My troubles with UFC Que Choisir
Solved/Closed
Eny
Posted messages
18
Status
Membre
-
Chrystolle -
Chrystolle -
UFC What to Choose ... Or how to get "scammed" by a consumer protection association! (What a twist!)
In the midst of procedures for 2 disputes (Free and bank contract), I decided to inquire with the UFC Que Choisir association in Grenoble to see if there were any other actions to take to settle my disputes amicably and to find out if the association "supported" consumers in their legal steps, should it become necessary.
Upon arriving at the association, the person in charge of consumer reception informed me that one must be a member in order to consult a lawyer and benefit from the association's assistance, which I completely understand.
However, I asked to present my disputes to the lawyers before having to pay the membership fee, to see if the association could provide me with additional information to move forward with my efforts, already contradicting what the reception person had announced:
- Pay first, regardless of the final outcome.
- Pay later, only if the association can assist the consumer.
The reception person then said to me:
- "Listen, here's what we're going to do. You write your check, you go see the
lawyers, and if the association can help you, you become a member; otherwise, I'll return your
check."
A statement as clear and precise as can be!
So I wrote my check and entered an office with the lawyers.
For my first issue, after all the steps I had already taken before going to the association, only legal proceedings remained to move things forward. At this point, the lawyer informed me that UFC could not intervene (that's the law!) and that the legal proceeding could only be initiated by the consumer himself.
The case of the first issue is settled: the association can do nothing to help me. Initiation of a legal proceeding in progress ...
…
Very quick interruption of the meeting! Someone from the association enters the office and addresses me:
- "Here is your membership card, since you are now a member of the association, and the magazine consom'agir, which is published once a quarter."
(At that moment, I thought: "this isn't good ...")
Before I could even open my mouth, the person was already gone ...
Resume of the meeting
…
For my second issue, I first clearly explained in detail all aspects of the case, and I also knew that there was no legal procedure possible. The lawyer then informed me that there were 2 solutions to my problem:
- The first, which I had already started doing some time ago.
- The second, which I had also done that same day, less than 4 hours after leaving an appointment before coming to the association. (It's a coincidence, but it comes at the right time!)
Result: the lawyer confirmed that I had taken the right steps (Thank you, I’m glad to hear that!) but there was nothing else to be done.
I just had to choose the solution that best suited my expectations.
So I packed my things and looked more closely at everything that had been said at home.
Conclusion of my visit to the consumer protection association:
No additional information to allow me to move forward in the steps I had already taken.
I therefore returned to the association the next day to explain that I did not agree to pay the membership fee I had paid since the association could not in any way provide me with additional help or support, and I made sure to remind them of what the reception person (who was not present that day) had told me the day before, namely that my check would be returned if the association could not help me!!!
Obviously, I was told that once a meeting with a lawyer had taken place, or once a membership fee had been paid, it could not be refunded. I was also informed that the reception person should not have told me that my check would be returned, as that was not practiced. It was an error on their part.
(Again, I’m very glad to hear that: it’s their error that has now cost me €30)
A consumer protection association that does not hesitate, depending on who you encounter, to "scam" its own members whenever it gets the chance. Isn't this unacceptable?!!!
In the midst of procedures for 2 disputes (Free and bank contract), I decided to inquire with the UFC Que Choisir association in Grenoble to see if there were any other actions to take to settle my disputes amicably and to find out if the association "supported" consumers in their legal steps, should it become necessary.
Upon arriving at the association, the person in charge of consumer reception informed me that one must be a member in order to consult a lawyer and benefit from the association's assistance, which I completely understand.
However, I asked to present my disputes to the lawyers before having to pay the membership fee, to see if the association could provide me with additional information to move forward with my efforts, already contradicting what the reception person had announced:
- Pay first, regardless of the final outcome.
- Pay later, only if the association can assist the consumer.
The reception person then said to me:
- "Listen, here's what we're going to do. You write your check, you go see the
lawyers, and if the association can help you, you become a member; otherwise, I'll return your
check."
A statement as clear and precise as can be!
So I wrote my check and entered an office with the lawyers.
For my first issue, after all the steps I had already taken before going to the association, only legal proceedings remained to move things forward. At this point, the lawyer informed me that UFC could not intervene (that's the law!) and that the legal proceeding could only be initiated by the consumer himself.
The case of the first issue is settled: the association can do nothing to help me. Initiation of a legal proceeding in progress ...
