mobiles.co.uk cashback

mobilejunkie

I've only had one occasion when one of my people had this (fairly recent); all the other claims (including mine) had encountered no (such) problems (we have had others!). When this happened it was followed up.

Usually (most of the time) they send an email and/or text withing 3-5 days saying they received it; then shortly after another saying it's been accepted. The instance in our case saw a delay of about 2-3 weeks. Coincidentally, after a strong email the acknoweldgements did arrive.

I believe you submit by rc? If so check proof of delivery. They can't avoid paying then because you will have them by the short and proverbials.

If it's any comfort, I can't remember the last time I used rc for any claims with any dealer; although that breaks my own groundrules I do watch like a hawk and should I not have confirmation in short order there's always a foolproof back-up plan. I always submit claims immediately the bills arrive.

If you haven't had confirmation from them within two weeks of sending it, follow it up by email (initially). Not much point in wasting money on postage unless you have to - BUT the acknowledgement timescale in their own t&c is 7 days. Like all cpw companies, they pick, choose and reinvent which t&c they follow. Also like all CPW companies, they have rewritten their t&c to suit themsleves frequently - the 7 days seems to have disappeared from my most recent contract set.

It makes me laugh when (in bold) you're instructed to contact them if you haven't had your cheque within 40 days of their receipt of the bill when they boast on their website that they are one of the fastest payers on the net. Of course, even those who seemed keen to make up excuses for them when they ran out of their own now seem to acknowledge that they ignore such statements and the reality is quite different. On the plus side, their payments have got quicker over recent months - but so have the instances of unjustified refusals to pay.

As long as you have proof of delivery (and what you sent) you have no problem. If they don't cough up you know what to do - then they will, since you do know what you're doing.

Guys_Dad

mobilejunkie wrote: »

On the plus side, their payments have got quicker over recent months - but so have the instances of unjustified refusals to pay.
.

I am glad that you now agree that their refusals to pay legitimate claims are on the increase which is why I have changed my stance against them despite, when I suggested that this was on the increase, you wrote in https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2581743

"Denial of claims always was an issue - when brought to (your) attention on here your main concern was to ignore the facts I repeatedly presented and give more benefit of the doubt than belief engendered to whatever excuses and falsehoods the rep served up. It was always plain to some of us that what was happening in reality was quite different - and little different (if at all) to what is happening now. It simply didn't take us 12 months to label it as a "new development".

It is obvious from the increase in posts on this particular issue - denial of legitimate claims - that something is rotten in the State of Denmark, so to speak and it would be fascinating to know if this is an incompetence issue or a deliberate strategy set down by management. We can all speculate, but it would be particularly interesting to hear from any recent ex-employees of the company,

mobilejunkie

What you really mean is that all the ones YOU weren't aware of a YEAR ago despite my awareness and warnings were batted away by you and one or two others whilst you spent your efforts making up lame excuses for them when the so-called rep (PR man) ran out of his own. More denied claims over such a long period of time finding their way on here is one thing; the way they were dealing with customers all along made it perfectly clear what they were about. CPW has always been incompetent (to some peoples' benefit at times!) but they have had long periods of determined and utter dishonesty. You hardly require an ex-insider to know that if you've had enough experience with them, but perhaps they might feed your fundamental need to defend them that way since all else has plainly failed. Who needs to speculate when you've a customer of this lot for long enough??

Lynsey

Thanks for your reply to my query mj, much appreciated.

With regards to Mobiles.co.uk and their cashback payment issues, it looks to me that's it's purely for profitability. If they can delay/decline cashbacks and members don't follow it up, then they will continue to do it. Their reputation is ruined, there branding is ruined, but it must be more profitable so they don't appear to care. Why members don't chase issues up immediately, I just don't know?? Do they just expect these deals to be too good to be true?? Are they just too lazy?? Do they not know how to chase up?? Probably lots of other reasons as well and a positive is that as long as Mobiles.co.uk are winning against these "non-triers" there will always be offers for those that do chase up.

Lynsey

Guys_Dad

1. I do NOT defend them. I take exception to your tone, language and self promotion, not your message. I have written this many times, but you choose to ignore it and accuse a couple of us of defending the company whereas we were complaining about your actual prose.

2. It is individual people who are dishonest - companies are inanimate things. So I just wonder how many individuals are colluding or conspiring, if "the company" is dishonest, in actually denying legitimate claims. Clearly this would involve senior and junior people to make this happen. And when thieves fall out............................

I am not arguing with you about whether it is incompetence, lack of staff or corporate dishonesty. I genuinely don't know, but can speculate as well as the next person. I fail to see how a relatively junior claims processor could gain financially from rejecting legitimate claims - (I can see how a profit-sharing director could) - unless there was some measurable cash incentive in place or some scheme that said x% of claims are needed to be rejected.

