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

imoneyop

bod1467 wrote: »

Bingo!

Maybe I should do the Euromillions on Friday?

If you don't win, come back on Saturday - hpuse will be posting advice on what to do if you were conned into playing the lottery in the belief you would win.

Money-Saving-King

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/travel/2014/02/google-axes-ads-for-london-congestion-charge-copycats

Bet Hpuse will be excited about this!

Exile_geordie

Money-Saving-King wrote: »

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/travel/2014/02/google-axes-ads-for-london-congestion-charge-copycats

Bet Hpuse will be excited about this!

Theyll be foaming at the mouth about it but will conveniently forget about this part in teh passage

But unofficial sites are catching out unsuspecting motorists and charging them extra fees for "additional services", which either don't exist, or are free for drivers who go directly to TfL.

Some unofficial sites were also found to be accepting payments for times when the congestion charge isn't in operation, such as weekends, public holidays and over Christmas.

peachyprice

It's not going to cost you anything to leave it running so you may as well, as long as you understand that they're not going to give you your money back based on the misleading (oh the irony) inaccuracies hpuse has posted here.

Who knows, you might be lucky in that between now and them making a decision the site you used may be closed down due to illegal trading (in which case you'd stand a much better chance), highly unlikely odds, but always worth a punt.

wealdroam

hpuse wrote: »

Banks when administering disputes will certainly look at what you paid for and what you got.

Are you now suggesting that banks use value for money criteria when making chargeback decisions?

meer53

Nope - wrong again.

I see that your bank has refused dispute. If you got the reason in writing please copy it over here. I would be really interested to see on what basis they rejected your dispute. You said cooling off period does not exist. Banks when administering disputes will certainly look at what you paid for and what you got.

powerful_Rogue

keith-66 wrote: »

I'am getting confusing msgs from here.
hpuse and OP may or may not work. Can anyone confirm
in here whether I get my money back.

You'be been asked a few times, but as far as I can tell have never answered.

Which website did you actually use?
Have you looked up their refund policy in their terms and conditions?

Pollycat

keith-66 wrote: »

I'am getting confusing msgs from here.
hpuse and OP may or may not work. Can anyone confirm
in here whether I get my money back.

keith-66
Have you read any of the posts on here from posters other than hpuse who have been telling you that you may not get your money back by taking hpuse's advice?

keith-66 wrote: »

Hi there
are you'all suggesting that I call and withdraw the dispute?

TBH keith-66, I'm all out of advice and/or suggestions for you.

I posted this on 21/2/14:

Pollycat wrote: »

@Keith-66

I suggest you read post #621 - it's at the top of this page.

That mentions a case where someone raised a dispute for a charge in similar circumstances, was refunded but then the Bank took back the money as they said the company had acted legitimately.

Your first step should be to check if the website you used (there are lots of different companies) has a refund clause.

If so, follow that.

Some companies do give refunds (minus and admin fee of around £8) but you usually have to contact them via a specific email address.

You may also wish to read my post #622 where there is a quote from another member of MSE who was told by his bank that 'it was his fault' and also an extract from a Daily Mail article where a woman said her bank 'refused to help'.

And this on 22/2/14:

Pollycat wrote: »

So - have you checked if the website you used has a refund policy?

I would advise you to spend a little time reading some of the comments about the usefulness of the first post (by hpuse) before relying on getting your money back using his advice

Again-have you read the posts that tell you about the person who did as you have done I.e. raise a dispute with your bank- only to have the money taken back from him 'cos the website was legal?

I would read that if I were you.

And this on 24/2/14:

Pollycat wrote: »

<<sighs>> :wall:

OK, for the last time:
I've been telling you that Hpuse's advice may not work and get you the refund that you presumably want.

Hpuse has also admitted that.

It matter not one jot whether Hpuse's instructions match with your financial institution's instructions.

Even if they match word-for-word, there is no guarantee that you'll get your money back using this method.

Your choice.

I'm not sure what part of 'check the website you used to see if they offer a refund policy' are you struggling to understand?

So - I'm fed up of doing this :wall::wall::wall::wall:


I wish you luck - you'll need more luck than the posters who have been knocked back by their banks/credit card companies.

hpuse

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

The ASA ruling on this advert stated
"On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation)."

You do know what "breached" means don't you? It means that it didn't comply with the required rules or guidelines.

http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2013/9/Tesco-Stores-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_224880.aspx

I am still struggling to find where in the article it mention horse meat ad is non-complaint? As you correctly said, it is adjudicated as 'misleading', not non-complaint.

Understand this :-
Tesco spends over £10m a year for advertising an PR.
They won't throw it to puppets to make ASA non-complaint adverts.

If an advertisement is misleading, then no one else, i.e Tesco solely are responsible. If they are 'non-complaint' then Tesco will make ad agency who created the ad responsible.

imoneyop

keith-66 wrote: »

Can anyone confirm
in here whether I get my money back.

No, only your bank can confirm that.

What we can actually tell you though is that
1. There is one existing member of the site who has just posted her negative result after following hpuse's advice.
2. There are a number of other posters on other threads who have either had disputes rejected or in one case been refunded only to subsequently have the money taken back when the company showed that they provided a legitimate service.
3. There is a further quote from a Daily Mail article where someone's bank "refused to help" (probably press sensationalism for couldn't help because there was no grounds for a dispute).
4. A number of us have industry experience, giving us reason to believe that there is no grounds for a chargeback (unless you managed to find a non-compliant website - but as you haven't told us which site you used we can't know that).

hpuse appears to have nothing to back up the advice he gives in his OP, as not one person has posted to say they have successfully been refunded after raising a dispute with their bank.