Am I covered under the right to cancel for this purchase?

frugal_mike

Hi heart. The Distance Selling Regulations do give a right of cancellation, however for services you can agree to waive that right if the service is going to be supplied immediately.

This would cover situations such as ordering extra channels for a tv provider whereby the channels are available immediately upon you ordering them. Unfortunately their terms and conditions have this waiver in, so you have no right to cancel.

System

OlliesDad wrote: »

That is because anyone with knowledge of website design understands that the majority of people will not look any further on the page than the screen that appears (i.e. will not scroll down).

In other words they have designed their site to what appears to be a standard for website design just like other sites so nothing wrong with that then.

OlliesDad wrote: »

Why would an unknowing person think that they need to? They believe they are on the correct site, they want to apply for a passport and there is a big button that says "Apply Now". At no point following the click of that button does the website inform the user that it is just a checking service they are paying for.

I don't know what sort of computer you are using but on my laptop there are at least 2 pages where the disclaimer is clearly visible at the bottom of the page as you go through the application.

Our services are not in any way affiliated with any UK Government body including HM Passport Office. We provide a reviewing and submitting service for all UK passport applications charging a service processing fee. You can apply autonomously to HM Passport Office , avoiding costs for checking and processing, by logging on to their authorised website. Please read our Terms and Conditions before using our website and services.

On a desktop with a standard type monitor it is probably visible on each page.

You can not get much more clearer than that.

hearts

!!!!!! wrote: »

In other words they have designed their site to what appears to be a standard for website design just like other sites so nothing wrong with that then.
I don't know what sort of computer you are using but on my laptop there are at least 2 pages where the disclaimer is clearly visible at the bottom of the page as you go through the application. On a desktop with a standard type monitor it is probably visible on each page.

You can not get much more clearer than that.

lol another reply. Isn't it strange how some people will defend even the most unscrupulous of practices.

Do you really believe that their sole intention is to do honourable business with no underhand pre thought attached to their website design?
They are TOP on Google search. They will pay handsomely for this privilege. They will not attract enough business from the actual service they provide to warrant this. So their main earnings will probably come from fools such as me.
They are obviously aware that mistakes are made and have written into their terms and conditions a method to avoid repaying those who make a mistake. Is this proper practice?
You think this is right? Why defend a company whose sole purpose is to deceive.

System

I don't defend their intention however I do defend the fact that their site is totally legal and not a scam as people keep saying. You may not like what they are doing but there is no law to say that they cannot design their site the way they have with numerous disclaimers that have been and will continue to be ignored by the more gullible.

Ye gods how many warnings both on their site and in various press and other websites do people need? There comes a point where you have to shrug your shoulders and accept that some people will not listen or even read things. At that point you just have to walk away shaking your head and wondering why you bother.

There are a lot of things in life both on the web and in other places that are not morally right but while they are legal then all that can be done is to warn about them.

powerful_Rogue

hearts wrote: »

lol another reply. Isn't it strange how some people will defend even the most unscrupulous of practices.

Do you really believe that their sole intention is to do honourable business with no underhand pre thought attached to their website design?
They are TOP on Google search. They will pay handsomely for this privilege. They will not attract enough business from the actual service they provide to warrant this. So their main earnings will probably come from fools such as me.
They are obviously aware that mistakes are made and have written into their terms and conditions a method to avoid repaying those who make a mistake. Is this proper practice?
You think this is right? Why defend a company whose sole purpose is to deceive.

Its at the top of google with the word "Ad" in highlighted yellow. This should be a little bit of a give away.

On the actual website it advises people that its only a check and send service and provides links to the actual passport office.

Its not there to deceive. If you had taken 30 seconds to look at the front page, you probably wouldnt have goen ahead and ordered the service.

If the site had hidden the fact that it wasnt a check and send service, or not displayed it at all, then I would agree that it would be there to deceive.

These sites are legal. They have been investigated by the OFT as pointed out a few posts back. People need to slow down, look at what they are purchasing and start taking responsibility for their own actions. I certainly dont want to have an internet that has legal sites banned by the government to protect the stupid.

rellarips

They have ingeniously worked around the law to provide a service which on first glance would appear to be something else, something it in actual fact isn't. The website is clever in design, built to psychologically mislead without actually making any false claims.

The fact that people have no prior experience or knowledge of such companies' existence cannot be held against them when they then use the site in error of thinking that it is an official passport application site. The website is misleading enough to allow a proportion of people to make that inference and go ahead with what they think is a full passport application.

