Jun/090
Consumer Guarantee - The Two Year Rule
A consumer who bought a TV from Tesco was not given the consumer rights he expected when his TV broke. EU regulations state that EU citizens are entitled to 2 years replacement cover if an item becomes faulty through general wear and tear but Tesco claimed that 1 year was the agreed length of cover.
Staff at the European Commission told Guardian Money this week that shoppers have an extremely strong case for demanding a repair, replacement or refund on items up to two years old – the minimum guarantee for all member states, including the UK. It is not a new rule, but it seems few shoppers or retailers are familiar with it. One reason stores are getting away with it is that the law in the area is complicated. The UK’s Sale of Goods Act (Soga) gives consumers a longer protection period – up to six years, although in practice consumers find it difficult to enforce.
While the European Union website clearly backs up the two-year guarantee, you will find no information of the two-year rule on the government’s Consumer Direct website. “Sellers … are obliged to guarantee the conformity of the goods with the contract for a period of two years after the delivery of the goods,” the EU says. An updated directive is being worked on, although it is not expected to become law for at least another year.
Jun/090
No Takers for Mystery Deposit
Last summer, a Natwest customer found £3,500 had been deposited mysteriously into her current account. She wasn’t expecting any such deposit, and when she contacted the Abbey (the bank from which it had been paid), they said it was from an off-shore account but could say no more. Since then, the consumer has been trying to either bank involved to take the money off her hands to avoid being involved in any sort of scam but both the Natwest and the Abbey still do not want anything to do with it.
The Abbey could only say that the money was deposited from an off-shore account.
A law firm in Leeds by the name of Lupton Fawcett advised that Natwest were not to be blamed in this case and that Abbey were responsible for obtaining the correct account number and sort code to which the funds would be deposited. John Eaton, the firms financial services director recommends that the consumer should contact Natwest and ask them to return the funds to sender. They will then be transferred back to the Abbey branch at which they were deposited.
Jun/090
Britons Class Broadband as a Neccessity
Government advisors now believe that home broadband is falling into the ‘utility’ category when it comes to bills. The government commissioned a survey included 16 focus groups and a face-to-face survey of 2,000 people across the UK, 73% of them classed a high-speed broadband connection as very important.
Its findings will be submitted to Lord Carter’s Digital Britain review, due to be published on 16 June.
Jun/090
Warning to Consumers over Forged Notes
Some UK holiday makers are claiming to have been given forged currency through bureaux de change. One man told the BBC that he and his family only realised that they had been mistakenly given the notes when they arrived at their hotel. They were also unable to shop abroad.
A leading expert lawyer in these cases has urged the government to act now to protect consumers from this happening again. However, UK foreign currency providers deny they are the source and insist their security systems are secure.
Jun/090
Financial Stability Sacrificed for Consumer Protection
The Bank of England, the Treasury and the FSA were criticised today for the way in which they supervised the banking system.
The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee, responsible for looking into national economic issues, said the so-called ‘tripartite’ system had become distorted and confusion reigned to the debtriment of the economy. The failure of Northern Rock only served to back up this theory.
The report by the Economic Affairs Committee indicated that the Financial Services Authority had taken its eye of its ultimate responsibility for looking after the countries finances and paying too much attention to its consumer protection role obligations.
Jun/090
TV Rentals Firm Found Guilty of Illegal Credit Practices
A Firm in Gloucestershire admitted trading without a Consumer Credit Licence, and as a result attempting to illegally enforce unlicensed credit agreements, at Stroud Magistrates Court. Glevum TV Rentals’ case followed an investigation by Gloucestershire County Council’s Trading Standards Service.
Magistrates imposed fines totalling £1,000 and ordered the company to make a £500 contribution towards the costs of bringing the prosecution.
Glevum TV Rentals Limited operated from a city centre shop where they offered a variety of goods, from furniture and domestic appliances to smaller goods, on a basis they described as ‘rent to buy’. These were actually hire purchase transactions.
Jun/090
Yes Loans Run on Expired Credit Licence
A recent report on the BBC website uncovered the illegalities of Yes Loans’ operations. Yes Loans are currently the UK largest loan broker (sub-prime) and they have continued to run on an expired credit licence for nearly 12 months.
It is already common knowledge in consumer legal circles that the managing director of the company obtained an exemption from a 10 year ban for “serious misconduct” and now Yes Loans are accused of making it as difficult as possible for consumer to get back what is rightfully theirs. Beit a compensation claim or refund of some description. This is a major breach of consumer regulation and is severely frowned upon.
Jun/090
Consumer Credit Act Helping to Boost Online Sales
Christmas 2008 came and went with stories about shopping figues being lower than ever and high street stores going bust within hours of each other. We know now that the crisis that was predicted never really materialised despite well-known chains such as Woolworths and Zavvi succumbing to low sales figures. However, internet shopping defied the economic downturn and even went on to level out the overall sales figures similar to the previous year.
Customers using credit cards, rather than debit cards, to purchase goods online enjoy greater legal protection from fraud. Section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act allows cardholders to claim against their card issuer, as well as their supplier, if they suffer breach of contract or misrepresentation for items costing over £100.
Jun/090
Ministry of Justice warns Consumers about debt write-off ’scams’
Consumers have today been told that trying to get debts written off can be dangerous. The Ministry of Justice say hundreds, if not thousands, of claims management firms are charging ever-increasing up-front fees, and making misleading suggestions about the chances of success.
Steve Sharrock, who is an oil engineer from the North West of England, got a call from a company who told him there was a 99.9% chance that they could get his credit card debts written off entirely. Anyone could be forgiven for falling for this ‘con’ as it sounds like too good an opportunity to miss.
But after paying a fee upfront of £275, Mr Sharrock never heard from the company again. “It’s just a scam,” he told the BBC.
Consumer-Help.co.uk have found that Keith Park Solicitors based in Merseyside have achieved considerable success in this field and do not charge a fee.
Jun/090
Consumers Given False Information over Credit Card and Loan Claims
A warning on credit card and loan write-offs has been issued by the government.
The Ministry of Justice said that firms had been and still are misleading consumers, telling them that they can exploit legal loopholes to wipe out their debts. Booklets and leaflets from some companies openly state that various bits of technical information in credit card and loan agreements are in breach of the Consumer Credit Act.
However, this often turns out not to be the case, leaving clients - who commonly pay large signing-on charges to the firm - out of pocket. Sue Edwards, head of consumer policy at the Citizens Advice Bureau, told the BBC that the possibility of managers being able to achieve a debt write-off for customers is “possibly quite slim”.
The Ministry of Justice, the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the Financial Services Authority organised a meeting which was held in London at the start of this month and at the top of the agenda was ways of tightening the rules for the firms.
 |
 |
