Dear TBeckett, I am not sure if I have read your message correctly, it is a little ambiguous. However, if I have misunderstood the point you are trying to make, please accept my apologies in advance. I have been helping Maca with difficulties she has been experiencing with an Endowment company. The problem was complex and involved various areas of contract law, way beyond the scope of a form that might be downloaded from the FSA. Purely out of a desire to assist with this matter I gave my time and help freely. I sincerely hope the ambulance chasing comment is not being directed at me. Without knowing the details about conversations that have taken place between myself and Maca, you cannot speculate. That said, I can confirm and I am sure Maca will verify this also in due course; the only costs Maca has incurred in resolving this situation is the cost of her stationary. Regards, Sam.

Hi Maca, Well, what a great result, you must be thrilled! It just shows that armed with some legal knowledge, and the willingness to pursue a case, to court if necessary, you can get what is rightfully yours! You put the work in, weren't discouraged and its paid off! Your problem involved some quite complex areas of contract law and they obviously caved in at the thought of having to defend themselves on the areas of law we discussed. I loved their retort, they haven't got the time or inclination, blah, blah, blah.....! So I guess drinks are on you then....?;-) Well done! Sam.

Hi Empire, I think the reason people are having problems with Egg is because the credit card business has been making losses for some time(don't know the figures). This is perhaps why they are so reluctant to settle claims. Or maybe they think they have a case lol! Do you intend to pursue them for their retaliatory action? It's disgraceful that some of the banks/credit cards are responding in this way. It is such a childish reaction, but it shows they are rattled! Keep me posted, I hope they see the futility of their actions sooner rather than later! Regards, Sam.

Hi Empire, I was wondering what the outcome was with Egg? Have they refunded your monies yet? I hope it's all going well! Regards, Sam.

Dear Spiceskull, If you let me know what the particular problem is you are having, I might be able to suggest other areas of contract law/legislation they are contravening, which may be of greater relevance. Personally I am inclined towards UCTA 1977 and the Regulations 1999 to seek redress. As I said before the P.E.R. is obscure, but I have included some cases that are interesting. Parol evidence cases Jacobs v Batavia &General Plantations Trust Ltd(1924) Allen v Pink(1838) Gillespie Bros &Co v Cheney,Eggar & Co(1896) Hutton v Warren(1836) Regards, Sam.

Dear Spiceskull, I'm not familiar with contract law in the US but the parol evidence rule is part of English law. Essentially, it prevents a party to a contract varying a particular term to their advantage, for example. Also a term cannot be added/excluded after the contract has been concluded. So as Maca highlighted their claim of "no win no fee" should be exactly that. They cannot subsequently claim, after the contract has been concluded that they are entitled to take their fee, when they have not done their job properly. It contravenes the rule and they would also be liable for misrepresentation. Not to mention it is clearly a breach of contract in the sense that they offered to provide a service and failed to do so. I hope this clarifies what I said in my previous post. Kind regards, Sam.

Dear Littlesherbie, Alan is absolutely correct. This is their attempt to test your nerve. You have to remember that you carry all the aces! The charges are legally unenforceable, therefore going to court is the last thing they want to do! It would expose their shameful tactics to everyone and more importantly they would LOSE! They know there are very well informed irrate consumers, not afraid to assert their rights! In terms of business risk, it is much cheaper if they have to pay those savvy enough to challenge them, rather than expose themselves to everyone and risk really huge losses! Fortune (or a refund) favours the brave, especially when you're right! I change expressions to suit! You have been really courageous in your actions thus far, see it through, you owe it to yourself! I've studied law, so take it from me they will cave in! Don't just accept a refund. What has the deprivation of that money caused you to go without? Have a good think about it. You are entitled to compensation if you can demonstrate a causal link between the charges and any detriment you have suffered. Also compensation is payable just by virtue of the fact they have charged you unlawfully. Squeeze them, is my advice! If you're near Bournemouth I'll support and help you. Best wishes, Sam.

Hi Robertxc, No I'm not a lawyer, thank goodness! It's not like there's a shortage. I studied law as a result of being ripped off more than once(long story)! I have been involved with pursuing companies to help friends and family for many years. For my sins, I'm about to go back to the law books soon, to do a specialist employment law course, which should be interesting. Best wishes, Sam.

