but unfortunately haven't had any decent deals for about a year).

Having said that, practically all cashback deals nowadays are at least 18 months long - and both companies have shown they can go from being fantastic to being the opposite in just one month. In other words, just because a dealer is trustworthy now (as cpw once were) shouldn't mean you can rely on them continuing to be so. As with investments, the honesty of the dealer can go down (rapidly) as well as up (which takes much longer - a lesson cpw are now learning, methinks).