…
Very quick interruption of the meeting! Someone from the association enters the office and addresses me:
- "Here is your membership card, since you are now a member of the association, and the magazine consom'agir, which is published once a quarter."
(At that moment, I thought: "this isn't good ...")
Before I could even open my mouth, the person was already gone ...
Resume of the meeting
…
For my second issue, I first clearly explained in detail all aspects of the case, and I also knew that there was no legal procedure possible. The lawyer then informed me that there were 2 solutions to my problem:
- The first, which I had already started doing some time ago.
- The second, which I had also done that same day, less than 4 hours after leaving an appointment before coming to the association. (It's a coincidence, but it comes at the right time!)
Result: the lawyer confirmed that I had taken the right steps (Thank you, I’m glad to hear that!) but there was nothing else to be done.
I just had to choose the solution that best suited my expectations.
So I packed my things and looked more closely at everything that had been said at home.
Conclusion of my visit to the consumer protection association:
No additional information to allow me to move forward in the steps I had already taken.
I therefore returned to the association the next day to explain that I did not agree to pay the membership fee I had paid since the association could not in any way provide me with additional help or support, and I made sure to remind them of what the reception person (who was not present that day) had told me the day before, namely that my check would be returned if the association could not help me!!!
Obviously, I was told that once a meeting with a lawyer had taken place, or once a membership fee had been paid, it could not be refunded. I was also informed that the reception person should not have told me that my check would be returned, as that was not practiced. It was an error on their part.
(Again, I’m very glad to hear that: it’s their error that has now cost me €30)
A consumer protection association that does not hesitate, depending on who you encounter, to "scam" its own members whenever it gets the chance. Isn't this unacceptable?!!!
21 réponses
- 1
- 2
Suivant
The goal was simply to warn consumers to pay attention to what they are being told, because even within a consumer advocacy organization, one can be misinformed!
In the end, it's still the consumer who pays... And in my case, I paid a membership fee that brought me absolutely nothing. It may be "only" 30 Euros (and for some people, that's not nothing!!), but when a consumer has a dispute and has already lost quite a bit of money, that is no reason to make them lose even more by paying a fee that brings them nothing.
In the end, it's still the consumer who pays... And in my case, I paid a membership fee that brought me absolutely nothing. It may be "only" 30 Euros (and for some people, that's not nothing!!), but when a consumer has a dispute and has already lost quite a bit of money, that is no reason to make them lose even more by paying a fee that brings them nothing.
I see, in any case, that you have a lot of time to waste attacking the whole world and writing a one-page email for a €30 subscription to Que Choisir.
But I’ll stop there, because I'm afraid you might find a way to take legal action against me as well.
But I’ll stop there, because I'm afraid you might find a way to take legal action against me as well.
Romek,
Thank you for sharing your testimony ... which clearly proves that consumers must also "be wary" of consumer protection associations.
And regarding the anonymous response, I would just like to remind you of this:
- “Listen, here's what we're going to do. You write your check, you go see the
lawyers, and if the association can help you, you join; if not, I’ll return your
check.”
...
I was told that once a meeting with a lawyer had taken place, or once a membership fee had been paid, it could not be refunded.
You don't say "white" to someone and "black" the next day, whether you are in a consumer protection association or not ...
Thank you for sharing your testimony ... which clearly proves that consumers must also "be wary" of consumer protection associations.
And regarding the anonymous response, I would just like to remind you of this:
- “Listen, here's what we're going to do. You write your check, you go see the
lawyers, and if the association can help you, you join; if not, I’ll return your
check.”
...
I was told that once a meeting with a lawyer had taken place, or once a membership fee had been paid, it could not be refunded.
You don't say "white" to someone and "black" the next day, whether you are in a consumer protection association or not ...
Hello,
I too was disappointed with the branch of the association located in Boulogne-Billancourt.
I had a dispute with a company and the person from UFC who received me strongly encouraged me to join the association, otherwise, he wouldn't rush to help me.
The membership fee wasn't mandatory, but I had to join; he assured me that my case would be reviewed in the coming days after the check was cashed. I waited a few days for him to look into my case, I called, and the receptionist informed me that he had gone on vacation for 15 days.
I had a dispute with this person upon his return and that’s how it ended.
The association is good (I think), but the Boulogne branch was not.
Romain
--
D.A Independent Web and Print
www.studioanney.com
I too was disappointed with the branch of the association located in Boulogne-Billancourt.
I had a dispute with a company and the person from UFC who received me strongly encouraged me to join the association, otherwise, he wouldn't rush to help me.