So, I would be interested to know exactly what culture is in place within the junior ranks of the company when it comes to customers and how it came about.

mobilejunkie

I'm only interested in one thing; making sure they pay up for all my contracts and quite a few others I watch over. In order to do that it's important to see through the smoke and deal with them as they require. When they do things properly it's a breeze. When they try it on they get an appropriate and immediate response - and I have at times also played them at their own game to achieve that. One way or another they WILL pay us. However, that's because I know what they're like and have seen most of their tricks before - and make quite sure that all our claims are virtually foolproof no matter WHAT they chose to get up to.

Lynsey, people believe what they want to believe; in other words, they give the dealer the benefit of the doubt because (usually) they have little or no prior experience of the dealer (and sometimes cashback schemes). They also haven't done thorough research and are reluctant to start suing etc. They lack the knowledge to do so (hence the repeated questions about LBAs etc) and eventually get to the stage where they need someone else to wave a magic wand for them. Some have had limited exposure to such deals in the past and managed to get paid without problems, so think the dealer always treats people fairly.

Con tricks have worked throughout human history because people are attracted like a magnet to something for nothing. In this case, it is possible to actually achieve a great deal for absolutely nothing - but like most things in life you have to put some time and effort in. Otherwise you become one of the endless line of people who lose out. It's actually a pity that it's easier to play the game now (and with fewer players on the other side) because deals aren't generally as good and common as before; we have actually been part of a movement to thwart the dishonest dealers with the end result we actually have more restricted opportunites ourselves. Still, I manage to have 8 current contracts for myself despite getting down to only 3 a few months ago. There are new players in the market so things may improve in time. I live in hope that the pinnacle of excellent cashback offers and customer service - Mobiles2yourDoor/Phones4u - return with a vengeance at some point; if and when I'll be off to them like a bullet from a gun - provided they are as excellent as before. The contrast between them and CPW stands like a monument even now

Lynsey

I think that is part of the problem (con-tricks). People/members/customers just expect it to fail and when it does they just let it die and probably tell themselves "never again". But both you and myself (and others) know that even though "all that glitters is not gold" - with cashback mobile contracts it can and should. As long as a company survives and you play 100% by the T&C's, you can then make them honour what they offered. You might have to play hard, but that's because you were forced to by them - not by choice.

Lynsey

Guys_Dad

Lynsey wrote: »

I think that is part of the problem (con-tricks). People/members/customers just expect it to fail and when it does they just let it die and probably tell themselves "never again". But both you and myself (and others) know that even though "all that glitters is not gold" - with cashback mobile contracts it can and should. As long as a company survives and you play 100% by the T&C's, you can then make them honour what they offered. You might have to play hard, but that's because you were forced to by them - not by choice.

Lynsey

Lynsey - I agree with you. But you refer to "the company", and this was my 2nd point in my post.

Imagine that you had been hired by mobiles.co.uk in their CS/cashback division. I take it as read that you are an honest person.

In your induction, it would be perfectly fair for the managers to tell you that you should scrutinise all claims and, if there was the slightest mistake, reject the claim. That is legitimate. In the course of your work, you could make mistakes and reject perfectly good claims because of your "incompetence" for a better word. But these would be rare.

If, however, the company went further - as in the instances of other companies in other industries as shown on Rogue Trader/WatchDog - and actually made it conditional on your continuing employment that you reject or ignore a certain number of legitimate claims in the hope that they just give up, would you do that? That would make you a party to defrauding customers.

Personally, I would quit and I have no reason to believe that you, MJ or most others on here would do the same. So, if "the company" is dishonest, then they are employing dishonest staff - or corrupting previously honest people - or they have brought in computer systems that are either bug-ridden ( I don't buy that one) or are specifically programmed, like slot machines, to deny some claims.

And, if you or I or MJ had walked out because there was this scam going on, would you not feel tempted to expose this?

I genuinely don't understand how a company, part of a large group, employing a number of staff - and I don't know their head count - can continue to act in a premeditated dishonest way - as against taking full advantage of generous (to them) t&c - for so long without some form of whistleblowing.

Guys_Dad

MJ - I have to say that your post above is absolutely spot on and thoroughly objective. I agree with almost every word, but would love to get more inside info on how deep into the company the con trick you refer to goes - hence my previous post.

Lynsey

Guys_Dad wrote: »

Lynsey - I agree with you.

I take it as read that you are an honest person.

I suggest you put your glasses on and "read" again. :rotfl:

I'm all for the consumer against any unscrupulous company (I will also take advantage if possible - and so will they), but I can fully imagine why this company may delay and further delay payments - it's so obvious and profitable. Legitimate declines are a different matter and that's naughty - though their excuse would be a "system failure" and an apology (if lucky).

100% (or near 100%) cashback deals are NOT sustainable - hence the declines/delays etc., many have got to fail - just make sure it's not yours.

Lynsey