Electrician course scam

Bananabeansodi

Hi everyone, hoping for some advice on a situation my partner has found himself in. Apologies in advance for the length — I want to give as much detail as possible.

Background

My partner was approached by a company trading as Engineering Real Results (GREEN 260 LTD) 1–3 years ago. A sales rep called him on zoom, showed him glossy brochures with endorsements from well-known companies, and encouraged him to sign up for a distance learning course. A credit agreement was arranged on the spot by the sales rep to cover the full course fee - he didn't source this himself, it was set up by them as part of the sale.

He is still making monthly payments on that credit agreement now.

The problem

After doing some research, we've discovered that this company has a long history of complaints going back to at least 2008, including:

• Fabricated endorsements from companies including Microsoft, CISCO, City & Guilds, E-Skills and the British Learning Association — confirmed in writing by those companies and investigated by BBC Watchdog
• ASA rulings against them for misleading advertising
• The credit company used appears to be connected to the same parent operation
• The company has rebranded multiple times apparently to outrun its reputation
• Other students have successfully obtained refunds via Trading Standards and the Financial Ombudsman Service

In short — he was sold the course on the basis of endorsements that were fabricated. The course materials have also turned out to be poor quality.

Our questions

1. Because the credit agreement was arranged by the seller as part of the sale, does Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act apply, making the lender jointly liable? Or does that only apply to credit cards?
2. Should he stop paying the credit agreement now, or keep paying while we pursue a refund to protect his credit record?
3. Is the Financial Ombudsman Service the right route given a credit agreement is involved, or should we go to Trading Standards first — or both simultaneously?
4. Are there any template complaint letters or specific legislation we should be citing? We've seen reference to the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (sections 5 & 7) and the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 — are these still the right ones to use?
5. Has anyone here successfully got a refund from this company or its related brands recently? We know others have in the past but wondering if it's still possible.

We're determined to pursue this properly and not just walk away. Any advice gratefully received.

Thanks in advance.

Aylesbury_Duck

To the best of my knowledge:

1. It does make the lender jointly liable.
2. Keep paying. I think it would only complicate matters to stop doing so.
3. I believe you have to exhaust a provider's complaints process and have a letter to show that, before the FOS will get involved. Trading Standards are not "open" to the public in that sense, I believe they only intervene if Citizens Advice notify them.
4. Not sure on this one. Others may be able to advise. Judicious use of AI may help, subject to the usual caveats about making sure it relates to UK legislation, accuracy, etc.
5. Highly unlikely, given that this forum is used by a tiny fraction of people.

Was your partner engaged in a business capacity, or as a genuine consumer? The exact status will change what legislation applies. A quick look at their website suggests they train existing tradespeople.

Woodstok2000

Section 75 isn't just for credit cards, it generally applies to goods/services costing between £100-30,000 paid for with:

• a credit or debit card
• a fixed sum loan
• certain catalogue shopping accounts

So if it was a fixed sum loan for more than £100 but less than £30,000, the lender is jointly liable.

Follow the guide here: Problems with Goods and Services

You can go to trading standards in parallel, they are unlikely to help you get your money back, but it may help others avoid the same situation.

Bananabeansodi

he’s a genuine consumer, it was for the company engineering real results.

They completely elongate everything and have told him that he has to wait to hear their decision, on whether he can book in a test ?

their entire product is a scam and they make it so you will never be qualified.

Aylesbury_Duck

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82023122#Comment_82023122

What are the timescales involved? You said he was initially in touch with them one to three years ago, which is a pretty big window of time. On what date did his contract start, which training was he contracted to receive, how much of it was delivered and when, and when did he tell them he was dissatisfied and wanted a refund?

Bananabeansodi

his contract started in April 2023, he wanted to do his practical end of March 2026. As advertised “a do at your own pace”. Which he did do alongside working full time.

When he contacted them he was within his time frame and their response was, “we didn’t let you know what course date you could do as you would’ve run out of time anyway”

to me, the legitimacy of all of this, they’ve made a course that’s impossible to finish, and to falsely sell a dream.

There are various accounts of this happening to other people. And the same people who run this company are allegedly linked to the controversy with Skills2train.. this link explains it all. https://www.collativelearning.com/SKILLSTRAIN%20SCAM%20%26%20REFUND.html

Aylesbury_Duck

I'm not going to click on some dubious link, and what may or may not have happened to an allegedly linked company doesn't have any bearing on your partner's consumer rights.

How much of the course has he completed? He may only be entitled to a pro rata refund of the bits of the course (and any certificates) he's being prevented from completing. Poor quality of materials is subjective and will probably take some homework to demonstrate.