The membership fee wasn't mandatory, but I had to join; he assured me that my case would be reviewed in the coming days after the check was cashed. I waited a few days for him to look into my case, I called, and the receptionist informed me that he had gone on vacation for 15 days.
I had a dispute with this person upon his return and that’s how it ended.
The association is good (I think), but the Boulogne branch was not.
Romain
--
D.A Independent Web and Print
www.studioanney.com
1) If you are indeed the person I saw the next day, I would also like to point out that constantly interrupting people is a nice form of rudeness! Indeed, I had to raise my voice several times to regain my turn to speak and finish my sentences!!! Simply because you did not accept that I prove, step by step, that there was a contradiction between what I had been told the day before and on the same day!
2) No one should have told me that the membership fee would be refunded if UFC could not help me! (And I hope that this famous Guillaume did not deny having said it!! It would be just my luck!! At that point, you could be sure that I would make the trip!!!)
3) At no point was I offered continued assistance with my procedures. This is logical (although ... :s), since I had already undertaken all the necessary steps by MYSELF. Therefore, all that was left was to initiate a legal procedure individually, since UFC cannot legally intervene on behalf of consumers!
4) I did not want to "absolutely see the legal advisor," as you mentioned in your message. I wanted to know if UFC was able to help me with my problem or not. That's when the volunteer made a fool of me by saying that if UFC couldn't do anything, my check would be returned to me!
Clearly, UFC can do nothing for me, and even worse, since the check has not been returned to me!!!
5) You also tried to argue the fact that you did not want to return the check, stating that the membership was valid for 1 year, and that I could return to UFC's premises for any other disputes. I don't think members spend their time at UFC branches, since consumers don't have disputes every day... Moreover, when someone comes to see a consumer protection association, it is first and foremost, and in most cases, because they have a problem!
Otherwise, I sincerely hope not to have any other disputes apart from the current one, but if that were to happen, based on the way I was received and informed at UFC, I doubt I would return to your premises. Rest assured that I am currently giving a good word about the Grenoble branch, because if it happened like this for me, there is no reason other people should escape it!
6) I can also believe that fees are used to amplify the voices of consumers... But mine too!
7) Thank you to Selma19 for your testimony and for your encouragement.
2) No one should have told me that the membership fee would be refunded if UFC could not help me! (And I hope that this famous Guillaume did not deny having said it!! It would be just my luck!! At that point, you could be sure that I would make the trip!!!)
3) At no point was I offered continued assistance with my procedures. This is logical (although ... :s), since I had already undertaken all the necessary steps by MYSELF. Therefore, all that was left was to initiate a legal procedure individually, since UFC cannot legally intervene on behalf of consumers!
4) I did not want to "absolutely see the legal advisor," as you mentioned in your message. I wanted to know if UFC was able to help me with my problem or not. That's when the volunteer made a fool of me by saying that if UFC couldn't do anything, my check would be returned to me!
Clearly, UFC can do nothing for me, and even worse, since the check has not been returned to me!!!
5) You also tried to argue the fact that you did not want to return the check, stating that the membership was valid for 1 year, and that I could return to UFC's premises for any other disputes. I don't think members spend their time at UFC branches, since consumers don't have disputes every day... Moreover, when someone comes to see a consumer protection association, it is first and foremost, and in most cases, because they have a problem!
Otherwise, I sincerely hope not to have any other disputes apart from the current one, but if that were to happen, based on the way I was received and informed at UFC, I doubt I would return to your premises. Rest assured that I am currently giving a good word about the Grenoble branch, because if it happened like this for me, there is no reason other people should escape it!
6) I can also believe that fees are used to amplify the voices of consumers... But mine too!
7) Thank you to Selma19 for your testimony and for your encouragement.
Good evening
I think you have spoken to the person concerned because I also spoke with her and she is indeed a volunteer responsible for UFC.
I would like to add for your case that when you call UFC Que Choisir, the answering machine already indicates that there will be a membership fee to pay.
I don't even understand why you went to see them if, as you say, you had resolved your dispute.
Moreover, this association does not have an obligation of results; it informs. It has the status of an association.
I have already mentioned that for my part, UFC helped me (like several victims) against Free and as the case is on appeal, I am happy not to bear the costs but also the stress.
UFC has advanced the law (free waiting time, for example) and operates thanks to its network of volunteers.
Finally, when you write, I quote you, "Rest assured that I am making good publicity for the Grenoble branch....", doesn't that look like defamation???
