book-your-driving-test.co.uk

bazster

Sheldon_Cooper wrote: »

Morally, maybe, but sadly not legally.

Indeed so.

johnnyboyrebel

bazster wrote: »

If it relies on fleecing the gullible (your word), then it is dodgy.

Why?

Assuming this company take the money and books the test then whats the problem?

Its no different to a travel agent office charging over the odds when the same holiday is cheaper online as they know the convenience of just nipping in there and then warrants the extra they charge.

bazster

johnnyboyrebel wrote: »

Why?

Assuming this company take the money and books the test then whats the problem?

Its no different to a travel agent office charging over the odds when the same holiday is cheaper online as they know the convenience of just nipping in there and then warrants the extra they charge.

You used the word "gullible". Taking money from people just because you can (i.e. because they are gullible) is immoral.

I work with people with learning disabilities, many of whom are extremely gullible due to their disability. They have a lot of problems with beggars who target them on the street, knowing that they are gullible, and persuade them to hand over money. Presumably that's also OK with you?

Your Travel Agent analogy is absurd. The Travel Agent offers something in return for the higher price (high-street convenience, for those who are so inclined), but these people provide nothing in return for their premium, given that it's just as easy to book online on the DirectGov website without paying the premium.

In my opinion DirectGov should blow these con artists out of the water by out-bidding them on Google AdWords, but I suppose there are lots of rules which say they can't do that.

johnnyboyrebel

bazster wrote: »

You used the word "gullible". Taking money from people just because you can (i.e. because they are gullible) is immoral.

I work with people with learning disabilities, many of whom are extremely gullible due to their disability. They have a lot of problems with beggars who target them on the street, knowing that they are gullible, and persuade them to hand over money. Presumably that's also OK with you?

Your Travel Agent analogy is absurd. The Travel Agent offers something in return for the higher price (high-street convenience, for those who are so inclined), but these people provide nothing in return for their premium, given that it's just as easy to book online on the DirectGov website without paying the premium.

In my opinion DirectGov should blow these con artists out of the water by out-bidding them on Google AdWords, but I suppose there are lots of rules which say they can't do that.

Gullible in the sense of someone who doesnt realise they can book directly. To even suggest removing any service of the same nature in any area is absurd. Its not a con when people openly use that service.

bazster

johnnyboyrebel wrote: »

Gullible in the sense of someone who doesnt realise they can book directly. To even suggest removing any service of the same nature in any area is absurd. Its not a con when people openly use that service.

I don't see how your refining your definition of "gullible" helps at all. In fact, you have merely emphasised the fact that these "services" offer no value whatsoever, they are nothing but traps for the unwary. As I recently said on another thread, stealing from fools is still stealing.

As for your argument that because people fall for it, it's not a con...

johnnyboyrebel

bazster wrote: »

I don't see how your refining your definition of "gullible" helps at all. In fact, you have merely emphasised the fact that these "services" offer no value whatsoever, they are nothing but traps for the unwary. As I recently said on another thread, stealing from fools is still stealing.

As for your argument that because people fall for it, it's not a con...

I have no idea what this conversation is even about.

Answer these questions.

Did this site book the test for the user?
Did the user choose to book the test?

You cannot say yes we have many people who are not very clued up so will use sites like this therefore we should close all sites like this down. its ludicrous. Why do people not take responsibility for their own actions anymore??

bazster

johnnyboyrebel wrote: »

I have no idea what this conversation is even about.

It is about your belief that it is OK to hoodwink gullible people into handing over money for something they didn't need.

Answer these questions:

Do people using this site realise they can book direct?
Do people using this site even realise they are not booking direct?

johnnyboyrebel

bazster wrote: »

Answer these questions:

Do people using this site realise they can book direct?
Do people using this site even realise they are not booking direct?

answers:

A: Of course, noone was taught at school how to book a driving test online. Its just something people just know.

B. If they dont then they should be worried.

jsmith4519

Just an update, the company have booked the test but not on the date requested and have still not replied to any email. Oh well guess just have to be grateful we didn't lose the money and also learnt to keep the missis away from any internet purchasing.

tradecarbon

jsmith4519 wrote: »

Just an update, the company have booked the test but not on the date requested and have still not replied to any email. Oh well guess just have to be grateful we didn't lose the money and also learnt to keep the missis away from any internet purchasing.

The company is doing nothing wrong. They are providing a service and as long as in this case they booked the test then nothing illegal has been done.

There are many companies providing similar services, as long as they do what they say for the money then it's legal. Not happy with these types of services then don't use them.

As for the date of the driving test, due to the long waiting list they wouldn't be able to guarantee it. If they say that dates are guaranteed and don't deliver then this is misrepresentation.