Warning issued to motorists over copycat DVLA websites that charge a premium for services

boobyd

Dbu said:

There are a lot of smug comments on here. The sites vary and there are many reasons why people fall for them. But the thing to do is to keep challenging them and to raise a complaint via your bank, normally after a week or so. They're sympathetic but you'll probably find that the shysters will have offered a full refund by then. They don't want their business model exposed. Don't be ashamed and don't give in.

Yes get the sites highlighted, but then what?
They get closed, but they will reappear in a different guise.,they did this years ago when the DL, passports etc looked like the real thing.
The biggest issue is getting the concept of people to be Internet aware, 
Over the last year the reliance and use has changed yet there seems to be a attitude that anything searched for is all fluufy and nice.
You can put all the controls etc in place but if the user can't be bothered to do basic 2 second checks what's the point 

Pollycat

boobyd said:

Yes get the sites highlighted, but then what?
They get closed, but they will reappear in a different guise.,they did this years ago when the DL, passports etc looked like the real thing.
The biggest issue is getting the concept of people to be Internet aware, 
Over the last year the reliance and use has changed yet there seems to be a attitude that anything searched for is all fluufy and nice.
You can put all the controls etc in place but if the user can't be bothered to do basic 2 second checks what's the point 

According to the BBC article, Google don't always close them:

Some of the websites continued to appear in the adverts even after they were flagged to Google with its reporting tools.

born_again

Dbu said:

There are a lot of smug comments on here. The sites vary and there are many reasons why people fall for them. But the thing to do is to keep challenging them and to raise a complaint via your bank, normally after a week or so. They're sympathetic but you'll probably find that the shysters will have offered a full refund by then. They don't want their business model exposed. Don't be ashamed and don't give in.

If you receive the service, then there is nothing your bank can do. If you did not get your licence, then there is a chargeback right. But I have yet to find one of these companies that does not do what they say and order the licence.

Banks are not there to regulate retailers. They have no magic power to get a retailer shut down. There are other bodies to do that.

TooManyPoints

According to the BBC article, Google don't always close them:

Why should anybody close them? They are advertising a service, they make it clear they are not associated with the DVLA in any way and they make their fees perfectly clear. They are not deceiving anybody, they are not doing anything illegal and I would say there is nothing immoral in what they are doing. There is no basis for their forced closure whatsoever.

Pollycat

TooManyPoints said:

According to the BBC article, Google don't always close them:

Why should anybody close them? They are advertising a service, they make it clear they are not associated with the DVLA in any way and they make their fees perfectly clear. They are not deceiving anybody, they are not doing anything illegal and I would say there is nothing immoral in what they are doing. There is no basis for their forced closure whatsoever.

Have you read the BBC article I gave the link to?
The BBC certainly think Google should close them.

TooManyPoints

Have you read the BBC article I gave the link to?

Yes I have. It's done nothing to change my mind. Lots of companies advertise goods or services that you can obtain cheaper elsewhere. It's a slippery slope when it is proposed that restrictions are placed on businesses that are advertising perfectly legitimate services that just happen to be more expensive than some alternatives.

The BBC certainly think Google should close them.

The last organisation I would take heed of when it comes to commercial enterprise is the BBC. This is an organisation which has around £3bn of income per annum guaranteed whether they provide what their subscribers (who have to pay whether they use their services or not)  want or whether they don't. The apparatchiks running that wretched organisation have absolutely no idea how commercial enterprises have to work to earn a crust.

[Deleted User]

TooManyPoints said:

Have you read the BBC article I gave the link to?

Yes I have. It's done nothing to change my mind. Lots of companies advertise goods or services that you can obtain cheaper elsewhere. It's a slippery slope when it is proposed that restrictions are placed on businesses that are advertising perfectly legitimate services that just happen to be more expensive than some alternatives.

The BBC certainly think Google should close them.

The last organisation I would take heed of when it comes to commercial enterprise is the BBC. This is an organisation which has around £3bn of income per annum guaranteed whether they provide what their subscribers (who have to pay whether they use their services or not)  want or whether they don't. The apparatchiks running that wretched organisation have absolutely no idea how commercial enterprises have to work to earn a crust.

BBC runs a very successful worldwide commercial operation. Based on the accounts to 31/3/20, BBC had an income of £4.9bn, of which £3.52bn came from the licence fee and thus £1.4bn from sources like BBC worldwide, selling programs etc. BBC worldwide has made a significant profit every year since 1995

BBC makes a variety of shows so inevitably it won't appeal to everyone in every show but so many shows they make would simply not be viable for a channel funded by adverts, I'd rather the BBC than say GB News

TooManyPoints

Well, if I ran an organisation where >70% of its income came from a compulsory subscription (where  the payment of said sum was "encouraged" by the threat of criminal sanctions) who may or may not use its services, I don't think I'd be too concerned about where the other 30% came from. However, we digress somewhat.

Pollycat

TooManyPoints said:

Well, if I ran an organisation where >70% of its income came from a compulsory subscription (where  the payment of said sum was "encouraged" by the threat of criminal sanctions) who may or may not use its services, I don't think I'd be too concerned about where the other 30% came from. However, we digress somewhat.

OK.

If you don't agree with the BBC about removing posts because of the company you believe they are, how do you feel about MSE having the same stance?

Guy Anker, MSE assistant editor recommends people report these posts - not just to Google but to Trading Standards too::

If you have unwittingly paid for services you could have got for free or for less via official sources it's worth complaining to the company to see if it will provide you a refund. It's worth doing this as soon as you can in case it offers a cooling off period to cancel penalty-free. 

 

You can also report the incident to Trading Standards by calling the Citizens Advice consumer helpline on 03454 04 05 06, as well as to Google if you spotted an advert for the copycat site on the search engine - just use its  online reporting tool. 

boobyd

Pollycat said:

TooManyPoints said:

Well, if I ran an organisation where >70% of its income came from a compulsory subscription (where  the payment of said sum was "encouraged" by the threat of criminal sanctions) who may or may not use its services, I don't think I'd be too concerned about where the other 30% came from. However, we digress somewhat.

OK.

If you don't agree with the BBC about removing posts because of the company you believe they are, how do you feel about MSE having the same stance?

Guy Anker, MSE assistant editor recommends people report these posts - not just to Google but to Trading Standards too::

If you have unwittingly paid for services you could have got for free or for less via official sources it's worth complaining to the company to see if it will provide you a refund. It's worth doing this as soon as you can in case it offers a cooling off period to cancel penalty-free. 

 

You can also report the incident to Trading Standards by calling the Citizens Advice consumer helpline on 03454 04 05 06, as well as to Google if you spotted an advert for the copycat site on the search engine - just use its  online reporting tool. 

Interested in what they would be reported for?
It's been agreed they are shysters not scammers.
No one has said they act illegally ,so what do you report for?
They operate within the law? DVLA have warned about them but haven't said they  are breaking the law.
Reporting on Google  gives 4 options,the closet would be misrepresentation?