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
I think you have spoken to the person concerned because I also spoke with her and she is indeed a volunteer responsible for UFC.
I would like to add for your case that when you call UFC Que Choisir, the answering machine already indicates that there will be a membership fee to pay.
I don't even understand why you went to see them if, as you say, you had resolved your dispute.
Moreover, this association does not have an obligation of results; it informs. It has the status of an association.
I have already mentioned that for my part, UFC helped me (like several victims) against Free and as the case is on appeal, I am happy not to bear the costs but also the stress.
UFC has advanced the law (free waiting time, for example) and operates thanks to its network of volunteers.
Finally, when you write, I quote you, "Rest assured that I am making good publicity for the Grenoble branch....", doesn't that look like defamation???
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
Good evening,
You don't understand why I went to see them ...!?
But it's quite simple, and stated in my first message:
"I asked to be able to present my disputes to the legal experts, ... to see if the association could provide me with additional information, in order to move forward with my démarches".
My dispute was still not resolved, I only had the option to pursue an individual procedure, as I have already explained! (procedure in progress!)
I went to see them to find out if there was anything else to do before the judicial procedure ... answer: no, nothing else to do!
As for defamation ... I find it a bit too easy to "hide" behind this term! Citizens, businesses, or associations would have the right to do or say anything, and no one would have the right to report them or warn others? That's exactly what I'm doing, I'm warning others about the UFC, based on the (rotten) fruits of my own experience.
Maybe you were received by a competent person, understandable and your case is possibly handled by UFC, even if it lasted several years, and sincerely, I'm really happy for you.
But for my part, that's not really the case! Moreover, it was clearly explained to me that membership was for a duration of one year, renewable if I wanted to remain a member and benefit from the UFC's services. And you, didn't you pay for a second year?! Isn't there some favoritism in the air? What about the members who pay their subscription even if they have no dispute? You, you have a dispute and you don’t even pay?! (Well done!!!)
Whether you are a volunteer in this association or not, that does not mean you don't have to pay your membership and your registered letters, like everyone else! (Otherwise it wouldn’t be volunteering!)
As for the status of the association, which informs, I quote again an excerpt from my first message:
Conclusion of my visit to the consumer defense association:
Not a single additional piece of information allowing me to advance in the démarches I had already undertaken.
So if that's not info ... NOTHING useful or exploitable ...
I completely understand that you are "shocked" by my statements, since according to you, UFC takes care of you better than anyone! But put yourself in my shoes, where UFC only took a check for 30 € without providing me with any information ... And I would add (why for you and not for others!!), without covering the costs I would have to incur?!
You don't understand why I went to see them ...!?
But it's quite simple, and stated in my first message:
"I asked to be able to present my disputes to the legal experts, ... to see if the association could provide me with additional information, in order to move forward with my démarches".
My dispute was still not resolved, I only had the option to pursue an individual procedure, as I have already explained! (procedure in progress!)
I went to see them to find out if there was anything else to do before the judicial procedure ... answer: no, nothing else to do!
As for defamation ... I find it a bit too easy to "hide" behind this term! Citizens, businesses, or associations would have the right to do or say anything, and no one would have the right to report them or warn others? That's exactly what I'm doing, I'm warning others about the UFC, based on the (rotten) fruits of my own experience.
Maybe you were received by a competent person, understandable and your case is possibly handled by UFC, even if it lasted several years, and sincerely, I'm really happy for you.
But for my part, that's not really the case! Moreover, it was clearly explained to me that membership was for a duration of one year, renewable if I wanted to remain a member and benefit from the UFC's services. And you, didn't you pay for a second year?! Isn't there some favoritism in the air? What about the members who pay their subscription even if they have no dispute? You, you have a dispute and you don’t even pay?! (Well done!!!)
Whether you are a volunteer in this association or not, that does not mean you don't have to pay your membership and your registered letters, like everyone else! (Otherwise it wouldn’t be volunteering!)
As for the status of the association, which informs, I quote again an excerpt from my first message:
Conclusion of my visit to the consumer defense association:
Not a single additional piece of information allowing me to advance in the démarches I had already undertaken.
So if that's not info ... NOTHING useful or exploitable ...
I completely understand that you are "shocked" by my statements, since according to you, UFC takes care of you better than anyone! But put yourself in my shoes, where UFC only took a check for 30 € without providing me with any information ... And I would add (why for you and not for others!!), without covering the costs I would have to incur?!
Hello,
I just went on the forum and I won't let anyone speak about UFC Que Choisir this way.
