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

Pollycat

hpuse wrote: »

To all the posters who breath and expel the "dodgy trade oxygen" in these forums,

It would be really helpful if you could manage to write sentences that people can understand.

hpuse wrote: »

Stay away if you do not have anything to contribute, and gentle reminder again : this thread is an attempt to help a consumer who thinks he or she got ripped-off as a result of failing to read t&c's.

You can't tell (or ask) posters to 'stay away' from a thread.
That's not how public fora work.
I've already pointed this out to you. :wall:

If you have a real desire to 'help a consumer who thinks he or she got ripped-off as a result of failing to read t&c's', you will amend your initial post to reflect suggestions you had to this post:.

hpuse wrote: »

Let's not divert...get back to topic of post#1.
With your "17 years" of "dispute experience", how should I re-word the literature on post#1? that would be of help?

Like this suggestion:

meer53 wrote: »

This :

Write to the company requesting a refund. Clearly tell them you are not happy. Please keep copies of all emails and replies received.

Delete everything else.

And this one:

Pollycat wrote: »

As I posted several days ago:

Pollycat wrote: »

Some of these websites do offer a full refund and some offer a refund less an admin fee (others say they won't refund at all).

The ones that do offer a refund clearly say on their website what the process is for applying for a refund.
If you take Hpuse's advice (as a 'first step') and don't follow their process, you may not get your refund at all.

Pollycat wrote: »

I think if you are seriously trying to help people, you should mention that they should check the T&Cs of the specific website they used to see if there is a refund process and, if there is, to follow it.

On other threads, posters have reported that they have received a refund - without the need for all the nonsense described in both the steps in your initial post.

If you are not interested in making your initial post more helpful to those posters you are attempting to help - you are just grandstanding.

WTFH

I suspect the OP should start a thread about how we need more Health & Safety regulations in this country.
After all, consumers need protection from things like kettles which may contain hot water (have you been "ripped-off" because you didn't know that).

Or have you been "ripped-off" because you bought curtains and now you've discovered that when you close them, you don't get as much outside light in your room? We need consumer advice on the steps to take!

hpuse

Pollycat wrote: »

You can't tell (or ask) posters to 'stay away' from a thread.
That's not how public fora work.
I've already pointed this out to you. :wall:

I see, so others can ask me to stay away - but I can't ask others to focus on the thread topic....interesting forum ideologies!

Advises...as Originally Posted by meer53

That poster above acclaims 17 years of banking dispute experience.

However, the only advise is to keep email replies from customer service and be quiet while hoping for a refund.

I wonder how on earth he or she managed to cling on to that job for 17 years if that was the advise she gave to all similar disputes!!
And now meer53 is doing the same thing, "keeping quiet":rotfl:

Pollycat,

It is worth understanding that there is world of people out there interested in how rip-off cases like these are 'desiged'. For e.g dispute/complaints department, trading standards and ASA , credit network fraud audit and detection systems.?

So do you think they all should 'keep quiet' and cling on to their jobs too?

bod1467

Anyone who claims that because someone disagrees with them then they must work for the said company/organisation being criticised, then the claimant has lost the argument.

Whilst the claim may be true in SOME cases, in the majority of cases (99% per my unscientific, unprovable assessment) it is simply false.

hpuse

WTFH wrote: »

I suspect the OP should start a thread about how we need more Health & Safety regulations in this country.
After all, consumers need protection from things like kettles which may contain hot water (have you been "ripped-off" because you didn't know that).

Or have you been "ripped-off" because you bought curtains and now you've discovered that when you close them, you don't get as much outside light in your room? We need consumer advice on the steps to take!

Another instance of breathing "trade air"....

Pollycat

hpuse wrote: »

I see, so others can ask me to stay away - but I can't ask others to focus on the thread topic....interesting forum ideologies!

I have not - in the specific way you have done so twice on this thread - told/asked you to stay away.

If other posters have done so, I cannot be held accountable.

You specifically asked me to 'keep quiet' (below).
Unsurprisingly, I have not acceded to your 'request'.

hpuse wrote: »

@pollycat - I am trying to leverage on "meer53"'s 17 years of dispute experience so that I help someone who think he has had a bad experience and got ripped-off dealing with this company.

I don't think it is grandstanding, as most of you think, I am speaking a 'loads' of rubbish since I do not see I am receiving 'thanks':D.
I also get 'heartbroken' for all the effort I put here when I see others, i.e someone like you with a pile of 'thanks' in their bags for all the helpful postings.
So please, give me a chance to improve, would you now please keep quiet and let me focus on the matter - i.e, improving this thread instead please?
"Thank you" for your patience in advance..

hpuse wrote: »

Pollycat,

It is worth understanding that there is world of people out there interested in how rip-off cases like these are 'desiged'. For e.g dispute/complaints department, trading standards and ASA , credit network fraud audit and detection systems.?

So do you think they all should 'keep quiet' and cling on to their jobs too?

But this thread - according to you - is supposed to help people.

What does that have to do with people in various organisations being interested in how 'rip-off (your terminology) cases are designed?

You're not seriously suggesting that 'dispute/complaints department, trading standards and ASA ,credit network fraud audit and detection systems' are likely to be interested in your post? :rotfl::rotfl:

I think some of the organisations you mention may be able to change things but the truth is they are all very much aware of these websites but are doing nothing about them.

For example, HM Passport Office website has a warning on it.
Not much use after you've used an unofficial website, is it?

So, in essence, they are 'keeping quiet'.
I have no idea if that is to keep their jobs. I suspect that it's because they can't do anything much about the websites.

WTFH

hpuse wrote: »

Another instance of breathing "trade air"....

Please explain what you mean, or is it another instance of you grandstanding?

hpuse

Pollycat wrote: »

What does that have to do with people in various organisations being interested in how 'rip-off (your terminology) cases are designed?

Its not 'my terminology'.... it is used by trading standards themselves

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/extra/news-item.cfm/newsid/1158

Don’t get ripped off online, warns Consumerline

hpuse

WTFH wrote: »

Please explain what you mean, or is it another instance of you grandstanding?

Earlier, I was accused of posting "misleading" info and now it has taken a tangent of grandstanding.

For the sake of argument, if I am attempting grandstanding that does worry/concern anyone else ...please report.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/site/forum-faqs

Kettles, hot water, HSSE - highly relevant ?

:rotfl:

Pollycat

hpuse wrote: »

Its not 'my terminology'.... it is used by trading standards themselves

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk/extra/news-item.cfm/newsid/1158

That's it - just reply to one small part of my post. :rotfl:

It's a sure sign that you are incapable of making a valid response to any of the points I've made.