Dear Readers,

We are often told of pensioners who find all sorts of information when they do a little clearing up and LPG are also guilty of having letters that never made the magazine when it was produced on paper.

We found this article that dates from just over 10 years ago and, even though it was never actually printed back then it illustrates the importance of those of us that do a little more than allow the establishment to dictate to us, the general public.  LPG continue to advocate the notion that it is really important to make a stand if you feel wronged by a company or organisation who hide behind their size when a consumer has been wronged, and the account that follows proves that the little person does not always win but doing a little more than letting them get away with it can only be good for the next person who is affected in the same way. 

It is even easier now to make a complaint but just as important to do so and, as LPG has often mentioned, we pensioners are in the best position (age and time-wise) to champion the cause of the little man...

Oh for an Ombudsman

Once upon a time I believed I had a strong case of breach of contract against a limited company, but when I lodged a complaint with an ombudsman he turned it down.  There is nothing remarkable about that you may say… that is until you consider the facts. 

The contract was made orally in two phone calls.  In the first I was given the company’s prices and in the second I agreed to buy the goods on offer and so I became the customer with an unwritten contract.  Two or three days later the company wrote to confirm that the contract existed and enclosed a leaflet showing the prices, terms and conditions.

I waited seven weeks before the company supplied the first of the goods and a further ten weeks before receiving a statement of account.  When it arrived, I was surprised to note that the prices on the statement exceeded those agreed when the contract was made.  So I wrote to the company for an explanation.  In its letter of reply (which has been copied to the ombudsman) the company’s spokesman apologised for causing inconvenience and wrote the following:-

‘I am pleased to confirm the necessary arrangements have been actioned against your account to resolve your query.  You will receive a new statement within the next few days showing your account being re-billed to the original prices you were quoted.  We at (the company in question)  aim to provide a high standard of service at all times, and I am very sorry that in this instance you did not receive the level of service to which you are entitled.  However I hope that the actions I have now taken will bring this matter to a successful conclusion.’

When I read those words I thought ’that’s all right then?’ how wrong I was! Both the company and the ombudsman have disowned this letter as if its content is an invention of my imagination in spite of my requests for information as to why that letter has been repudiated.  Neither the company, or ombudsman, have ever supplied an answer.

Likewise, I have asked the company and asked the ombudsman to ask the company where in the contract terms, I must look for a provision of contract without giving me notice.  Once again the company and ombudsman have both remained mute

The ombudsman’s reason for his decision is given in a letter from his manager as follows:

“I am unable to verify with any certainty that the information provided to you was a clear breach of contract terms as you allege.  There could be other more simplistic explanations for the confusion”

The ombudsman has not challenged the evidence of the documents referred to in the second and third paragraphs of this article.  Therefore, that leaves the two phone calls as the only other possible cause of confusion.  The manager’s letter states that during the period in which the contract was made the company did not record all calls.  The  inference of that statement is that the company may not have a record of my two calls so that nothing is known of what was said, hence the possibility of confusion. In making that statement the manager is either overlooking or unaware of a letter (a copy of which has been sent to the ombudsman) from the company in which the author says he has listened to the tapes in which I agreed to enter into a verbal contract.  The author disagrees that the company is in breach of contract but offers no evidence of any kind to refute the accusation.  He does not assert or hint that there is anything in the tapes that could have caused confusion or uncertainty.  If it were otherwise, it is surely inconceivable that, in the circumstances then prevailing, he wouldn’t have said so.

You, the reader now have the evidence and are free to reach your own conclusion. 

We can only apologise for having lost the initials of the person who wrote this, but in spite of this, LPG would emphasise the importance of making a stand when you are wronged even though you may not have a successful outcome.  

LPG found the following information which can only prove that companies do listen even more now than ten years ago and that they are particularly worried about adverse information left on the internet, because it is so much harder to put it there than it is to get it off.

(►►►)