The Mobile Outlet

Quentin

We all know the real reason they ask for the complete bill. It's part of the game - if we want our cashback we must complete all of the obstacles to get it, and this is just another one which it is easy for us to mess up.

We agree to send the complete bill by accepting the conditions prior to completing the purchase.

Whether or not they are entitled to it is a different matter!

fagun

Quentin wrote: »

...We agree to send the complete bill by accepting the conditions prior to completing the purchase...

True - but DPA does not rely solely on whether we agree to terms and conditions. I was just wondering whether it was the hassle of complaining to the ICO, or being able to use that as a challenge in the courts if they have rejected a claim just because the whole bill had not been submitted.

James212

Quentin wrote: »

We all know the real reason they ask for the complete bill. It's part of the game - if we want our cashback we must complete all of the obstacles to get it, and this is just another one which it is easy for us to mess up.

A good point Quentin, and one I agree with.
Personally, if I was ever in a situation where I'd been refused my cash back claim on the grounds that I'd only sent in the front page of my bill(s) (i.e. I'd forgotten to send in the itemised part of my bills), I would certainly consider challenging TMO on the grounds that they do not need this information.

Not a good situation to be in, I grant you, but I believe this offers some hope for those who find themselves having their claim rejected on such grounds.

Personally, unlike some others, it doesn't bother me if TMO can see who I've called, but I object to inclusion of such conditions purely to catch people out. If anyone could think of a reason why TMO needs the itemised bill (apart from to catch a few people out who don't send the complete bill) I'd be interested to hear it
As I have said in a previous post, what happens for those people who have contracts with providers who do not pay for itemised billing (do these still exist?). Presumably, this is okay as long as you send in "your complete bill", if this is the term in TMO's T&Cs.

sabelu

Has anyone sucessfully claimed against TMO through Moneyclaim? I am just about to start proceedings and wonder whether theyt contest.

Quentin

Read through recent pages (and this one) for the answer.

All Defendants can contest a court summons, but if you are certain you have stuck to the conditions you will win.

Read up on using a fundamental breach for claiming the whole amount outstanding.

rose28454

As per my previous post my son has just been turned down for his cashback and is sending the paperwork home for me to deal with. He called me last night very upset as he does not even have enough money in his account to send me the letter as his bank account is empty. Now if TMO had paid up as they should have he would be £180.00 in credit!! I for would not use or reccomend them again!!

rose28454

I e-mailed them on all three e-mail addresses and received one reply saying they would reply in 3 days and onr from Imran to say he is away on holiday and will reply when he gets back on 5.11.7 Unbelievable !!!!

grayme-m

James212 wrote: »

A good point Quentin, and one I agree with.
Personally, if I was ever in a situation where I'd been refused my cash back claim on the grounds that I'd only sent in the front page of my bill(s) (i.e. I'd forgotten to send in the itemised part of my bills), I would certainly consider challenging TMO on the grounds that they do not need this information.

Not a good situation to be in, I grant you, but I believe this offers some hope for those who find themselves having their claim rejected on such grounds.

Personally, unlike some others, it doesn't bother me if TMO can see who I've called, but I object to inclusion of such conditions purely to catch people out. If anyone could think of a reason why TMO needs the itemised bill (apart from to catch a few people out who don't send the complete bill) I'd be interested to hear it
As I have said in a previous post, what happens for those people who have contracts with providers who do not pay for itemised billing (do these still exist?). Presumably, this is okay as long as you send in "your complete bill", if this is the term in TMO's T&Cs.

I didn't pay for itemised billing so just sent through the whole bill; no problems of who I called then.

There have to be a few conditions to be able to turn down some payments, but I guess it is a fine line between conditions that are designed to part fools from their money and those deliberately placed to trip people up by being misleading.

grayme-m

rose28454 wrote: »

I e-mailed them on all three e-mail addresses and received one reply saying they would reply in 3 days and onr from Imran to say he is away on holiday and will reply when he gets back on 5.11.7 Unbelievable !!!!

Which email address is Imran on?

rose28454

grayme-m wrote: »

Which email address is Imran on?

I emailed on customerservices,cashback and forumqueries so it was one of them. I dont know which??