I posted a while back about problems getting a CB payment out of
Mobileshop and had to threaten them with a Small Claims action . My
last (as in final) voucher was received by them in May so payment is
well overdue .
I sent an e-mail yesterday again threatening a SCC action and what do
I get today...not an e-mail addressing my points but another offer of
an Argos (or other) vouchers at 110% of the £105 I am due .
They are still playing on these "technical problems" that they say
they had .How long does it take to get these problems sorted for
Heaven's sake .
On 31 Aug, 12:40, Stuart B <stu...@xpozure4u.plus.com> wrote:
> I posted a while back about problems getting a CB payment out of
> Mobileshop and had to threaten them with a Small Claims action . My
> last (as in final) voucher was received by them in May so payment is
> well overdue .
>
> I sent an e-mail yesterday again threatening a SCC action and what do
> I get today...not an e-mail addressing my points but another offer of
> an Argos (or other) vouchers at 110% of the £105 I am due .
>
> They are still playing on these "technical problems" that they say
> they had .How long does it take to get these problems sorted for
> Heaven's sake .
>
> Anyone else in a similar situation with them ?
>
> Stuart.
The "technical problems" allegedly boiled down to matching claimant
details with the appropriate bank details.............the two were
alleged to have become detached.
Except............my 2nd claim was late so, like you, I sent a final
letter before action which resulted in them finding my bank details
and paying up before the deadline I'd issued.
Hmmm, but my 3rd claim was also late.............how can this be,
they've already matched my details in order to pay the 2nd claim?
And my 4th claim is also overdue.
They're having a laugh and it seems will only pay out on receipt of a
letter before action.
Stuart B wrote:
> I posted a while back about problems getting a CB payment out of
> Mobileshop and had to threaten them with a Small Claims action .
And you haven't done so yet? No wonder they don't take you seriously.
Send them a letter before claim by recorded post with a deadline (say,
14 days). Then actually stick to it.
Unless you have already done this, in which case you should just issue
your claim now in the county court.
> They are still playing on these "technical problems" that they say
> they had .How long does it take to get these problems sorted for
> Heaven's sake .
>
> Anyone else in a similar situation with them ?
I was. My letter before claim got the same response. But it was amazing
how quickly those "technical problems" cleared up as soon as they
received the claim form from the county court.
--
Michael Hoffman
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 18:24:40 +0100, Michael Hoffman
<cam.ac.uk@mh391.invalid> wrote:
>Stuart B wrote:
>> I posted a while back about problems getting a CB payment out of
>> Mobileshop and had to threaten them with a Small Claims action .
>
>And you haven't done so yet? No wonder they don't take you seriously.
>
>Send them a letter before claim by recorded post with a deadline (say,
>14 days). Then actually stick to it.
Why do you assert that they are not taking me seriously?.
What I said in my post was that almost immediately after threatening
them with a SCC action on the previous occasion they paid up so no
further action was required .
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 18:24:40 +0100, Michael Hoffman
<cam.ac.uk@mh391.invalid> wrote:
>Stuart B wrote:
>> I posted a while back about problems getting a CB payment out of
>> Mobileshop and had to threaten them with a Small Claims action .
>
>And you haven't done so yet? No wonder they don't take you seriously.
>
(disregard my other response)
I see that I didnt make myself clear in my OP.
What happened was that they paid up the last time almost immediately
after I threatened them with a SCC action so no further action was
required .
Now we are back at that situation again re the final payment due.
On 31 Aug, 18:46, Stuart B <stu...@xpozure4u.plus.com> wrote:
>
> (disregard my other response)
> I see that I didnt make myself clear in my OP.
>
> What happened was that they paid up the last time almost immediately
> after I threatened them with a SCC action so no further action was
> required .
> Now we are back at that situation again re the final payment due.
>
> .
Yes, they do pay up on receipt of a FLBA.
Which only goes to demonstrate that they're taking the mickey.
>On 31 Aug, 18:46, Stuart B <stu...@xpozure4u.plus.com> wrote:
>>
>> (disregard my other response)
>> I see that I didnt make myself clear in my OP.
>>
>> What happened was that they paid up the last time almost immediately
>> after I threatened them with a SCC action so no further action was
>> required .
>> Now we are back at that situation again re the final payment due.
>>
>> .
>
>Yes, they do pay up on receipt of a FLBA.
>
>Which only goes to demonstrate that they're taking the mickey.
>
>A shame, they used to be quite reliable.
mobileshop have an offer on at the moment that I'm interested in.
