Overpayment Received From E2save

byb3

kitty wrote:

I wouldn't have any sympathy with 2save. There are allegations that are in such a financial mess that they won't now pay cashback/money4me without lots of pressure or legal action. Be warmed...this is beginning to look like another possible FWDcellular. And don't think having CPW as a parent protects you...it doesn't...whole point of being a separate company.

It's a crap company. Try their price guarantee e.g....they won't even match CPW offers!!!!...little bit of smallprint that price match is at 'their discretion'.

whilst on here...whatever is said about 3 at least i got a sensible, honest and helpful e-mail response within a few hours when i asked about coverage. all i ever get from BT is an automated response saying they havn't got enough people to respond and should call them (itself a waste of time) and from o2 just silence on everthing as others here have found.

That scares me slightly.

Saying that I received my Money4Me without any hassle a few weeks ago. Just said that they had been pending for 45 days and a week later £40 was in my bank account.

Now waiting until june to get me £157.50 cashback.

Woby_Tide

andrew_b6k wrote:

R v GILKS (1972) :

---

D was overpaid winnings by mistake by a bookmaker. D knew that the bookmaker had made a mistake, but he kept the money. D said that "bookmakers are a race apart." It would be dishonest if your grocer gave you too much change and you kept it, but it was not dishonest in the case of a bookmaker.

Held: It was correct to invite the jury to put themselves in the defendant's position and decide whether he thought that he was acting dishonestly or honestly.

"On the face of it the defendant's conduct was dishonest: the only possible basis on which the jury could find that the prosecution had not established dishonesty would be if they thought it possible that the defendant did have the belief which he claimed to have."

GUILTY

---

Who's silly now?

I'd say D is silly now as it was R that did the naughty deed and should have been in court


Do I win a prize?

andy88_2

Woby_Tide wrote:

I'd say D is silly now as it was R that did the naughty deed and should have been in court

I think the Crown may sue you for defaming the Queen like this

Do I win a prize?

5 years transportation

D = defendant

quixy_2

abarthman wrote:

Jeez, this thread separates the opportunists from the, erm, overly cautious, doesn't it?

Me? I'd keep schtum and fire in a second claim at month 12. What's the worst that could happen? They tell you that you've already had your full refund and then you can act the daft laddie. They won't pursue it; it's not worth the hassle. And, anyway, for every person they overpay, there'll be many hundreds who don't get their rental refunded, because they forget or don't fully comply with the claim requirements.

Mobile phone companies are run by wideboys who'd take the sugar out of your tea given half the chance, so I wouldn't hesitate to take advantage of their screw-up.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
nice one arbarthman, dead right. These companies rely on people making mistakes (not claiming, outside of terms etc)....why shouldn't it work the other way round?
Do the "moral majority" on this thread seriously think if you overpaid them they'd be falling over themselves to refund you????