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

Pollycat

annas1974 wrote: »

This is one of the company I have problems with.

From the Daily Mail article:

The banning orders were made because the authority believes all three sites hoodwinked users into thinking they were applying for a Government service through an official site. The extra charges they applied, the authority says, were not spelt out in black and white.

So all they will do is restart with an in-your-face statement on the home page that they are not affiliated with xxx and that you can get the goods/service free or cheaper from that source - and probably provide a link to the official website too - and they will still make money because there are some people who just don't read what's in front of them before putting in their credit card details.

hpuse

annas1974 wrote: »

http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2014/9/UK-Services-and-Support-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_273276.aspx#.VCCGbn6kqrU

And in here Asa report.
My mother in law did not pay, she just blocked them in the mobile and house telephone.

Annas1974,

People love to hate copycats - but anytime they see ASA biting hard on a copycat trader even with just 1 complainee - the posters here all go ...shhhhhh !

Why, because they simply can't resist posting here :rotfl:

hpuse

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

I've bumped this back to the top in the hope that hpuse decides to return and comment on the fact that despite his hopes, nothing much seems to have happened about Google adverts for companies offering a paid for driving licence service.

Ah ! Shaun, you are here!

Its easy we forget the fact that there are 4 million passport renewals a year...Yes, they are stats !

And unfortunately I have not seen any passport renewal copycat screen dump yet in the last 3 months.

Of course that is the reason why I specifically asked "how are we doing with driving license" pun intended:rotfl:

OlliesDad

hpuse wrote: »

Annas1974,

People love to hate copycats - but anytime they see ASA biting hard on a copycat trader even with just 1 complainee - the posters here all go ...shhhhhh !

Why, because they simply can't resist posting here :rotfl:

I would say the ASA ruling confirms what everybody else has already said. Having a copycat site is NOT illegal - the only actions given by the ASA were to make it clearer that the site is not the official one.

Is this really your opinion of "biting hard"?

hpuse

OlliesDad wrote: »

I would say the ASA ruling confirms what everybody else has already said. Having a copycat site is NOT illegal - the only actions given by the ASA were to make it clearer that the site is not the official one.

Is this really your opinion of "biting hard"?

The 'only'......

Action

The website must not appear again in its current form. We told UK Passport Offices to include on each page a prominent disclaimer alongside calls to action such as "Apply now" or similar and the most prominent price statements. The disclaimer should be clearly worded and presented separately from other information to ensure it was prominent and would be read by consumers.


It should contain sufficient additional information to allow consumers to understand the non-official nature of the service on offer and the additional cost of using that service compared to using the official service directly. As best practice it should: state that passports are available directly from the official https://www.gov.uk website and specify their cost (or a "from" price if the amount varied), provide a link to that website, state that UK Passport Offices charge a separate and additional amount for their application verification service and specify that amount (or a "from price if the amount varied). For additional clarity, this information would be repeated on the final page of the online application process before consumers complete the transaction.


http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2014/9/UK-Services-and-Support-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_273276.aspx#.VCCGbn6kqrU

Money-Saving-King

hpuse wrote: »

The 'only'......

Action

The website must not appear again in its current form. We told UK Passport Offices to include on each page a prominent disclaimer alongside calls to action such as "Apply now" or similar and the most prominent price statements. The disclaimer should be clearly worded and presented separately from other information to ensure it was prominent and would be read by consumers.


It should contain sufficient additional information to allow consumers to understand the non-official nature of the service on offer and the additional cost of using that service compared to using the official service directly. As best practice it should: state that passports are available directly from the official https://www.gov.uk website and specify their cost (or a "from" price if the amount varied), provide a link to that website, state that UK Passport Offices charge a separate and additional amount for their application verification service and specify that amount (or a "from price if the amount varied). For additional clarity, this information would be repeated on the final page of the online application process before consumers complete the transaction.


http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2014/9/UK-Services-and-Support-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_273276.aspx#.VCCGbn6kqrU

Yeah but basically they all do that now anyway and have done for ages.

Pollycat

Money-Saving-King wrote: »

Yeah but basically they all do that now anyway and have done for ages.

And there will still be people who use those websites and complain they were ripped off, scammed, conned <insert over-stated term of your choice>.....

Blackbeard_of_Perranporth

Gosh in 8 months of hard work and over excited google engineers, seems the service providers are still making money.

hpuse

Pollycat wrote: »

And there will still be people who use those websites and complain they were ripped off, scammed, conned <insert over-stated term of your choice>.....

Have you ever voted to elect an MP, they work for you....

MPs demand action on ‘copycat’ websites targeted at driver services

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/07/copycat-websites-transport-mps-warn-drivers

hpuse

Money-Saving-King wrote: »

Yeah but basically they all do that now anyway and have done for ages.

Onus should not be on driver groups identifying these fake websites, but on the government.