Latest news with #TheComplaintsResolver
Scottish Sun
7 days ago
- Business
- Scottish Sun
Millions of Brits could get £1,000s in compensation from six lawsuits – from Mastercard fees to loans, can you claim?
Read on to find out which lawsuits are ongoing and if you are due compensation RECLAIM YOUR CASH Millions of Brits could get £1,000s in compensation from six lawsuits – from Mastercard fees to loans, can you claim? MILLIONS of Brits could get thousands of pounds in compensation after being overcharged on their loans or bills. Several major collective lawsuits have been launched in the past year and consumers may be able to cash in. 1 You could be in line for compensation from one of these class action lawsuits These legal cases are called class action lawsuits and help to chase compensation for millions of consumers that have been let down by companies. In these cases one person usually takes a company to court on behalf of all consumers. The cases have become popular in the UK after changes introduced in the Consumer Rights Act 2015. The act allowed a new 'opt-out' collective action system in the UK, which lets groups of consumers pursue claims against companies for breaches of competition law, including fixing prices or restricting supply. Scott Dixon, who runs The Complaints Resolver, said: 'Many familiar names including easyJet, VW and M&S have been caught up in these class action claims. 'You may only get a few hundred pounds, but it's power in numbers.' It is worth noting that legal cases can take time to go to trial and pay out customers. If you are affected by a class action lawsuit then you do not need to do anything to get compensation if the claim is successful. We have rounded up the cases that are currently ongoing and those that could lead to you getting your money back. Homeowners hit with 'secret' insurance charges Some 20,000 people who own flats in the UK are taking legal action against the companies that own their apartment blocks. Legal letters claim freeholders - the building owners - took commission fees when they arranged the building insurance. The freeholders were allegedly paid the fees by insurance companies in exchange for buying their products. These were then added to the cost of the buildings insurance by the freeholders or their agents, and the total amount was then charged to the flat owners in the form of service charges without their knowledge, the leaseholders claim. The flat owners believe this was secretly added to the service charges they paid. Collective claims for compensation Lawsuits that result in compensation for many people are often referred to as "class actions". In England and Wales a Group Litigation Order (GLO) is often used for this kind of lawsuit. Collective Proceedings Orders (CPOs) are also used for claims of breaching competition law. Collective action has been made easier under the UK's Consumer Rights Act 2015. It means the courts can treat similar claims as one, rather than having hundreds or even thousands of separate individual claims. There are a number of stages to bringing this kind of lawsuit, including the courts needing to give permission. Both sides can also appeal decisions at various stages making it a lengthy process with no guarantee of a payout. Lawyers have urged Brits to join several other collective claims for compensation in recent years. There is no cost to sign up, but the firm will usually take a cut of any payout if the claim is successful to cover legal costs. There's no guarantee of a payout and collective claims of this type have not yet been fully tested in court. Lawyers have suggested that each flat owner could be awarded up to £3,500 in compensation. They have also suggested that up to 900,000 homeowners who own flats in multi-occupancy blocks could be affected. Velitor Law, the firm taking the class action lawsuit, has written to four of the UK's largest freeholders - E&J Estates, Consensus Business Group, Long Harbour and Ground Rents Income Funds - to recoup the fees. It is expected that around two dozen landlords, who control the leaseholds for close to 900,000 homes, may be subject to the Leaseholder Action claim. The claim seeks to recover a minimum of six years' worth of commissions from landlords. However, lawyers have applied to suspend the usual period of limitation, which in certain cases could see the claim stretch back as far as 1997. Liam Spender, the lawyer at Velitor Law, said: 'This first set of landlords are now on notice of this claim and they are now going to have to answer in court.' The firm said a second tranche of legal letters to landlords will be issued before the end of the year. The Sun has contacted all four freeholders involved for comment. They all deny any wrongdoing. Shoppers overcharged by credit card companies Millions of shoppers are due to receive £70 each after a tribunal approved a settlement in a lawsuit against Mastercard. The verdict came after a long-running legal case dating back almost a decade. The action was brought by Walter Merricks, a former financial ombudsman, who argued that shoppers were charged higher prices after fees were wrongly levied on transactions made between 1992 and 2008. You do not need to have owned a Mastercard at any point to be eligible for compensation. Consumers can claim compensation if they lived in England, Wales or Northern Ireland for at least three months between June 1997 and June 2008. They need to have bought goods or services from UK businesses that accepted Mastercard credit cards. For those who live in Scotland the starting point is May 1992. The settlement is worth £200million and half of this has been ringfenced for consumers, who have until the end of the year to claim. Around 2.5million people are expected to come forward. If this number does make a claim they will each receive £45. But if fewer people apply then the payments will be capped at £70 per person. iPhone users could get share of £3billion lawsuit Consumer group Which? is leading a claim against Apple on behalf of 40million UK customers. The £3billion class action lawsuit claimed the tech giant breached competition law by 'forcing its iCloud services on customers'. It said Apple encouraged users to sign up for an iCloud subscription to store photos, videos and other data, which meant it favoured its own products. Which? argued the company also made it difficult for customers to use other products, which ultimately stifled competition. The consumer group said it is acting on behalf of all UK consumers that used iCloud from October 1, 2015. The first court date in the claim will be heard in the Competition Appeal Tribunal on November 19-21. During the hearing the tribunal will decide whether Which?'s legal claim against Apple is appropriate to go ahead on a 'collective' basis. Energy bill-payers could be due hundreds of pounds A former head of the UK's gas regulator is leading a claim against energy companies on behalf of customers. Clare Spottiswoode has been authorised by the Competition Appeal Tribunal to act as the class representative in the lawsuit, which she hopes will prove that households were overcharged for their energy between 1999 and 2009. The overcharging comes as a result of companies which sold high voltage and underwater electricity cables running a cartel. They were fined