The Mobile Outlet

thesaint

Don't worry, they never explained in their previous terms and conditions how they calculated the cashback payments.

If you were a good lurker, you would've read it here though.;)

TenThirteen

Tee hee!! I must work on my lurking more!! I still think I'd probably win a court case for the cash back tho 'cos it's taken them so d@mn long to write me (even if incorrectly) a cheque!! They should get the letter this morning so will probably open it and ring me in about six days!! :rotfl:

Shelby

TenThirteen wrote: »

They should get the letter this morning so will probably open it and ring me in about six days!! :rotfl:

If this is your understanding of how The Mobile Outlet operates, you indeed need to work more on your lurking. A great deal more.

Quentin

TenThirteen wrote: »

I still think I'd probably win a court case for the cash back tho 'cos it's taken them so d@mn long to write me (even if incorrectly) a cheque!!

Everyone is allowed to make a mistake! (You seem to have done so in your Letter Before Action!)

Allow them some time to correct theirs and reissue a cheque, rather than continuing your court case.

They have an adequate defence to the matter as it stands. (You accepted their delays originally, and they have made an administrative error)

If you really are serious about a court case, then start again - send a new Letter Before Action, (no need for expensive registered mail), return the useless cheque to them and give them 7 days to reissue it. Keep a copy of the correspondence.

davidjones90

TenThirteen, I would have said I never received the cheque and it got lost in the mail, that way they would just issue you a new one. Could have been easier I think.

Shelby

Quentin wrote: »

Everyone is allowed to make a mistake!

:eek:

Er, forgive me, but your mistake was to write that, Quentin.

I think it would be wise to edit it...

patwa_2

If you've been prepared to wait this long for a response in the past, why don't you give them the same time again?

I'm not trying to attribute blame anywhere, but I do think we've gotten into a sue first ask questions later culture here, a la US.

It seems to have been a mistake with the cheque, I'm not saying it might not have been done deliberately to stall, but that would seem unlikely until we see what TMO will do next. It would look mighty embarassing for you to be on the steps of the court only to get a call from home saying the cheque had arrived and all was in order. You could be liable for hefty costs (although admittedly I'm not sure how small claims works for costs claimed by the other side for a case that never went ahead).

Cheers.

H.

Quentin

patwa wrote: »

It would look mighty embarassing for you to be on the steps of the court only to get a call from home saying the cheque had arrived and all was in order. You could be liable for hefty costs (although admittedly I'm not sure how small claims works for costs claimed by the other side for a case that never went ahead).

Your advice is not correct.

1) If a case reaches court it is long after the summons has been issued.

2) In the scenario you paint, the defendant's cheque would not cover the cost of the claim (which would be for money owed plus court fees). The case would continue, and the claimant would win judgement. The defendant would then have to pay the claimant the balance still owing from the original claim, plus any other costs accrued.

(A cheque arriving on the day of the hearing is still a worthless piece of paper - what you want is cash handed over on the steps of the court, paying you in full before you consider withdrawing the case.)

Quentin

Shelby wrote: »

...........your mistake was to write that, Quentin.
I think it would be wise to edit it.

My post was written to advise TenThirteen (who had posted that he thought he would win a case despite his mistaken understanding of the payment due) that it is unlikely he would win because up to now all that has happened is human error over the writing of a cheque, and to perhaps save him losing his case as well as his costs.

If you have a different view, why not join the debate, rather than want me to edit my post!

golddustmedia

Well just in case the mobile outlet are reading may I take the opportunity to say the following;

- You have seen fit to deny my whole cashback despite me complying with the T's & C's as you "didn't recieve the dispatch note" despite me sending it AND supplying 2 subsequent photocopies AND a fax when requested to do so.
- You ignore and fail to reply to 8 of the 10 emails sent to you. Instead you write to request another copy of dispatch note, then write to say it's arrived after the claim period, despite your letter of request being sent after the claim period. (What a pointless excercise).
- Your customer service call centre promises call backs in regard to the query (as post and email got us nowhere) but never call back.

All in all your service has been proven to me to be shockingly bad, especially in comparison to my partners cashback claim with onestopphoneshop which could not have been easier.

Furthermore discussion with work colleagues about this matter now means that none of my work colleagues (and by extension the family & friends they talk to) are willing to buy from you. Which by my guess in the last 6 months has seen approximately 50-70 people take out contract phones but deliberately avoid the mobile outlet due to knowledge of the service you have failed to give me (as well as being referred to this thread).

So, even if I never do get the cashback you've falsely denied I'm glad to say it will have cost you far more in lost business.

To one and all; The mobile outlet, caveat emptor!