Driving License Scam: Guidance for Obtaining a Refund

Sindy

This is the 3rd response received after saying I was taking them to court. Do I proceed with court action as they are suggesting that they can defend themselves?

We will be defending our position in full and willprovide the relevant evidence which shows how clear our service is stated onour homepage and throughout the website, we will also provide screenshotevidence of the terms and conditions and the no refund policy which you hadagreed to before proceeding and then submitting your application withourselves.

Thanks in advance

Pollycat

Hi Sindy
Have you read the original post in full?
If you have, I would suggest you read it again.

Joe Malone goes into great detail about using the small claims system and what to do if the company intends to defend themselves:

Joe_Malone wrote: »

Should Caveat Viator Ltd decide to contest your claim in County Court then the basis for your case is below. Once they lose in court then their whole business model collapses and I do not believe this is a risk they will take.

1. The Recent ASA case confirms that website material was duping customers.
2. The OFT produced a 2006 guide for business relating to rules of distance selling. They are very clear in this guide that administrative work of the type provided by caveat viator ltd cannot equate to the provision of a service.
3. Contract Law... There has to be a benefit or consideration to the customer to form a valid legal contract. The OFT guidelines confirm that there is no benefit and in fact the DVLA provide precisely the same checking service as part of their fee's so in fact it can easily be claimed that caveat viators service is actually a detriment rather than a benefit since all it achieves is delaying your application at great expense. Therefore there can be no valid contract between you the customer and Caveat Viator Ltd.
All the information needed to pursue a county court claim is here.

Good Luck but to be frank if you follow this guidance to the letter you will not need it.

Which actual company did you use?

Is it the same one that Joe Malone used?

If not, you will have to decide how much to trust what he/she says about your legal position and chances of winning.

Joe Malone also posted this (18/1/2014):

Joe_Malone wrote: »

Caveat Viator recently removed advertising from their website that duped customers into thinking this was the official DVLA website. The details are logged for September 2013 on the advertising standards authorities website and the ASA have confirmed to me by email the details of the case. Another fact that supports the view that prior to amending their website the ASA held the view that their website material did not comply with legal guidelines.

so if you used that same website and - as the company are now telling you - it was made clear that you were not using the official website at the time you paid your money to them, then I can't see how you could win against them.

Of course, they may be bluffing.
But it doesn't sound like it to me.
Maybe wait and see what other opinions you get.

Joe_Malone wrote: »

Good Luck but to be frank if you follow this guidance to the letter you will not need it.

The above is very easy for Joe Malone to say (write) but it's you who has to decide if you're throwing good money after bad.

Sindy

Thanks Pollycat.

Yes it was Caviat Viator Ltd. I've also contacted Action Fraud and trading Standards, none of whom seem particularly interested.

Not sure if it's worth pursuing?

Pollycat

Sindy wrote: »

Thanks Pollycat.

Yes it was Caviat Viator Ltd. I've also contacted Action Fraud and trading Standards, none of whom seem particularly interested.

Not sure if it's worth pursuing?

Sindy
I was hoping that you'd have had more opinions by now.

What do you think your chances are of taking this company to court and winning - particularly as they seem pretty bullish about defending against your claim?

How much did you pay to Caveat Viator?

I think you need to weigh up - financially - what you will have lost if you just let go and put it down to experience against what you will lose if you go ahead and lose the case against what you will gain if you go ahead and win.

imoneyop

IMHO, it would depend on whether at the time I used the site, it was before or after they made the changes they appear to have been told to. They are probably bullish, because they are now convinced that the site is legitimate and they will win.

Also, there is no precidence in small claims, so just because someone claims that they took them to court and won - means nothing for another individual's chances of getting the same verdict.

transient

Sindy wrote: »

This is the 3rd response received after saying I was taking them to court. Do I proceed with court action as they are suggesting that they can defend themselves?

We will be defending our position in full and willprovide the relevant evidence which shows how clear our service is stated onour homepage and throughout the website, we will also provide screenshotevidence of the terms and conditions and the no refund policy which you hadagreed to before proceeding and then submitting your application withourselves.

Thanks in advance

Assume you have followed the pre-action protocol thus far?

What is your claim?

welshdoll3

I'm absolutely bouncing I have just found out by receiving my credit card statement that I have also been duped by this website that are posing as DVLA to the sum of £60 for something that costs £20 and I work for DVLA, I am an elected union official and will certainly be speaking to the CEO about letting this company so fraudulently carry on using such similar i dents

imoneyop

welshdoll3 wrote: »

posing as DVLA

Are they - in that case report them to trading standards, but I think you'll find they make it perfectly clear that they are not affiliated with DVLA and what service they are providing.

welshdoll3 wrote: »

I work for DVLA

I'm surprised you don't know the real DVLA website address then.

Pollycat

welshdoll3 wrote: »

I'm absolutely bouncing I have just found out by receiving my credit card statement that I have also been duped by this website that are posing as DVLA to the sum of £60 for something that costs £20 and I work for DVLA, I am an elected union official and will certainly be speaking to the CEO about letting this company so fraudulently carry on using such similar i dents

If you feel that this website is misleading, report it to Trading Standards (via CAB):

http://www.oft.gov.uk/contactus#.UvNppilFBjp

Maybe also bring it to the attention to your MP?

And perhaps suggest to your union members that they do the same.....?

Before you do all that though, are you actually sure that this website is 'posing as DVLA'?

Were there any disclaimers on the website that clearly told you that you could get the same service cheaper from the official website?

imoneyop

Pollycat wrote: »

Were there any disclaimers on the website that clearly told you that you could get the same service cheaper from the official website?

welshdoll3 didn't bother to tell us which website it was that she agreed to pay money to to provide her with a driving license renewal service, so we'll have to assume that it is dvla-driving-licence.co.uk, since that is the only one that is mentioned in this thread.

So, on their homepage

Our service is not connected to or affiliated with the UK Government or Driving Vehicle Licence Agency and acts as an agent processing the application. These services are available from other government sources for no fee. The additional benefit of using this website include, instant email confirmation, 24/7 online support, application checked for errors & omissions, telephone application service and full compliance with data protection act.

Seems pretty clear to me (and anyone else who bothers to spend 30 seconds reading the clearly presented text (not hidden away in small print at the bottom of the page)):

• That they are not the official DVLA site (they even give a link to it)
• That the same service is also available for free from the Gov.
• What benefits their service provides.