Daubeneys Ltd, Broadband system - I arranged for this company to take a look at a problem with my broadband system, when i initially phoned to report the problem i was informed that the problem was my drivers and it would take approximately 1 hour to fix.

Daubeneys Ltd, Broadband system - I arranged for this company to take a look at a problem with my broadband system, when i initially phoned to report the problem i was informed that the problem was my drivers and it would take approximately 1 hour to fix.

May 7, 2006 - Business Reply - From: Email User

Mr Merrick complaining about Daubeneys Ltd, November 2004 - February 2005

Dear Sirs Here is my response to Mr Merrick's complaint: =============== 8< ================

Mr Merrick asked me to investigate his non-functioning AOL broadband in North Colerne, an area which had recently had its exchange ADSL-enabled. The charges were made clear to him on the initial call as &#16340 callout and &#16340 per half hour plus VAT. This is a charging regime that is well-within normal limits and represents very good value for a knowledge-based service such as the one we provide. As arranged, I visited Mr Merrick's house, he was not present but his wife let me in. I tested the ADSL connection and found a signal but could not connect. I contacted AOL on his behalf and after a number of calls it turned out that they had forgotten to enable his account. Once it had been enabled it all worked fine. 1, Mr Merrick is mistaken about the rates and preferred to hear what he wanted to hear. 2, My first visit took an hour for which I invoiced him. 3, I did not charge for a subsequent visit (agreed with his wife) and follow up phone calls occurred because, frankly, I felt sorry for him and his family. I felt that he was struggling to cope with the problem and for reasons of charity as well as professional pride did not want to leave him in such a state. 4, I, too, contacted trading standards and found that they were unlikely to do anything unless several complaints arose. There have been none. 5, I also contact existing customers to see if they had felt in any way confused about our pricing. They did not; on the contrary, several wrote in support. 6, Since I was getting nowhere reasoning with Mr Merrick, I told him that I would be taking him to court unless he paid. I started the process. 7, Mr Merrick, in his statement to Trading Standards made a number of unsupported allegations about my honesty (explaining the pricing structure) and competence (doubting that I was really a Microsoft Certified Professional). 8, In my evidence I enclosed our correspondence, statements from existing customers saying that my pricing was clear and a copy of my Microsoft Certificate. 9, On being presented with my evidence, Mr Merrick offered to settle; I accepted and informed Trowbridge County Court of the fact. =============== >8 ================

Please let me know if I can further clarify the matter. I look forward to hearing from you. Regards Ian Butterworth

Daubeneys Ltd Tel: 01225 745732

Fax: 01225 744384

November 26, 2004 - Consumer Message:

Daubeneys Ltd, Broadband system

Daubeneys Ltd,

High Street

Colerne

Wiltshire

SN14 8DB

01225 742538

I arranged for this company to take a look at a problem with my broadband system, when i initially phoned to report the problem i was informed that the problem was my drivers and it would take approximately 1 hour to fix. The going rate was &#16340 per hour, i agreed to this and a representative came out on the following tuesday to take a look.

The problem was not resolved and the representative did not mention that he was coming back and we did not require him too as &#16340 was above our price limit.

I work away with the army, and during my time away the representative returned to my house without anybody agreeing for him to carry out any more work on my broadband system.

I informed the representative that we did not require his services anymore due to the fact that BT and AOL were taking a look at the problem now.

Approximately one week later i recieved a bill for &#163141.00, the invoice says that &#16340 is for a call out charge, that the company forgot to mention on the initial phone call, and &#16380 was for visits to the house, when i only arranged for one visit, his VAT was &#16321

I contacted Trading standards and they informed me to send a cheque for the one visit plus his vat which i did which equaled &#16347.

Now the company is planning to take me to court for the full amount owed plus extra.

I do not see how i am at fault due to the fact that, the company did not mention any call out charge and i only agreed to one visit.

Please can you help in this matter

Click this link to e-mail the above consumer: Email User Consumer