They used to have a spotless reputation (2005/6?) but I've read about
several people having problems this year.
Trouble is I can't tell if these are just exceptions.
Anyone care to comment whether it's worth the risk or not?
(be aware there are libel laws etc... I don't want to put anyone at
risk)
In article <1lu4e3djt07pmriea23b9cd5ap0lefouof@4ax.com>, pjlusenet@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> mobileshop have an offer on at the moment that I'm interested in.
> They used to have a spotless reputation (2005/6?) but I've read about
> several people having problems this year.
> Trouble is I can't tell if these are just exceptions.
>
> Anyone care to comment whether it's worth the risk or not?
> (be aware there are libel laws etc... I don't want to put anyone at
> risk)
They paid my first two cashbacks after a small delay (beyond their 60
days that is), the next one was after a very long delay, and the final
one a few days after the third, which was unexpected. I did think that
they wouldn't pay the last two claims at all so I was ultimately
satisfied but not exactly happy with their service.
On Sep 8, 7:39 pm, Chris Leuty <n...@leuty.me.uk> wrote:
> In article <1lu4e3djt07pmriea23b9cd5ap0lefo...@4ax.com>,
>
> pjluse...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> > mobileshop have an offer on at the moment that I'm interested in.
> > They used to have a spotless reputation (2005/6?) but I've read about
> > several people having problems this year.
> > Trouble is I can't tell if these are just exceptions.
>
> > Anyone care to comment whether it's worth the risk or not?
> > (be aware there are libel laws etc... I don't want to put anyone at
> > risk)
>
> They paid my first two cashbacks after a small delay (beyond their 60
> days that is), the next one was after a very long delay, and the final
> one a few days after the third, which was unexpected. I did think that
> they wouldn't pay the last two claims at all so I was ultimately
> satisfied but not exactly happy with their service.
They paid all four of my claims but only upon receipt of final letters
before action and all were way overdue anyway.
Yep, I got my money but I'm not happy at having to spend £1.04 each
time sending them letters by Recorded Delivery just to get them to
honour their legal obligations.
To be honest, I thought they were going to go bust and didn't expect
to get my last three payments because I didn't expect them to be
trading............so, overall, I'm relieved more than impressed with
them.
In message <1189347769.480175.9110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.co m>, chuckles_the_scary_clown@budweiser.com writes
>On Sep 8, 7:39 pm, Chris Leuty <n...@leuty.me.uk> wrote:
>> In article <1lu4e3djt07pmriea23b9cd5ap0lefo...@4ax.com>,
>>
>> pjluse...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> > mobileshop have an offer on at the moment that I'm interested in.
>> > They used to have a spotless reputation (2005/6?) but I've read about
>> > several people having problems this year.
>> >
Although mobileshop doesn't get a mention, and this post might not be
directly relevant to your question, this article from the Guardian on
Saturday is worth a read.
I suspect that the business model of the smaller cashback operators is
based on rapid growth - so todays customer's commission pays last years
customer's cashback. If growth doesn't happen then the cashflow
problems start so you have to do better and better deals to attract
customers so the margins go down so it all spirals down. Only a thought
- may be completely different and perhaps someone else will be along to
explain how it really works. I wonder if the too good to be true deals
are the first signs of death throws of a company?
Anyway, it appears that there are 'failures' in the market. Failure to
file accounts is often a sign of problems.
Its always worth a look at the companies house website, their free web
check tells you the registered address, accounting dates and date of
last/next accounts: at least you find out who you are dealing with.
In article <EWkMooIA6O5GFwKp@cowling1.demon.co.uk>,
RCC <richard@mapson_cowling1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I suspect that the business model of the smaller cashback operators is
> based on rapid growth - so todays customer's commission pays last years
> customer's cashback.
If this is the case then mobileshop are going to have difficulties.
Their problems are well-documented with numerous dissatisfied customers
and anyone doing a bit of research on the net prior to using them will
see this. If not, their own website has not had a new cashback
testimonial since April which ought to set off the alarm bells for a
potential customer.
> mobileshop have an offer on at the moment that I'm interested in.
> They used to have a spotless reputation (2005/6?) but I've read about
> several people having problems this year.
> Trouble is I can't tell if these are just exceptions.
>
> Anyone care to comment whether it's worth the risk or not?
> (be aware there are libel laws etc... I don't want to put anyone at
> risk)
In the end I received all the money I expected, but only after I sued
them. I would not do business with Mobileshop again.
--
Michael Hoffman
<chuckles_the_scary_clown@budweiser.com> wrote in message
news:1188583538.544755.227570@50g2000hsm.googlegro ups.com...
> On 31 Aug, 18:46, Stuart B <stu...@xpozure4u.plus.com> wrote:
>>
>> (disregard my other response)
>> I see that I didnt make myself clear in my OP.
>>
>> What happened was that they paid up the last time almost immediately
>> after I threatened them with a SCC action so no further action was
>> required .
>> Now we are back at that situation again re the final payment due.
>>
>> .
>
> Yes, they do pay up on receipt of a FLBA.
>
> Which only goes to demonstrate that they're taking the mickey.
>
> A shame, they used to be quite reliable.
>
My experience too, with two separate accounts. Third claim (of four)
took LBA to get results. Final claims (both accounts) took two Letters
before Action.
How can two letters both be "final"? When I sent the LBA for the third
claim, I used Recorded Signed For. Nothing showed up on the online
tracker, so I phoned the Royal Mail enquiry line, where a helpful young
lady explained that some firms were not required to sign individually
for letters - they were given a list to sign and return when it suited
them. I emailed a complaint to RM that this rather spoiled the point of
Recorded Signed For: they changed their tune, said my letter _had_ been
delivered, just not scanned - and a few days later the Mobileshop
payment arrived, so I thought no more of it.
Final claim, overdue, so LBA again, sent RSF. Again no online tracking,
emailed RM again, and this time they just told me to send a "lost
letter" claim. Nothing from Mobileshop, so maybe they didn't get it -
or perhaps they've realised that if they don't have to sign, they don't
have to admit receipt either.
So I sent another LBA, this time Special Delivery. It arrived, and less
than a week later, the money is in my bank.
Conclusions: mobileshop are most unlikely to be telling the truth about
their reasons for delaying cashback; Recorded Signed For is an
unreliable method of sending important letters; it's worth addressing
your envelope to The Company Secretary at their registered address, with
no mention of cashback on the envelope; and I won't be using them again
unless and until I start seeing glowing reports about a re-discovered
integrity.
As Chuckles said, it's a shame, because they've had some good deals, and
they used to have perhaps the best reputation of any of the retailers
(damning with faint praise, I know), but they're working to a horribly
flawed business model.
"Autolycus" <aug2007@mainbeam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bOCdnTyoAbV6IW_bRVnyiAA@pipex.net...
>
> <chuckles_the_scary_clown@budweiser.com> wrote in message
> news:1188583538.544755.227570@50g2000hsm.googlegro ups.com...
>> On 31 Aug, 18:46, Stuart B <stu...@xpozure4u.plus.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> (disregard my other response)
>>> I see that I didnt make myself clear in my OP.
>>>
>>> What happened was that they paid up the last time almost immediately
>>> after I threatened them with a SCC action so no further action was
>>> required .
>>> Now we are back at that situation again re the final payment due.
>>>
>>> .
>>
>> Yes, they do pay up on receipt of a FLBA.
>>
>> Which only goes to demonstrate that they're taking the mickey.
>>
>> A shame, they used to be quite reliable.
>>
> My experience too, with two separate accounts. Third claim (of four) took
> LBA to get results. Final claims (both accounts) took two Letters before
> Action.
>
> How can two letters both be "final"? When I sent the LBA for the third
> claim, I used Recorded Signed For. Nothing showed up on the online
> tracker, so I phoned the Royal Mail enquiry line, where a helpful young
> lady explained that some firms were not required to sign individually for
> letters - they were given a list to sign and return when it suited them.
> I emailed a complaint to RM that this rather spoiled the point of Recorded
> Signed For: they changed their tune, said my letter _had_ been delivered,
> just not scanned - and a few days later the Mobileshop payment arrived, so
> I thought no more of it.
>
> Final claim, overdue, so LBA again, sent RSF. Again no online tracking,
> emailed RM again, and this time they just told me to send a "lost letter"
> claim. Nothing from Mobileshop, so maybe they didn't get it - or perhaps
> they've realised that if they don't have to sign, they don't have to admit
> receipt either.
>
> So I sent another LBA, this time Special Delivery. It arrived, and less
> than a week later, the money is in my bank.
>
> Conclusions: mobileshop are most unlikely to be telling the truth about
> their reasons for delaying cashback; Recorded Signed For is an unreliable
> method of sending important letters; it's worth addressing your envelope
> to The Company Secretary at their registered address, with no mention of
> cashback on the envelope; and I won't be using them again unless and until
> I start seeing glowing reports about a re-discovered integrity.
