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

Valli

oh

hpuse is back to his old self!

wealdroam

hpuse wrote: »

Ok, you cannot find any, and most of the forum users here will agree with you Wealdroam.

However, TS (i.e the trade monitoring authority) does find.
That is probably the difference between me and majority of posters here. I believe in a system and their finding that monitor trade (i.e copycat websites). Feel the difference, Wealdroam?

So no link then?

Ok, I'll draw my own conclusions from that.

George_Michael

hpuse wrote: »

Feel the difference, Wealdroam?

Difference, what difference?
You are still making claims and failing to provide any verifiable proof to back these claims up, so no, there is no difference.

Pollycat

hpuse wrote: »

Ok, you cannot find any, and most of the forum users here will agree with you Wealdroam.

Most of the forum posters on here will agree with wealdroam because they can't find any either.

hpuse wrote: »

However, TS (i.e the trade monitoring authority) does find.
That is probably the difference between me and majority of posters here. I believe in a system and their finding that monitor trade (i.e copycat websites). Feel the difference, Wealdroam?

Without a link to "misleading websites" which purport to be affiliated and associated with a Government agency, I - and I suspect the majority of other posters - simply do not believe your claim, regardless of what system you believe in.

hpuse

Folks,

Understand this. Analyse this.
It is trading standards who classified copycat website into two-tiers.
One is 'unofficial' and other other is 'misleading'.

I do not work for Trading Standards, so I cannot give you which copycats belong to which categories of this scam buckets.

If you think none of the copycats belong in 'misleading' then that is your own opinion, it is definitely not TS opinion or my opinion.

That is why I say, I am different from rest of you posters. And I am proud to say that. Anyone has a problem with that?

wealdroam

hpuse wrote: »

If you think none of the copycats belong in 'misleading' then that is your own opinion, it is definitely not TS opinion or my opinion.

Ah... I see.

It's opinions we are talking about... not facts.

That's ok then... I now understand.

Thanks for that clarification Hpuse.

powerful_Rogue

hpuse wrote: »

I am different from rest of you posters.

hpuse

wealdroam wrote: »

Ah... I see.

It's opinions we are talking about... not facts.

That's ok then... I now understand.

Thanks for that clarification Hpuse.

It is a fact that two categories of "copycats" are being monitored by TS.

It is also another fact that none of posters here(expect me) think that they are 'misleading'. Strange but true. What say, wealdroam?

Pollycat

hpuse wrote: »

It is a fact that two categories of "copycats" are being monitored by TS.

It is also another fact that none of posters here(expect me) think that they are 'misleading'. Strange but true. What say, wealdroam?

According to the article you gave the link to, even the Telegraph & Argus only refer to one of the categories as 'misleading'.

hpuse wrote: »

There are two different categories of copycat websites:

• unofficial ‘copycat’ websites, which explain within their terms and conditions that they are not affiliated with any Government agency. Although they may look like the official website, if the site clearly states it is not endorsed or affiliated with a government agency and you decide to accept their fee, then the company is not committing any criminal offence.
• misleading websites, which purport to be affiliated and associated with a Government agency and give the impression that you need to apply for the product through them at an extra cost, when in fact they have no such association and the consumer could have quite easily applied themselves for free.

Source: http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/11187841.Watchdog_warns_Bradford_people_about_web_scams/

Strange but true.
What say, hpuse?

wealdroam

hpuse wrote: »

It is a fact that two categories of "copycats"...

Don't be silly. That isn't even a quote from the TS guy.
It is only a fact if you believe everything in newspapers are facts, and only a few days ago it was shown in this thread that that isn't true. See post #1552.

hpuse wrote: »

It is also another fact that none of posters here(expect me) think that they are 'misleading'. Strange but true. What say, wealdroam?

It may be a fact that most of the posters here expects(sic) you to think that they are 'misleading'. Not so strange, but true.