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

Valli

Great minds - was thinking of that exact phrase myself!

hpuse - this thread hasn't been pulled because it's not abusive, hasn't descended into a racist debate and isn't about benefit scroungers. It hasn't been trolled (AFAIK) nor has it been spammed.

Don't be so vain as to assume it's been left here because it contains sensible consumer advice though.

Money-Saving-King

hpuse wrote: »

Even though 95% of forum posters disagrees with OP [as per the poll]

That was 3 other people, you've had at least 2 AE's. So that leaves either a third AE you've kept quiet about or someone hitting the wrong button!

Money-Saving-King

hpuse wrote: »

Yes, there is fault on consumers side that they did not read the small print or T&C's

It was never a case of having to read the small print, with these websites it was the very large print.

shaun_from_Africa

hpuse wrote: »

Even though 95% of forum posters disagrees with OP [as per the poll] it does not make any difference to me. In other words, I don't care.

I bet you would care if the results went the other way.

If you don't care, why did you even bring up the subject of a poll in the first place?

hpuse wrote: »

Poll for the day ( as suggested by fantastically fervent moneysaver wealdroam )

Who is misleading OR What is more misleading

a) hpuse's OP
b) Government Copycat websites

Sheldon_Cooper

:rotfl: It's now got to the point where the people who are regularly :rotfl:
:rotfl: responding to the OP are coming across as just as batty as he is. :rotfl:

hpuse

Sheldon_Cooper wrote: »

:rotfl: It's now got to the point where the people who are regularly :rotfl:
:rotfl: responding to the OP are coming across as just as batty as he is. :rotfl:

The main problem I see is events and facts after OP was posted.:

a) The largest authority of this country (i.e UK government) has instructed the largest search engine that has close to 70% of market share to remove copycat ads.

b) Google has obliged and now have a filter for passport copycats on all sites - which has stopped all copycat ads related to passport services appearing on search results page.

Yet, people here continue to argue their legality and throw exception where google filters are not working as expected for other services. Of course there are people to offer support them and challenge me for the sake of challenging.

I was never a regular poster on any MSE forum, and I do not use any other handles to post. And for everyone's benefit let me make this absolutely clear: I have never purchased any copycat services. However, I somehow got bumped into this topic and various thread from Dec last year seeing general attitude towards consumers who have clicked this website.

The general attitude can be summarised as :

Ha ha ha, this guy must be stupid - he can't read t&c's before clicking. If it was me, I would have read t&c's 2 times before. So I better expect him to be like me and give him the right "read before your click advise"

hpuse

Money-Saving-King wrote: »

It was never a case of having to read the small print, with these websites it was the very large print.

Post overflowing with love of copycats.....

shaun_from_Africa

hpuse wrote: »

Post overflowing with love of copycats.....

Really?
I'm sure that you won't have any problem point out where that post (or indeed, any other post) has stated that they like/agree with or love the companies in question.

Why can't/won't you understand that there is a big difference between stating that something is legal and stating that you actually agree with what they are doing.


I think that many civil enforcement officers that are employed by various councils to issue parking tickets are total jobsworths and that they should give more leeway for many correctly issued tickets. BY saying that tickets are legal, does this mean thet I agree with the practices used by some of these CEO's?

RosiPossum

hpuse wrote: »

Post overflowing with love of copycats.....

No-one likes them. They say very clearly on the front page that they are offering a paid for service you can get for free.
It's not about not reading the terms and conditions. Your advice (yes, adviCe not adviSe) is misleading as consumers can't prove they were misled.

Money-Saving-King

hpuse wrote: »

Post overflowing with love of copycats.....

Post overflowing with assumption.