Littlewoods delivery

Littlewoods

MissySJ wrote: »

The reason I'm refusing to take 'buy now pay later' is because so far you have given me wrong information, not contacted me at all and not delivered the item safely. So I have no faith in you putting this item on BNPL as you will probably make me pay later (with interest)

Hi,

I appreciate your concerns however; if you email the address given above I can guarantee that this will be done. Unfortunately, the way our system works is as the item is under investigation, it will remain on your account and undoubtedly a minimum payment will be requested which includes this iPad. If the requested minimum payment isn't met our system will automatically put your account in arrears and may charge an administration fee. Whilst we can leave notes to explain the situation on your account, as the account is run automatically, once a payment is late or missed we can't stop the arrears or charges happening. Obvoiusly we can correct this and once the investigation has been completed we can amend the account if necessary however, to avoid this completely the BNPL option has been given.

This BNPL option has been given as a way to make sure that you don't make payments towards this item whilst it is under investigation.

Many Thanks

Chris

Littlewoods Network Team

visidigi

Littlewoods_company_representative wrote: »

Hi,

I appreciate your concerns however; if you email the address given above I can guarantee that this will be done. Unfortunately, the way our system works is as the item is under investigation, it will remain on your account and undoubtedly a minimum payment will be requested which includes this iPad. If the requested minimum payment isn't met our system will automatically put your account in arrears and may charge an administration fee. Whilst we can leave notes to explain the situation on your account, as the account is run automatically, once a payment is late or missed we can't stop the arrears or charges happening. Obvoiusly we can correct this and once the investigation has been completed we can amend the account if necessary however, to avoid this completely the BNPL option has been given.

This BNPL option has been given as a way to make sure that you don't make payments towards this item whilst it is under investigation.

Many Thanks

Chris

Littlewoods Network Team

I'm not sure that's legal...you're charging a consumer for a good you have failed to deliver.

Your systems are utterly incompetent if you cannot suspend an account whilst an issue is investigated.

Does the BNPL option trigger a credit check or mark on the OP's credit file that finance has been taken out?

Sorry, but I am astonished, that, having failed to deliver an ordered item you expect the consumer to 'fix' the situation.

Unbelievable.

sarahg1969

visidigi wrote: »

I'm not sure that's legal...you're charging a consumer for a good you have failed to deliver.

Your systems are utterly incompetent if you cannot suspend an account whilst an issue is investigated.

Does the BNPL option trigger a credit check or mark on the OP's credit file that finance has been taken out?

Sorry, but I am astonished, that, having failed to deliver an ordered item you expect the consumer to 'fix' the situation.

Unbelievable.

Agreed - that is utterly shocking. :eek:

somethingcorporate

What an absolute disgrace.

You've failed to deliver to the customer and you are forcing them down an alley that may have far greater ramifications for them just to suit yourselves.

If you did put an account into arrears after failing to deliver I'd expect a grovelling apology and full refund as an absolute minimum.

How do you expect a court would view such contempt for the customer? And whether or not you (on an anonymous forum) provide guarantees that agreeing to a payment method just to avoid charges being made if it ever got to court I bet your legal team would jump at this as a reason for expecting the OP to pay for both.

I think it is absolute BS that you do not have the ability to suspend a payment where you have miserably failed in your service.

visidigi

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Are you sure?

Still have the same registered office as each other and that building is an operational centre for the retail division. Likewise in resolution to a complaint to the group CEO in 2011 their response talked about their colleagues in both Very and Yodel which wouldn't suggest a supplier

Yodel is one of the UK's largest home delivery and collection providers.

Until June 2010 the company was known as Home Delivery Network Limited (HDNL) until it, and its associated companies were rebranded. HDNL was formed in 2005 as part of The Littlewoods Shop Direct Group and was run as a separate company. It separated from Littlewoods Shop Direct Group in May 2008.

In January 2010 the company, through its subsidiary company Parcelpoint Limited, purchased the domestic B2B and B2C businesses of DHL Express (UK) Limited.

In 2010, its revenues were £723.56m.

Source = http://www.supplychainleaders.com/provider/yodel-home-delivery-network-ltd/825/

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Are you really agreeing to payment terms? Sounds much more like a simple way of working around a system constraint.

You are agreeing to the payment terms, otherwise they can't put you on it.

As for a 'simple' way of working round a system constraint, well quite frankly that constraint is not the consumers problem, this isn't a novelty to Littlewoods (after all this is Yodel we are talking about here...) so they really should have done something about this which means until the consumer has signed for the goods that no payments are required by the consumer.

This situation is entirely caused by the lack of capability of the system Littlewoods choose to use for their business - it shouldn't be at the expense of the consumer.

unholyangel

Littlewoods_company_representative wrote: »

Hi,

I appreciate your concerns however; if you email the address given above I can guarantee that this will be done. Unfortunately, the way our system works is as the item is under investigation, it will remain on your account and undoubtedly a minimum payment will be requested which includes this iPad. If the requested minimum payment isn't met our system will automatically put your account in arrears and may charge an administration fee. Whilst we can leave notes to explain the situation on your account, as the account is run automatically, once a payment is late or missed we can't stop the arrears or charges happening. Obvoiusly we can correct this and once the investigation has been completed we can amend the account if necessary however, to avoid this completely the BNPL option has been given.

This BNPL option has been given as a way to make sure that you don't make payments towards this item whilst it is under investigation.

Many Thanks

Chris

Littlewoods Network Team

I have to wonder, what exactly would you do if the customer cancelled their order under DSRs? Would you still charge them and put their account into arrears?

What would be utterly fantastic is if people didn't have to know their rights or complain because companies genuinely were acting in good faith and not looking at customers like walking wallets. But on the flip side, it would be equally fantastic if a minority of consumers didnt try and pull a fast one. Maybe one day

MissySJ

Update:
Last night I emailed the Littlewoods address above and informed them everything that has happened. I was asked to send a picture of my signature on my passport. I did this and also sent a picture of the delivery note.
This morning I received an email from Littlewoods stating that the signatures do NOT match. They are going to interview the driver but thankfully they have taken the item off my account now.
I would like to thank the advisor who has sorted this issue out within 16 hours once I made it public.
May this never happen to anyone else.
Thanks for your advise guys

somethingcorporate

So they could do it?? Thought it smelled a bit funny!

Great result OP.

MissySJ

Well no they couldn't do it, I have to pay towards it this month then I should get reimbursed next month. Great that I have to pay for something I don't have but at least I can clear my name.

unholyangel

MissySJ wrote: »

Well no they couldn't do it, I have to pay towards it this month then I should get reimbursed next month. Great that I have to pay for something I don't have but at least I can clear my name.

I had something similar with virgin. They added a business installation to my account which amounted to some £400. This put me over my credit limit (as I only had internet with them at the time @ £10 a month). They wanted me to pay the £400 until they could sort it out and then it would be applied as credit to my bill. Now given my bill was £10 a month, thats over 3 years it would take me to get the money back. So I declined stating that I am not liable for THEIR mistake and even after telling me they couldnt remove the charge, they did.

18.2.1 A contract may be considered unbalanced if it contains a term the supplier
is better able to bear. A risk lies more appropriately with the supplier if:
• it is within their control
• it is a risk the consumer cannot be expected to know about, or
• the supplier can insure against it more cheaply than the consumer.

The customer should not be liable (in any way) for a breach that is on the suppliers side.