Dear Maca, I wish I had read your post before now, as you are certainly being given the run around by this company. I would say from what you have outlined, the company are liable for misrepresentation and breach of contract. I also think that they would be liable under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. They are probably also liable under an obscure contract law principle known as the parol evidence rule, which prevents a party to a contract from adding or varying the agreement, once it has been signed. I hope this is helpful. I wouldn't pay them a penny, but I am bl**dy minded! Kind regards, Sam.

Hello Brian, Sorry to read you are having such problems with Morrisons! My name is Samantha Linley and I help people with consumer and contract law disputes. The problem you have related falls into my area of expertise. If you wish to discuss this matter further, either post another message here to confirm, or send me a private message and I will reply with my contact details. I have suggested that we do things this way as it is probably frowned upon if people post their details in an open forum! I hope this is helpful. Kind regards, Sam Linley.

Hi Jonchris, My advice would be believe nothing that the bank tells you and go over all your financial information held with them with the precision of a forensic expert! It may well be worth making a request under the DPA to see all the information they hold. Make sure to ask them to include a full explanation of any abbreviated terms. They really don't give a damn about their customers and we should all be very suspicious of and question everything they do. Holding them to account wherever possible. Pursuing them, through the courts if necessary, is the only language they understand. The more people that challenge their completely unfair and dubious practices, the better! The idea of a consumer revolt, fills me with joy! Regards, Sam.

Dear Drivers, You raised an interesting point and there is a common misconception as Bookworm pointed out. In contract law and under the principles of offer and acceptance; if you go into a shop and put lets say a book into your basket and then proceed to the checkout, you are making the offer to the retailer to buy the item. The retailer can either accept or reject your offer to buy. They are not under any obligation to accept your offer however, there are exceptions to this, as is always the case with law! If these principles operated in reverse, so for example, an incorrectly priced item that the retailer was bound to sell to you. It would mean that goods displayed in a shop would constitute an offer, and if you put an item in your basket that would constitute your acceptance and a binding agreement. It would prevent you from changing your mind about the item for something more suitable, which would be entirely unworkable. I hope I haven't sent anyone to sleep with my fascinating(or is it mind numbingly boring) info about contract law! Regards, Sam.

Dear Rich44, From your comments I would say they are definitely in breach of the DPA. If no consent to disclosure has been signed, they have absolutely no right to make your personal details available to others. Even if they claim it is their policy to do this, advise them they are breaking the law and if they persist you will report the matter to the Information Commissioner. I would say it is probably unlikely you will have to make your point strenuously, but there is always the possibility of encountering someone who flatly refuses to accept that their rules contravene the law! I hope it all goes well and congratulations by the way! Regards, Sam.

Dear Mumofthreeboys, From what you have said, you did not receive the service/product they agreed to provide you with. They are therefore in breach of contract. You absolutely MUST go through all of your statements and work out the total you have paid to the company. They have to pay you compensation for their failure to provide the service you contracted for. A further aggravating factor in your favour is their rush to call in the heavies! So you are claiming back the monies you have paid to date, compensation for the breach and any harassment you suffer from the DCA, as they have been instructed on a false basis. Incidentally, if they have put information on your account as a result of the problems you have had with them, stating you are a bad payer, for example or something else equally derogatory, you may have a further claim against them. The info they keep on you must be factually correct. If it isn't and there are comments on your account that have besmerched your character or they have reported inaccurate facts to a credit reference agency, you can report the matter to the Information Commissioner stating a breach of the DPA 1988. I think I have addressed all the issues you have raised. If I've forgotten anything let me know and I'll do my best to help. Best wishes, Sam.

Dear Martin3030, The £10.00 late payment levied by Telewest is a penalty charge and is legally unenforceable. I am absolutely certain that they will not/cannot provide you with a breakdown of what the charge includes.This is unfair and unlawful and is not representative of the costs incurred by Telewest because your payment was late.There is even a question mark over the validity of the charge applied to non dd customers. You should claim compensation from them also, as they have been "unjustly enriched" by taking money from you that they were legally not entitled to! They would soon dispense with these charges if everyone who had had them applied to their account, claimed compensation from them as well as the original charge! That would put a sizeable dent in their profits! I hope this is helpful, let me know if I can help you further. Kind regards, Samantha.