E2Save £200 auto cashback deal

mobilejunkie

"A credit will be raised automatically by cheque within two months..." Seems pretty clear to me! It is a breach of the t&c. Of course, that doesn't bother them - but they will continue to act as they please if people let them get away with things.

agsnu

"Raised" is not clearly defined in the T&C, though. Lynsey, you said it was "due" 3 weeks ago, so I thought you meant that you were expecting to have received it by then.

Lynsey

agsnu wrote: »

"Raised" is not clearly defined in the T&C, though. Lynsey, you said it was "due" 3 weeks ago, so I thought you meant that you were expecting to have received it by then.

Yeh, my mistake. The two months without cancelling were up 3 weeks ago, but looking at the wording it looks like they will just "raise" the cheque as you say, so the way I see it, it may take up to 28 days before being late. It did say somewhere to allow 90 days from contract start before claiming it's missing, just can't find it!!!!!!!!!!!!
Anyway, I'm happy. £136 pays for the next 4 months line rental give or take a few quid. As said before, they have been by far the best and quickest payers so far - long may it continue. :T


Lynsey

mobilejunkie

If you wait 90 days it'll end up taking 120. Won't catch me watiting longer than 60. This is (like most things cpw) historical. Since the IIC arrived they do things the Onestopphoneshop way rather than the E2Save way - even though Onestopphoneshop IS now E2save. Don't worry if you haven't a clue what I'm on about - I do!!

Lynsey

Well if not paid in 90 days it is late and is in breach of contract. LBA giving 10 days max. should be all that is needed and if not settled then suing for the lot would be the outcome.

Won't catch me watiting longer than 60.

I would, but perhaps I'm just nice , or stupid !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lynsey

Borgie

If you wait 90 days it'll end up taking 120. Won't catch me watiting longer than 60. This is (like most things cpw) historical. Since the IIC arrived they do things the Onestopphoneshop way rather than the E2Save way - even though Onestopphoneshop IS now E2save. Don't worry if you haven't a clue what I'm on about - I do!!



I took out my latest contract on 27/2. I phoned them day before yesterday to check on progress of my 60 day auto cash back - they say this will come within 90 days. This is not what original paper work says.
So if it doesn't come within 60 days I take it I do an LBA and then sue for the whole lot ?

mobilejunkie

Despite my previous comments I know they will pay. However, I would email them and if you get no reply then send a LBA. If the reply is insufficient I would give them the 90 and have the LBA ready to send immediately. My general approach is to draw a line in the sand once they have failed to deliver, trying a reasonable approach (which sometimes works) followed by a firmer one. This is not about a claim being denied - it is about them being late. A court might not be too sympathetic without a reasonable attempt to obtain what is due before resorting to it's services. However, wait after 60 days before doing anything and you're on the slippery slope. Phone calls are a waste of money and proof of zilch. An email and then a LBA if that doesn't work in a week or so (at least in terms of a response) is my strategy. I would reply to their message saying 90 days that this is not the t&c they committed to on your contract and it is not acceptable to wait so long once they have breached the terms.

Quentin

mobilejunkie wrote: »

A court might not be too sympathetic without a reasonable attempt to obtain what is due before resorting to it's services

They wouldn't. That is one of the reasons why a LBA should be sent.

Once you have issued a LBA, then you can demonstrate that you did attempt to get the money owed before resorting to the court.

A reputable company on getting a LBA would not ignore it.

If they respond without the requested payment BUT with a reasonable reason for not paying, then is the time to decide whether or not to pursue with the MCOL.

But if anyone ignores a LBA, then the court would not consider it unreasonable to proceed to a MCOL.

Borgie

mobilejunkie wrote: »

Despite my previous comments I know they will pay. However, I would email them and if you get no reply then send a LBA. If the reply is insufficient I would give them the 90 and have the LBA ready to send immediately. My general approach is to draw a line in the sand once they have failed to deliver, trying a reasonable approach (which sometimes works) followed by a firmer one. This is nopt about a claim being denied - it is about them being late. A court might not be too sympathetic without a reasonable attempt to obtain what is due before resorting to it's services. However, wait after 60 days before doing anything and you're on the slippery slope. Phone calls are a waste of money and proof of zilch. An email and then a LBA if that doesn't work in a week or so (at least in temrs of a response) is my strategy. I would reply to their message saying 90 days that this is not the t&c they committed to on your contract and it is not acceptable to wait so long once they have breached the terms.

I Emailed them (Like you I have an E Mail address they respond to) In the E Mail they said it will be raised 60-90 days after connection. This is not what original paperwork said. It said 60 days so shall I E Mail back now saying that 90 days breaches those terms ?

Thanks

mobilejunkie

I would. Why wouldn't you? otherwise you will simply waste another 2 weeks waiting to see. Besides, there's no harm in people letting them know that ignoring the t&c which (THIS time!) THEY wrote is unacceptable.