Three add-on ('buy now' or 'view all add-ons')

OceanSound

About a month ago, I was checking my PAYG balance on the Three website and saw that they have a link to 'view all add-ons'. So, out of curiosity I clicked on the 'view all add-ons' link. The next thing I know, a web page loaded saying 'you've just purchased the all-in-one 25' add-on'. (There is a 'buy now' button directly above 'view all add-ons'. see below)



I contacted three customer care, but they refused to do anything saying add-on purchases on PAYG are non-refundable. So I tell them I didn't purchase, merely wanted to see all the available add-ons. They kept refusing, so I asked them to escalate the problem.

Recently the three executive office contacted me about it. I told them that they should make the 'view all add-ons' link and 'buy now' buttons more distinctive (spaced out) and also have a prompt appearing 'are you sure you want to purchase this add on' if/when someone clicks on 'Buy now'. I also said, they should reimburse the £25.

Exec office has replied saying £25 can be credited to my account, but the changes to the website can only be put forward as a suggestion (so no guarantees if they will ever happen). I then said 'okay, reimburse the £25, but issue a deadlock letter for the other part of my complaint (about changes to the website). They've replied saying, if I accept the £25 reimbursement then it will be as a full and final settlement.

Do you guys think I should go for the full and final settlement or ask them to issue a deadlock letter? If deadlock letter, who can I pursue this with? Telecoms Ombudsman, Trading standards or both?

Cisco001

For £25. I don't care

OceanSound

Cisco001 wrote: »

For £25. I don't care

Do you mean you would ask for deadlock letter? or do you mean you wouldn't have bothered complaining in the first place?

d123

OceanSound wrote: »

Do you mean you would ask for deadlock letter? or do you mean you wouldn't have bothered complaining in the first place?

What do you expect to gain? You’ve been offered your money back after you clicked the wrong link, I doubt the ombudsman is going to force the network to make a technical change to their website to assist people who don’t pay attention while clicking links.

pmduk

Whether a company makes a change to its website is surely its own business decision and hence outwith the jurisdiction of the ombudsman.

As a customer, you have received your £25 back.

If you want to make executive decisions, apply for a job with the company and wait until you get promoted to the relevant role, You are in no position to make demands.

Go to the Ombudsman in your current position and you will end with nothing having turned down a full and final settlement of everything you are entitled to and wasted the Ombudsman's time.

OceanSound

d123 wrote: »

What do you expect to gain? You’ve been offered your money back after you clicked the wrong link, I doubt the ombudsman is going to force the network to make a technical change to their website to assist people who don’t pay attention while clicking links.

It's not so much what I would expect to gain by going down the deadlock letter route. It's what I would expect for the next man/woman to gain when they interact with the Three website. A user friendly, pleasant interaction with the website. That's all.

I'm pretty sure an Ombudsman or another organisation (like trading standards) will be interested if a service provider is not running it's business in accordance with the law, rules, regulations.

If the practices are not in accordance with the law, rules, regulations, I would expect the proper body to enforce the law as opposed to force the law.

OceanSound

pmduk wrote: »

Whether a company makes a change to its website is surely its own business decision and hence outwith the jurisdiction of the ombudsman.

Not quite. Remember the travel booking site misleading advertisements fiasco, offering holidays FROM £59, but in actuality cost £266. I wouldn't leave it completely to busineesses to make the most cogent and fair decisions for all. No matter how well it looks after the right people.

If you want to make executive decisions, apply for a job with the company and wait until you get promoted to the relevant role, You are in no position to make demands.

Actually Three has offered to take on board my suggestions and pass it to the relevant people. Perhaps to the CEO?

Anyway, I've previously made suggestions (probably wouldn't call it a demand) to businesses like TrustPilot and I've seen them being implemented. (not saying it was done purely based on my suggestion, but I have seen the change) I didn't even apply for a job there and work my way up the career ladder.

PHK

OceanSound wrote: »

It's not so much what I would expect to gain by going down the deadlock letter route. It's what I would expect for the next man/woman to gain when they interact with the Three website. A user friendly, pleasant interaction with the website. That's all.

I'm pretty sure an Ombudsman or another organisation (like trading standards) will be interested if a service provider is not running it's business in accordance with the law, rules, regulations.

If the practices are not in accordance with the law, rules, regulations, I would expect the proper body to enforce the law as opposed to force the law.

All this because you clicked on the wrong link. It's standard web design practice to have the explanatory link underneath the "Action" link, for the very good reason that otherwise some people can't find it.

You'll also notice that despite the Three website and other websites having this design for years there have been no others complaining here.

This isn't a scam by Three or anything untoward. Just accept this as a mistake and move on to something more productive.

pmduk

By asking for a deadlock letter because they haven't acted immediately on this aspect of your complaint, you have turned it into a demand.

You're also confusing the Ombudsman with a regulator. In the telecoms industry, the ombudsmen act as alternative dispute resolution services. The regulator, Ofcom, doesn't deal with individual complaints. It can be misleading to compare this industry to others.

OceanSound

PHK wrote: »

All this because you clicked on the wrong link..

It may seem to you this is the case, but you do realize that system faults happen all the time.

You'll also notice that despite the Three website and other websites having this design for years there have been no others complaining here.

That's a laugh. MSE is not the only website out there. I'm aware of at least one occasion where this has happened to an EE customer. (He of course made purchase accidentally - even when on that website you have to click purchase then go to another page to buy data). Just because no one hasn't complained on here it doesn't mean it's never happened before.

Actually,, I'm not surprised no one has complained on here, if the quality and the one-sidedness of the advice is anything to go by.

This isn't a scam by Three or anything untoward.

We don't know that yet. Especially, (if as another poster said) it's solely up to the business to decide how to present the info on the website.

OceanSound

pmduk wrote: »

By asking for a deadlock letter because they haven't acted immediately on this aspect of your complaint, you have turned it into a demand.

No, actually I offered them a reasonable amount of time to effect the change.
(I know how much red-tape there could be to effect even a small change).

You're also confusing the Ombudsman with a regulator. In the telecoms industry, the ombudsmen act as alternative dispute resolution services. The regulator, Ofcom, doesn't deal with individual complaints.

Actually, I'm aware of the distinction. Which is why I asked you if I should complain to the Ombudsman in the OP.

It can be misleading to compare this industry to others.

How is the ombudsman/regulator distinction even related to advertising standards.