It may be that feeding dogs or cats home made food is now financially worthwhile. When petfood was cheap it wasn't. I don't have the knowledge where dogs are concerned but it's certainly possible to feed cats on a raw diet as long as you include things like heart for the taurine content and make sure they get enough calcium. If you have a real old fashioned butcher it's worth looking into.

As I come across them I'll gladly let you know. As I said in an earlier post, if I see their name I hit the back button at the speed of light but I'll take more notice now. Am I allowed to mention a couple of companies I think are very good? I pm'd someone who asked because I didn't want to break any rules.

By whom? Why? I understand that without the railcard he had not paid the correct fare for the journey but the ticket in his possession is a receipt for money paid. If he's going to be treated as though he hadn't paid at all why take the existing ticket away?

I'm delighted to see people taking them on. I wasn't too sure how much I could say on the forum but they really are to be avoided. They've been working quite hard at muscling in on particular sectors of the market lately and the more people who are warned off the better.

For DSRs to apply it must be a BIN (so fixed price) and a business seller. They don't apply for private sellers or auctions.

I spent a year in Romania post revolution and was at that time appalled at how a whole population had been cowed under the one of the harshest regimes in Europe. They reckoned that 1 in 3 of the population were informers for the Securitate. It's a figure I think of every time I hear of yet another initiative to get us all to spy on and report each other as more and more things are criminalised. I'm old enough to be saddened that this is how my country is going and worried that younger generations will grow up considering it normal and acceptable.

Under DSRs he should refund within 30 days and the refund should not depend on the return of the goods first. Do you believe he is going to abide by this? The way to guarantee getting your money back is to go through a Paypal dispute. It is then Paypal who refund you and get the money back from him.

Thanks for that. I'm fit to burst at the moment. I've been lax I admit in that I'm lucky enough to be able to pay all my bills on time and never had reason to believe my credit report could hold anything dire. It's as stupid as believing only guilty people need lawyers

I really need help. Back in 2006 I was informed of an overpayment of child tax credits and went some way down the line of appealing it but eventually gave in and paid rather than go to court. They banked my cheque but I still got court papers because some numpty hadn't entered the payment properly on their 'system'. I didn't return the court papers because I was stupid enough to believe promises over the phone that it would be withdrawn. Next I got notification of a default judgement. A few furious phone calls later and they agreed that it was their mistake. They did at first tell me I could get rid of the ccj by sending £15 to the court along with proof I had paid. I refused to pay for their mistake and my local office agreed that they would clear it. On recently checking my credit report I find this ccj is sitting there as Not Satisfied. It shouldn't even be satisfied - it shouldn't exist. I'm cross with myself as I do realise I should be checking my credit report more often but I'm a lot more furious with HMRC. Before I contact them, is there anything they have done wrong other than the obvious miserable negligence. Have they broken any rules and regulations I could quote? If possible I'd rather not give them a chance to make false promises and empty apologies again.

If he was a business seller then DSRs apply as it was bought on a fixed price BIN. You then don't have to send it back for your refund UNLESS he has a returns policy listed which says you do - there will usually be a timescale too. In reality, you'll be safer putting in a claim through Paypal. You will have to send the item back by recorded delivery at your expense but you are guaranteed your money back for the price you paid and the original p&p. Go into your Paypal account and raise a dispute for Significantly Not As Described and follow the process through. Paypal will then refund you and take the money from him.

I don't think I'm allowed to post recommendations or links to other companies up here so I will pm you. It would be nice to think that because the blood test was negative for allergies that they would have to pay out even though they've tried to exclude it. Unfortunately I've got a feeling that because the reason for it was allergy based they will still say no way. I really think your best option is to insist it was a single course of investigation starting before the exclusion.

Very cleverly there isn't a 'from price'. No reductions stated, just big yellow stickers on the front of the shelf saying Sale £x (exactly the same prices as before the sale). The word 'sale' does imply some reduction so I see it as sharp practice.

I've been thinking about this one. Many people don't claim immediately because of the time taken for the diagnosis process and subsequent treatment. It's perfectly normal to claim at the end of a course of treatment. I've got a feeling that insurance should pay out for a 'course of treatment' even if it overlaps a renewal period - then they'd exclude any similar conditions. You do need your vet to help and how they word their letter is all important. Ask them to make it clear that this was all one inclusive ongoing course of diagnosis/treatment. I don't think E&L will suddenly see sense but it should help your argument in the long run.

I do fairly regular searches and test quotes for pet insurance because I need to keep up to date to advise my kitten buyers. I had noticed that E&L now appear to be underwriting insurance for other company names. I see their name and hit the back button so hadn't checked further. I'm sure I've seen more than one so be careful and check out the underwriter before taking out any new policy.

Two days before Christmas I bought a Kate Moss perfume and body lotion set in Superdrug for my daughter. Perfumes are kept behind the counter so prices are not on show and I therefore had to ask prices for quite a few items before I chose what to buy. One week later, Superdrug have notices up stating 'Fragrance Sale' and individual sale price notices on the products. The prices are exactly the same as before this sale. I'll admit my memory might be playing tricks on the things I only asked about but I've got the receipt for the one I bought so there's no doubt there. They aren't claiming any particular saving or reduction in price but I do think it's misleading. Are they allowed to do this?

This is how many of the cheaper policies work, any condition existing at the renewal date will be excluded from further cover. The next level of cover will allow you to keep claiming up to a set maximum per condition and then that condition would be excluded. Some companies claim that they cover for life but have a maximum per condition. The best level is true 'cover for life'. A condition would continue to be covered (up to your yearly maximum) for as long as you keep paying the premiums - which will obviously rise according to the risk. I know of only two companies that provide this cover. One is a brand leader and very well known, the other is not but offers great cover for the things you really need. That's what we all want but pet owners get blinded by all the glitzy extras they'll never use and don't check the basic cover. For example, how often will you really need to put your animals in kennels because you have to go into hospital and how much would it cost if you did? A few nights in a boarding kennel don't even come near the excess.

E&L are the ONLY insurers my vets will not claim from direct, they have a very big notice up saying that the customer must pay up and claim themselves. I have known people succeed in getting a full payout from them but only in response to a solicitors letter. I breed pedigree cats and if I were prepared to recommend E&L to my new kitten owners they would pay me a tenner for every one I sent their way. I'd rather starve. They are the only company I tell my buyers to avoid. Admittedly Petplan do reward me for sending each kitten off with their 6 weeks free cover but not quite so blatantly and not nearly so handsomely. If you're looking for pet insurance ask your local vet which companies they like dealing with. It's a fair indication of who pays up when you need to make a claim.

Considering we all search for the package that suits us best it is worrying that they can change it. The packaged deal is the very reason we sign up and nobody tells us it is subject to change. Not putting it in the contract terms is hardly the same as letting you know. I consider it lying by omission. I'm fairly good at reading what I sign and I'd always thought I was signing up to the package for a set time.

This seems very complicated. Only the seller has any contract with the courier. The buyer has a contract with the seller to supply goods paid for to the address given. It makes no sense whatsoever that the seller/courier can decide to deliver to any address of their choice and deem the contract completed.

Thank you for that explanation. I too have my original 'pay up front' contract from 7/8 years ago. It cost me £99 back then, no line rental and calls at contract rates. I get my daughter's old phones every time we change her contract so I've never even had to buy another handset. My monthly usage is between 85p and £4 and I still get itemised paper bills. I reckon it must sometimes cost them more than I owe to bill me and collect by dd

This has shocked me. Is it really true that they can be changed on a whim part way through the contract? Such a thing could leave me seriously embarrassed. For example, my daughter is on a contract allowing for 1000 texts/month included in the line rental (note I'm not stupid enough to call them free). Can the company suddenly take those away and change it all with months still to run until we could get out of the contract?

I think if there was a duty of care (and I would like to believe there was) then any claim you have against them is for negligence. If it were me, I would put in the counter claim because the details may be pertinent in your defence of their claim but you really do need someone with proper knowledge to comment. I'm sure someone will be along with proper answers in due course.

I think shops are using their own returns policies to mask statutory consumer rights. Those stores that will accept returns for any reason including a simple change of mind can set whatever terms they like at any time. They should not include the right for a refund for faulty goods in those store policies. It is a completely different kind of return and should be dealt with on demand however busy the store may be.

It is inconvenient for a store to refund at any time. So they're busy on Boxing Day but it's they who chose to open and trade. They could equally claim they can't deal with refunds at quiet times because they don't have so many staff on duty, or on weekends because they're not proper working days.

They are an electronic device that looks like a real cigarette consisting of a battery, an atomiser and a cartridge. You draw on it just like a real cigarette and get water vapour and nicotine. At present I am using high level nicotine cartridges but you can reduce the strength so I plan to go down through medium and low. You can even get zero nicotine cartridges. One cartridge lasts about the same as 15 cigarettes and you change it as needed. I really went in for this hoping to at least substitute every other cigarette and within a couple of days had reduced my tobacco consumption by about 80%. I have two different makes and definitely have a preference though I don't think I'm allowed to post links here.