>
> As Chuckles said, it's a shame, because they've had some good deals, and
> they used to have perhaps the best reputation of any of the retailers
> (damning with faint praise, I know), but they're working to a horribly
> flawed business model. Kevin Poole
I Suppose I have been lucky, I am on my 2nd year, and waiting for my next
argos card, i have 3 running at the moment.
just hoping with everything i keep reading things wont change.
Tracym
What is an LBA? An RSF? A FBLA (a Final LBA?). It looks as if I am
going to have to take action against them. Both my wife's and my
contracts are now at the end and so far not even one cashback received
plus neither of the 12th months applications have been updated on
their database in spite of having been sent by post and also faxed. I
suspect they are pretty close to meltdown.
Maris
On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 14:46:53 +0100, "Tracym"
<tracymidd@knickersoffhotmail.com> wrote:
>
>"Autolycus" <aug2007@mainbeam.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:bOCdnTyoAbV6IW_bRVnyiAA@pipex.net...
>>
>> <chuckles_the_scary_clown@budweiser.com> wrote in message
>> news:1188583538.544755.227570@50g2000hsm.googlegro ups.com...
>>> On 31 Aug, 18:46, Stuart B <stu...@xpozure4u.plus.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> (disregard my other response)
>>>> I see that I didnt make myself clear in my OP.
>>>>
>>>> What happened was that they paid up the last time almost immediately
>>>> after I threatened them with a SCC action so no further action was
>>>> required .
>>>> Now we are back at that situation again re the final payment due.
>>>>
>>>> .
>>>
>>> Yes, they do pay up on receipt of a FLBA.
>>>
>>> Which only goes to demonstrate that they're taking the mickey.
>>>
>>> A shame, they used to be quite reliable.
>>>
>> My experience too, with two separate accounts. Third claim (of four) took
>> LBA to get results. Final claims (both accounts) took two Letters before
>> Action.
>>
>> How can two letters both be "final"? When I sent the LBA for the third
>> claim, I used Recorded Signed For. Nothing showed up on the online
>> tracker, so I phoned the Royal Mail enquiry line, where a helpful young
>> lady explained that some firms were not required to sign individually for
>> letters - they were given a list to sign and return when it suited them.
>> I emailed a complaint to RM that this rather spoiled the point of Recorded
>> Signed For: they changed their tune, said my letter _had_ been delivered,
>> just not scanned - and a few days later the Mobileshop payment arrived, so
>> I thought no more of it.
>>
>> Final claim, overdue, so LBA again, sent RSF. Again no online tracking,
>> emailed RM again, and this time they just told me to send a "lost letter"
>> claim. Nothing from Mobileshop, so maybe they didn't get it - or perhaps
>> they've realised that if they don't have to sign, they don't have to admit
>> receipt either.
>>
>> So I sent another LBA, this time Special Delivery. It arrived, and less
>> than a week later, the money is in my bank.
>>
>> Conclusions: mobileshop are most unlikely to be telling the truth about
>> their reasons for delaying cashback; Recorded Signed For is an unreliable
>> method of sending important letters; it's worth addressing your envelope
>> to The Company Secretary at their registered address, with no mention of
>> cashback on the envelope; and I won't be using them again unless and until
>> I start seeing glowing reports about a re-discovered integrity.
>>
>> As Chuckles said, it's a shame, because they've had some good deals, and
>> they used to have perhaps the best reputation of any of the retailers
>> (damning with faint praise, I know), but they're working to a horribly
>> flawed business model. Kevin Poole
>
>
>I Suppose I have been lucky, I am on my 2nd year, and waiting for my next
>argos card, i have 3 running at the moment.
>just hoping with everything i keep reading things wont change.
>Tracym
>
On Oct 19, 11:17 am, Maris <lat...@london.com> wrote:
> What is an LBA? An RSF? A FBLA (a Final LBA?). It looks as if I am
> going to have to take action against them. Both my wife's and my
> contracts are now at the end and so far not even one cashback received
> plus neither of the 12th months applications have been updated on
> their database in spite of having been sent by post and also faxed. I
> suspect they are pretty close to meltdown.
>
LBA = letter before action
FLBA = final letter before action
RSF = Recorded Signed For
Your LBA or FLBA should always be sent RSF IMHO but YMMV
Mobileshop Cashback Problems....Again 
Linear Mode