for doing this by the European Commission in 2014. Anyone who has paid an energy bill in Britain since 2001 is eligible to be included in the lawsuit. Lawyers hope to recoup hundreds of millions of pounds. Victims of data breaches could get thousands There are several actions against firms that have been negligent by allowing data breaches, which put customer information at risk. Among them is a collective action against Marks & Spencer after its data breach earlier this year. The proceedings are being led by Patrick McGuire, a partner at Thompsons Solicitors, on behalf of Scottish victims of the hack. The hack exposed sensitive customer information and left hundreds of people worried about their online safety. It is unclear how much victims could be entitled to as the case is still in its early stages. Compensation for mis-sold car finance loans Thousands of motorists will get a share of £20billion in compensation for undisclosed broker commission arrangements. The Court of Appeal ruled in October that the firms broke the law by not telling borrowers about the broker commission terms. This is because banks allowed car dealerships and brokers to set their own interest rates on loans. Under these now-banned discretionary commission arrangements (DCAs), dealerships and brokers had a financial incentive to charge higher interest rates, as this would increase their commission. But many customers were not aware of this practice. The case was taken to the Supreme Court, where it was decided that customers will be compensated. Lenders are all now liable to pay out £20billion in compensation. It is not yet clear when customers will begin to receive this compensation, which is likely to be administered through a formal redress scheme. What are class action lawsuits? Lawsuits that result in compensation for many people are often described as 'class action'. In England and Wales, a Group Litigation Order (GLO) is often used for this type of lawsuit. Class action lawsuits have become easier after the Consumer Rights Act 2015. It means that courts can group similar claims together, rather than having to deal with hundreds or even thousands of separate claims. There are several stages to bring this type of lawsuit, including the courts needing to give permission for a GLO. Both sides can appeal a decision at various stages, which can make the process lengthy without a guarantee of a payout. The Mastercard case was the first of these big claims to be launched after the changes were introduced in 2015. It was first launched in 2017 and consumers have not yet received compensation. Lawyers have urged Brits to join several other class action claims for compensation in the past few years. There is no cost to sign up but the firm will usually take a cut of a payout if the claim is successful. This money is used to cover legal costs and it can be as high as 30%. Do you have a money problem that needs sorting? Get in touch by emailing money-sm@ Plus, you can join our Sun Money Chats and Tips Facebook group to share your tips and stories
Sky News
19-03-2025
- Business
- Sky News
'My Deliveroo order was wrong and they refused to replace it - is that allowed?'
Every Tuesday in our Money blog, we answer questions about your financial problems or consumer disputes. This week, a reader asked what his rights were after Deliveroo refused to replace an order that arrived with the wrong main item. Patrick asked: "My Deliveroo arrived with the main item wrong. They wouldn't issue a replacement and would only give me credit or a refund. Even with credit, to replace it would cost me delivery fees of £2.99, a £0.50 service fee and a small order service fee. Is it legal to refuse to replace? What are my rights when a takeaway arrives wrong?" We asked consumer expert Scott Dixon from The Complaints Resolver to tackle this one. He said issues with takeaway deliveries had soared since the creation of delivery apps, with companies able to fob customers off with a range of excuses. "Common problems I see are delays resulting in food being cold and inedible, spilt coffee over food, orders never arriving or being delivered to the wrong address, wrong orders, missing items and refunds being refused in line with the food delivery platform's policy after investigation," he explained. "Consumers often don't realise the order they have accepted was wrong until it's too late and the delivery driver has left. Orders are often delivered in sealed bags so it's impossible to check the items before a driver leaves, with delivery companies giving small credits which are a fraction of the food and delivery costs." When these issues occur, Dixon said, customers often find themselves caught in the crosshairs between the delivery company and the takeaway provider. What are you entitled to? Under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, goods ought to arrive as described and if the food you have received is not what you ordered or items are missing, this is considered a breach of contract and you are entitled to a remedy. Dixon said that in this particular case, you would be entitled to ask for a replacement and the outlet should offer it, without charging you any fees. However, the offer of a credit or refund would be considered a fair and reasonable remedy. But charging you delivery fees, service fees or an order fee could be considered as a breach of contract under the Consumer Rights Act 2015, according to Dixon. So, what should you do? To start, Dixon said you should contact the delivery company via the app that the takeaway has a contract with - so Deliveroo in this case. "If you have a problem with your takeaway order, you need to contact the delivery food company and takeaway as soon as possible to give them an opportunity to put things right and explain what has happened," he said, stressing that being nice is more likely to get you a quick outcome. "Proof is key in these disputes, so gather your evidence. You need the date and time you placed the order, receipt, time it arrived, screenshots and photos to prove your case. "If you ring to complain, note the time you called, who you spoke to, what was promised and put it in writing to confirm what was discussed to create a paper trail if you need to escalate your complaint." If your request has been denied, what happens next? If you are denied a replacement or a credit for missing items and cannot resolve a dispute, Dixon said you should escalate the complaint and stress there has been a "breach of contract" under the Consumer Rights Act 2015. With takeaways, you're not talking about the kind of money that would make going to the small claims court worthwhile, and the best way to get your money back would be via chargeback. "It's worth saying that if you are unwilling or unable to put things right, you will contact your bank or credit card provider and raise a chargeback to dispute the transaction," he added. "You need to push hard on chargebacks citing 'breach of contract' as they are often rejected on the first attempt. "Chargebacks are problematic and costly for retailers, so even mentioning it will often elicit a swift outcome to close your dispute." This feature is not intended as financial advice - the aim is to give an overview of the things you should think about. Submit your dilemma or consumer dispute via:
