📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

The Mobile Outlet

Options
1104105107109110285

Comments

  • kltpzyxm
    kltpzyxm Posts: 391 Forumite
    Hi rose28454,
    you say it should have been received on 11/9/2007...but when does the royal mail website say it was delivered?
    Also, by my calculations, 12/9/2007 is 21 days from 22/8/2007, as my T&C don't have the word "Inclusive" in them.....
  • Quentin
    Quentin Posts: 40,405 Forumite
    James212 wrote: »
    I think this is what TMO is trying to do in my case: even though I won my claim for cash back without TMO defending it, they didn't pay up for a good two weeks after I requested a warrant to be issued (costing £55). When the cheque arrived, not only was it £55 less that it should have been, it was dated the day before the warrant was issued. So either TMO wrote me the cheque then waited two weeks before posting it to me, or they predated the cheque and are trying to avoid paying the cost of the warrant......

    Assuming the cheque came to you direct from TMO, and your warrant has not yet been dealt with by the bailiff, you need to inform the bailiff that part payment has been received, and they will still progress your warrant and pursue them for the balance remaining. (Even though they have now paid you the amount on the original judgement, the warrant was issued by the court, and they must abide by its new amount they must pay - ie the original judgement + £55, plus any other direct costs they incur with the bailiffs whilst they are dealing with the warrant.)

    Sending a cheque dated the day prior to the warrant being issued won't fool the bailiffs.

    As a rule, once you have won judgement, don't contact the Defendant (even to let them know the bailiff is on the way).

    The court sends the Defendant the judgement, with details of how (and when) they must pay the claimant.

    If enforcement is required, just do it via the court, and let them contact the Defendant.

    Keeping copies of any payments received (and the envelopes they came in) is also a good idea.

    The bailiff dealing with this will be from the court local to TMO.

    ****************************************

    If you want to have the greatest satisfaction from winning a judgement, then allow the Defendant 21 days to pay you. And start enforcement proceedings as soon as 28 days are up. If a ccj is paid in full within 28 days of the judgement, then the ccj doesn't get registered. But once 28 days have passed, then the ccj is put on the Register of CCJs, and remains for 6 years, causing much strife for the Defendant and making it hard for them to get goods on credit etc., and generally is bad for their reputation.
  • Quentin
    Quentin Posts: 40,405 Forumite
    don9999 wrote: »
    My question.
    Am I within my rights to claim the FULL cash repayment, rather than just the current cashback payment? ie. the full £480?

    Don't quite understand how you would want to give more business to a company you have had to sue already???

    Anyway, to answer your question, if you complied with the conditions, then their failure to pay you is a fundamental breach of the contract which allows you to claim the full amount due (plus interest on the instalment overdue from the date it should have been paid).
  • rose28454
    rose28454 Posts: 4,963 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker Car Insurance Carver!
    kltpzyxm wrote: »
    Hi rose28454,
    you say it should have been received on 11/9/2007...but when does the royal mail website say it was delivered?
    Also, by my calculations, 12/9/2007 is 21 days from 22/8/2007, as my T&C don't have the word "Inclusive" in them.....

    The Royal Mail website says the 12.9.7. I will check his T & C's to see if it says inclusive but even so if it was delivered on 11.9.7 as it should have been ( if they did not change their address! ) then it would be within 21 days if you count the bill date! So where do we go from here??
  • kltpzyxm
    kltpzyxm Posts: 391 Forumite
    rose28454 wrote: »
    The Royal Mail website says the 12.9.7. I will check his T & C's to see if it says inclusive but even so if it was delivered on 11.9.7 as it should have been ( if they did not change their address! ) then it would be within 21 days if you count the bill date! So where do we go from here??
    I have a copy of the T&C from June 2007, and they don't have the word inclusive in the cashback claim section.....
    Why do you think that TMO have a redirection on their snail mail and not informed anyone of the fact???
    Anyone (like your son) who sends their claim at the last nanosecond could be caught out by the extra day caused by the redirection....
  • James212
    James212 Posts: 62 Forumite
    Quentin wrote: »
    Assuming the cheque came to you direct from TMO, and your warrant has not yet been dealt with by the bailiff, you need to inform the bailiff that part payment has been received, and they will still progress your warrant and pursue them for the balance remaining.

    Hi Quentin,

    Apologies, I neglected to say that the cheque was from TMO, as per your assumption, and after speaking to the bailiff, I had to write a letter stating that I had received part payment of the amount of the warrant and that I wanted them to proceed with recovering the remaining amount of the warrant (£55).

    That letter was dated 29.08.07, but when phoning the bailiff again a couple of weeks later, it would appear they did not receive this letter, so I faxed this across, which after calling them again, they confirmed that they received. I'm going to call the bailiff tomorrow and find out what is happening. Last thing I heard was about a month ago, when they mentioned that the warrant had to be reissued to the 'new' address.
  • thesaint
    thesaint Posts: 4,324 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture Combo Breaker
    kltpzyxm wrote: »
    Anyone (like your son) who sends their claim at the last nanosecond could be caught out by the extra day caused by the redirection....

    ...or The Mobile Outlet could catch themselves out by the extra day. ;)
    Well life is harsh, hug me don't reject me.
  • rose28454
    rose28454 Posts: 4,963 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Combo Breaker Car Insurance Carver!
    thesaint wrote: »
    ...or The Mobile Outlet could catch themselves out by the extra day. ;)

    I know he was silly to leave it so late but you know what us Mum's are like. We dont like to cut the apron strings. I was going to London to see him and I offered to show him what to do as it was his first cashback deal!! He is sending me the letters and proof of posting back and I will compose a letter ( mse style! ) to send to them disputing this. Many thanks
  • taz63
    taz63 Posts: 68 Forumite
    Has anyone since the status of MOBILE MATTERS (UK) LTD
    (tmo) on WebCHeck: Status: Active - Proposal to Strike off
  • kltpzyxm
    kltpzyxm Posts: 391 Forumite
    thesaint wrote: »
    ...or The Mobile Outlet could catch themselves out by the extra day. ;)
    Here's hoping that they do, saint....
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 351.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 453.6K Spending & Discounts
  • 244.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 599K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177K Life & Family
  • 257.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.