Steps to take if you have been ripped-off by a copy-cat government website

hpuse

Valli wrote: »

The planet 'it's someone's else's fault' or possibly the planet 'don't blame me'.

Certainly NOT on Mea Culpa

FYI, the planet I come has a search engine called Google.
They have banned the advertisements from a copycat website that charges £8 over london congestion charging scheme + for sunday and saturdays from the unwary ...Have you got anything to say ???:rotfl:

Valli

For now, hpuse, for now.

Thing is google gets its (considerable) income from sponsored sites.

So they'll be back. As we have already seen...

So let's get back to the point which is that people should research what they are buying, and from whom and where before they buy; not after.

powerful_Rogue

hpuse wrote: »

FYI, the planet I come has a search engine called Google.
They have banned the advertisements from a copycat website that charges £8 over london congestion charging scheme + for sunday and saturdays from the unwary ...Have you got anything to say ???:rotfl:

As usual, ignore all the other posts where people have corrected you. I'll post again incase you missed it.

hpuse wrote: »

However, there is right to enter a dispute. If the concerned trade is NOT following the accepted advertising and trading norms, then customer cannot be held responsible for clicking.

Well they are clearly following accepted advertising standards as they are compliant with the ASA.

They are also clearly trading legally as they have been investigated and cleared by the Office of Fair Trading.

Why can the customer not be held responsible for clicking a link and not reading what they are about to purchase?

Can you back your post I quoted up with any evidence at all?

shaun_from_Africa

hpuse wrote: »

FYI, the planet I come has a search engine called Google.
They have banned the advertisements from a copycat website that charges £8 over london congestion charging scheme + for sunday and saturdays from the unwary ...Have you got anything to say ???:rotfl:

Maybe they banned that particular website because it was fraudulent as the congestion charge does not get charged for weekends.
The "copycat" passport application websites that are currently in use are not fraudulent (as already explained by plenty of posters, the ASA, the OFT, CAB etc), they are simply providing a paid for service. Fair enough, a service that if people read and understood the terms and conditions, would probably decide that they didn't require, but it's a legitimate service, unlike the congestion charge service that you referred to.

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

Where is the rope, I need to swing something

Money-Saving-King

hpuse wrote: »

FYI, the planet I come has a search engine called Google.
They have banned the advertisements from a copycat website that charges £8 over london congestion charging scheme + for sunday and saturdays from the unwary ...Have you got anything to say ???:rotfl:

Yes, Google isn't the law!

It's their own site they can have on it what they want. What they put on it has nothing to do with what's legal or not.

What Google does has got nothing to do with the UK legal system, surely you known this?

bod1467

Can I suggest that people refrain from replying here any further? That way it'll hopefully just die a natural death.

hpuse

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

Maybe they banned that particular website because it was fraudulent as the congestion charge does not get charged for weekends.
The "copycat" passport application websites that are currently in use are not fraudulent (as already explained by plenty of posters, the ASA, the OFT, CAB etc), they are simply providing a paid for service. Fair enough, a service that if people read and understood the terms and conditions, would probably decide that they didn't require, but it's a legitimate service, unlike the congestion charge service that you referred to.

@Shaun From Africa, Powerful_R, Valli and BoP

May be it is helpful for you to know:

OFT has taken action against some copycating websites in the past.
They were not under fraud, but under unfair trading regulation i.e CPRs.

hpuse

Money-Saving-King wrote: »

Yes, Google isn't the law!

It's their own site they can have on it what they want. What they put on it has nothing to do with what's legal or not.

What Google does has got nothing to do with the UK legal system, surely you known this?

Agree, google isn't the law.

But the lawmakers can put pressure on them - that is the reason why they have removed congestion charging ads from their website.

Remember, there is no legal position for Google that they must act in favour of government orders againt copycats ads. Hence banning copycat ads is not under law, simply under orders. As you know, congestion charging copycat one was the main cash cow.

hpuse

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

Third time lucky.

hpuse



Well they are clearly following accepted advertising standards as they are compliant with the ASA.

They are also clearly trading legally as they have been investigated and cleared by the Office of Fair Trading.

Why can the customer not be held responsible for clicking a link and not reading what they are about to purchase?

Can you back your post I quoted up with any evidence at all?

Powerful_R

In legal terms, whoever breaks the law/or on the verge of breaking the law will be subject to scrutiny. Not the consumer.