I could not hold it against anyone to have made such a mistake nor could I point a finger at them saying 'you should be more informed' or 'you should have looked more closely'. Ever seen the psychology video of the gorilla walking through the basketball players? People are easily distracted from true purpose and what is infront of their noses, using just a few of the right tactics and techniques.

The website is what it is and it does a good job of being what it is, hence why someone posted this thread. If any person wishes to call it a good honourable site, then that is an opinion they are perfectly obliged to have.

hearts

The last 2 posters are completely missing the point. I'm not asking for anything to be made illegal or banned.
I simply asked if I was covered by legislation to cancel a purchase I made by mistake.
Surely in this day and age when more and more purchases are done online and more and more sites like these are set up with the sole intention of catching out the naive-stupid-etc. A simple law allowing cancellation within a reasonable period is not much to ask for.
The cancellation option would not cause undue problems for reputable traders whose main aim was to sell their product to people who actually wanted it.
The layout of this particular site whether you consider it right or wrong is really irrelevant to the fact that if a mistake is made then any reputable company would simply refund the payment. The fact that they go out of their way to avoid doing this proves beyond doubt that although they may appear legitimate and in the eyes of the law are legitimate. They operate outside what can be considered honourable/moral/ethical practice.

I say again, if they were/are not out to deceive there is a simple solution. Offer a refund to those who buy their service mistakenly.

powerful_Rogue

hearts wrote: »

The last 2 posters are completely missing the point. I'm not asking for anything to be made illegal or banned.
I simply asked if I was covered by legislation to cancel a purchase I made by mistake.
Surely in this day and age when more and more purchases are done online and more and more sites like these are set up with the sole intention of catching out the naive-stupid-etc. A simple law allowing cancellation within a reasonable period is not much to ask for.
The cancellation option would not cause undue problems for reputable traders whose main aim was to sell their product to people who actually wanted it.
The layout of this particular site whether you consider it right or wrong is really irrelevant to the fact that if a mistake is made then any reputable company would simply refund the payment. The fact that they go out of their way to avoid doing this proves beyond doubt that although they may appear legitimate and in the eyes of the law are legitimate. They operate outside what can be considered honourable/moral/ethical practice.

I say again, if they were/are not out to deceive there is a simple solution. Offer a refund to those who buy their service mistakenly.

It no different to going into a shop and buying an item you then realise once you've paid and walked out that you don't actually need it.

Yes, store policy may allow you to return it, however the law is you have no statutory right to a refund because you made a mistake.

In regards to these sites, its classed as an instant service, as such its exempt from the DSR.

jacques_chirac

hearts wrote: »

The last 2 posters are completely missing the point. I'm not asking for anything to be made illegal or banned.
I simply asked if I was covered by legislation to cancel a purchase I made by mistake.
Surely in this day and age when more and more purchases are done online and more and more sites like these are set up with the sole intention of catching out the naive-stupid-etc. A simple law allowing cancellation within a reasonable period is not much to ask for.
The cancellation option would not cause undue problems for reputable traders whose main aim was to sell their product to people who actually wanted it.
The layout of this particular site whether you consider it right or wrong is really irrelevant to the fact that if a mistake is made then any reputable company would simply refund the payment. The fact that they go out of their way to avoid doing this proves beyond doubt that although they may appear legitimate and in the eyes of the law are legitimate. They operate outside what can be considered honourable/moral/ethical practice.

I say again, if they were/are not out to deceive there is a simple solution. Offer a refund to those who buy their service mistakenly.

How would you propose that such a law would operate - a compulsory 24 hour delay before the provider be allowed to commence provision of service? If so, that would leave a good number of consumers very unhappy - imagine trying to add a Sky channel because you want to watch something tonight, only to be told it will only be available in 24 hours because some people might want a cooling off period

System

rellarips wrote: »

If any person wishes to call it a good honourable site, then that is an opinion they are perfectly obliged to have.

I don't believe anybody in this thread has said that it is a good honourable site - only you mentioning it now.

All that has been stated is that the site is legal and contains numerous disclaimers that they are not connected or affiliated to the Passport Office.

Bottom line is Caveat Emptor.


(Waits for the inevitable claim from somebody that one of the defenders of the legality of this site works for them as normally happens when the morally outraged do not get everybody singing off their hymnsheet)