We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Sunday Times refusing to pay up...

belafron
Posts: 4 Newbie
Hi everyone,
First of all, I'm aware that this is a trivial issue, but it annoys me all the same.
Bought the Sunday Times two weeks ago and noticed there was a missing section . I emailed their customer services in order to get the replacement section (in gear which I particularly enjoy). I was told that subject to availability, one would be sent out to me.
Over a week later I have not received anything so contact customer services again and ask for a voucher to compensate me for my missing section. I then get the following response:
"News International has in the past issued vouchers to a very limited number of readers as part of a customer loyalty programme. This has now ceased.
However we have identified a number of instances where counterfeit vouchers have been claimed. We are therefore stopping all claims on these particular vouchers whilst we investigate"
My question therefore is: Does this fall under the SOGA as an item not being "as described" and am I entitled to a refund? If so, what should I do to get them to pay up?
In the contents of the newspaper, the section was listed as being included and it was not. I have emailed a response to this, and will update later.
First of all, I'm aware that this is a trivial issue, but it annoys me all the same.
Bought the Sunday Times two weeks ago and noticed there was a missing section . I emailed their customer services in order to get the replacement section (in gear which I particularly enjoy). I was told that subject to availability, one would be sent out to me.
Over a week later I have not received anything so contact customer services again and ask for a voucher to compensate me for my missing section. I then get the following response:
"News International has in the past issued vouchers to a very limited number of readers as part of a customer loyalty programme. This has now ceased.
However we have identified a number of instances where counterfeit vouchers have been claimed. We are therefore stopping all claims on these particular vouchers whilst we investigate"
My question therefore is: Does this fall under the SOGA as an item not being "as described" and am I entitled to a refund? If so, what should I do to get them to pay up?
In the contents of the newspaper, the section was listed as being included and it was not. I have emailed a response to this, and will update later.
0
Comments
-
well your issue would be/is with the retailer0
-
-
wow, you're really claiming for a missing section of a newspaper?helpful tips
it's spelt d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y
there - 'in or at that place'
their - 'owned by them'
they're - 'they are'
it's bought not brought (i just bought my chicken a suit from that new shop for £6.34)0 -
And why shouldn't they?
As has been said, no disclaimer can override your statutory rights. Your issue is with the retailerOne important thing to remember is that when you get to the end of this sentence, you'll realise it's just my sig.0 -
How much of a refund were you expecting ? I presume you got the rest of the newspaper ?0
-
It was one full part of the paper that was missing- travel/work/ingear/money, so whilst I originally wanted the missing sections replaced, as this is now not going to happen, a refund of the original purchase price would not be unreasonable to expect IMO.
Thanks for clarification regarding my issue being with the retailer; whilst this may technically be the case I thought I would have more luck with the newspaper directly.
As I mentioned before, it's a trivial issue but it puzzled me as to why it couldn't be easily resolved by The Sunday Times.0 -
It was one full part of the paper that was missing- travel/work/ingear/money, so whilst I originally wanted the missing sections replaced, as this is now not going to happen, a refund of the original purchase price would not be unreasonable to expect IMO.
Thanks for clarification regarding my issue being with the retailer; whilst this may technically be the case I thought I would have more luck with the newspaper directly.
As I mentioned before, it's a trivial issue but it puzzled me as to why it couldn't be easily resolved by The Sunday Times.
Have you not got more things to deal with in life than a missing page from a news paper.0 -
Have you not got more things to deal with in life than a missing page from a news paper.
Have you not got more things to deal with in life than flaming members of an internet site?One important thing to remember is that when you get to the end of this sentence, you'll realise it's just my sig.0 -
I've had the magazine bit missing before, and just went back to the shop to get a spare(or phoned them up and asked them to put one aside). Never been an issue.Should've = Should HAVE (not 'of')
Would've = Would HAVE (not 'of')
No, I am not perfect, but yes I do judge people on their use of basic English language. If you didn't know the above, then learn it! (If English is your second language, then you are forgiven!)0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 349.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 452.9K Spending & Discounts
- 242.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 619.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.3K Life & Family
- 255.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards