OSPS cashback help

mobilejunkie

Ah... as I thought. I'm afraid you didn't follow the groundrules and have left yourself exposed. You may need legal advice here; their t&c break the industry code (can send copies BUT has no legal bearing and is generally ignored) and they have deliberately and specifically mislead you. I suspect you'd stand a reasonable chance of persuading a judge but there are no guarantees and you MUST be able to prove they mislead you. If I were them I could put up a defence; whether a judge would wear that is up to any given judge.

--Tony--

mobilejunkie wrote: »

Ah... as I thought. I'm afraid you didn't follow the groundrules and have left yourself exposed. You may need legal advice here; their t&c break the industry code (can send copies BUT has no legal bearing and is generally ignored) and they have deliberately and specifically mislead you. I suspect you'd stand a reasonable chance of persuading a judge but there are no guarantees and you MUST be able to prove they mislead you. If I were them I could put up a defence; whether a judge would wear that is up to any given judge.

Thanks MJ, can you elaborate a bit, what bit have I got wrong? I thought I had followed the rules to the letter.

You mention copies, I sent them the originals and kept copies for my records, again following their T&C's.

This is my third cashback with OSPS, I'm quite experienced at cashback and have never had a problem before.

mobilejunkie

The way they are working the 2nd claim should have arrived there by 9th February and (probably) even slightly earlier (therefore you could have sent the previous bill within their claim window (just) and still covered yourself with the claim you actually made under the legal t&c if the first wasn't paid). You have, followed the legal t&c so provided you can prove receipt receipt should have an excellent court case to present. I misunderstood about the copies, so since you have (and can prove?) you've complied with the legal t&c you should be ok. I would point out that OSPS always operated their claim window; the price-match t&c were a temporary change which they basically ignored.

--Tony--

Thanks MJ you had me worried for a moment.

I have no hesitation in taking this all the way, having spoken to them on the phone twice now (the second time directly with CPW HQ to a contact I was given when I had problems with talktalk) I will now write to them going straight to a 14 day LBA then hit them with a claim.

I have had to use the scc twice before and am quite happy to do it again, will write back with updates.

Not that it matters but out of interest, I normally send off the bills the day they arrive but they threw me in January as Decembers bill was marked "bill 6" and January's was marked "bill 8" knowing I had to send off every other bill on odd numbers (5,7,9,etc) I almost filed it away and hence the few days delay.

nugget07

mobilejunkie wrote: »

Ah... as I thought. I'm afraid you didn't follow the groundrules and have left yourself exposed. You may need legal advice here; their t&c break the industry code (can send copies BUT has no legal bearing and is generally ignored) and they have deliberately and specifically mislead you. I suspect you'd stand a reasonable chance of persuading a judge but there are no guarantees and you MUST be able to prove they mislead you. If I were them I could put up a defence; whether a judge would wear that is up to any given judge.

Thanks once again!

I have both copies of the welcome pack (online and hard copy (booklet)) which both specify that copies should be sent as opposed to original bills. Is this enough to take them to court? I stand to lose £540 so it's worth fighting if I have a resonable chance.

Does anybody know how I should have known that I was on a price match deal as this seems to be the crux... Those terms and conditions are ever so slightly different.

Also, do I have more of a case, as I made my claim within the time period all my bills are on time. I just provided a copy rather than the original bill. Surely this doesn't matter form a informational point of view?

Quentin

Your case is that you adhered to all the conditions as set out.

From what you say, they have committed a fundamental breach of the contract by not paying you.

In addition to this, they have attempted to mislead you by giving you two (conflicting) reasons why they consider you breached the contract.

mobilejunkie

I suspect that he is looking at the wrong set of on-line t&c; he is almost certainly on a price-match deal and those DO specifiy an original bill. The problem is that if I am correct, only an original bill meets the legal t&c. If it is NOT a price-match deal their dates may be correct (though I as I said I'm fairly confident it IS a price-match deal so he has a real problem if he only sent copies). Afraid I'm rather snowed under so can't look up his original details, but I hope this helps. Last time I checked the price-match t&c WERE on their website under "contact us", which is effectively currently the so-called "help" area. They would have been stated at the point of purchase; as always people really MUST copy EVERYTHING at that time and keep it all somewhere quite safe nowadays! Find and copy them now if what I have said applies to anyone!

nugget07

mobilejunkie wrote: »

I suspect that he is looking at the wrong set of on-line t&c; he is almost certainly on a price-match deal and those DO specifiy an original bill. The problem is that if I am correct, only an original bill meets the legal t&c. If it is NOT a price-match deal their dates may be correct (though I as I said I'm fairly confident it IS a price-match deal so he has a real problem if he only sent copies). Afraid I'm rather snowed under so can't look up his original details, but I hope this helps. Last time I checked the price-match t&c WERE on their website under "contact us", which is effectively currently the so-called "help" area. They would have been stated at the point of purchase; as always people really MUST copy EVERYTHING at that time and keep it all somewhere quite safe nowadays! Find and copy them now if what I have said applies to anyone!

Thanks Quentin and MJ.

Yes the legal t&c do state that the original bill is required.

However, I have been provided conflicting information in both a hard copy of the Welcome Pack, and a PDF version. Do I have grounds to raise an LBA?

Surely, there's no excuse for supplying me an electronic document, the PDF, (that should be eaisly tailored by a per deal basis), with misleading information not relevant to my offer? I feel the whole cashback section of this document should have been removed and replaced with the line "please consult your t&c" for this type of deal. Rather than confirm what is written in the hard copy.

If I send an LBA stating my grounds are for misleading me with a whole host of contridictory information (also stating that they have a copy of my bill rather than the original, so have the exact same information to issue the cashback), what kind of response should I expect? Will they show up in court?!

Quentin

You originally posted:

I have both copies of the welcome pack (online and hard copy (booklet)) which both specify that copies should be sent as opposed to original bills.

Though from the above post it seems this is not quite the case. (You actually have ts + cs which tell you to send originals - and ts + cs of a contract overide all other copy. When you took out the contract you will have specifically said you agree to them)

They are not going to "give in" because you feel they shouldn't have put a "contradictory" pdf on their website, which is intended for customers taking a different deal to the one you have. They did make it clear that the deal you got was subject to different ts + cs.

If you decide to pursue this, then you can expect them to defend any summons, meaning you will have to pay for a hearing and let a judge decide. If you lose, you will have to pay their costs for attending any hearing as well as all court fees.

fazer_2

Get this, just had a letter from OSPS refusing my 3rd claim at month 8 because I didn't send my first bill which showed the original number (I ported my number), obviously I didn't because I sent it with the 1st claim!
What the hell!