Indeed, in 2000, I had two disputes that were favorably resolved by the AL of Grenoble.
Since then, I have remained a member.
If you didn't want to pay the 30 euros, you could have gone to a free lawyer's consultation.
If the person who received you told you that there was only the justice system, she fulfilled her duty of advice. You stayed for at least 20 minutes, that's not nothing!!! She told you the truth. If she had taken your case while making you believe otherwise, she would have jeopardized the responsibility and credibility of the Association.
You mention two disputes; what did she say about the other one?
If you go to a lawyer's office and he tells you the same thing, wouldn't you pay for the consultation? And a doctor who tells you that you are fine, wouldn't you pay for the consultation? I can't believe it! Moreover, the person who received you at reception could not have told you that you would be refunded. In that case, you would have been asked to write the check only after the consultation. Furthermore, the legal experts are salaried, there are operating costs, and you would like everything to be free; I am surprised. This is not a state organization. Also, be careful with the terms you use; there is defamation involved.
Why didn't you demand a refund immediately after leaving the office and only the next day???
I will now respond to the person who has a problem with 9 telecom. If her dispute can be defended, UFC will do it. I have friends who have had problems, and thanks to UFC, their case is in court. But I remind you that there are other consumer associations and everyone is free to join or not. On the phone or on the website, we are warned that there is a membership fee.... So!
Indeed, UFC cannot go to court for an individual dispute but in a collective interest (I assume that is the case for the person with the FREE problem). I know that every volunteer pays their membership fee, and it is time and money that they put at the service of others. On this front, you could learn some lessons! UFC fights for group action to exist in France; I signed a petition on this a few months ago. I receive the consom'Agir and I see the work done by this Association. Every time I have friends with defendable issues, but who can’t sort it out (like VOGICA), I advise them to find this Association. I am part of another association that organizes outings; I pay 36 euros, and if I want to participate in the activities, I pay according to these outings that I couldn't do if I were not a member.
But why respond to you when only your point of view matters?
And if we don’t agree with you, it means we haven’t understood anything...
I just went on the forum and I won't let anyone speak about UFC Que Choisir this way.
Indeed, in 2000, I had two disputes that were favorably resolved by the AL of Grenoble.
Since then, I have remained a member.
If you didn't want to pay the 30 euros, you could have gone to a free lawyer's consultation.
If the person who received you told you that there was only the justice system, she fulfilled her duty of advice. You stayed for at least 20 minutes, that's not nothing!!! She told you the truth. If she had taken your case while making you believe otherwise, she would have jeopardized the responsibility and credibility of the Association.
You mention two disputes; what did she say about the other one?
If you go to a lawyer's office and he tells you the same thing, wouldn't you pay for the consultation? And a doctor who tells you that you are fine, wouldn't you pay for the consultation? I can't believe it! Moreover, the person who received you at reception could not have told you that you would be refunded. In that case, you would have been asked to write the check only after the consultation. Furthermore, the legal experts are salaried, there are operating costs, and you would like everything to be free; I am surprised. This is not a state organization. Also, be careful with the terms you use; there is defamation involved.
Why didn't you demand a refund immediately after leaving the office and only the next day???
I will now respond to the person who has a problem with 9 telecom. If her dispute can be defended, UFC will do it. I have friends who have had problems, and thanks to UFC, their case is in court. But I remind you that there are other consumer associations and everyone is free to join or not. On the phone or on the website, we are warned that there is a membership fee.... So!
Indeed, UFC cannot go to court for an individual dispute but in a collective interest (I assume that is the case for the person with the FREE problem). I know that every volunteer pays their membership fee, and it is time and money that they put at the service of others. On this front, you could learn some lessons! UFC fights for group action to exist in France; I signed a petition on this a few months ago. I receive the consom'Agir and I see the work done by this Association. Every time I have friends with defendable issues, but who can’t sort it out (like VOGICA), I advise them to find this Association. I am part of another association that organizes outings; I pay 36 euros, and if I want to participate in the activities, I pay according to these outings that I couldn't do if I were not a member.
But why respond to you when only your point of view matters?
And if we don’t agree with you, it means we haven’t understood anything...
Hello "I've Had Enough"
Indeed, before knowing UFC, I managed on my own; there were registered letters at my expense with no reply, monthly bank withdrawals from Free that were processed (despite having no connection), not to mention the cancellation fees (€85).. I had also started to manage on my own (I am also a lawyer), but I lacked the strength of this association.
As soon as they wrote, there was a response. The case went to court because the "compensation for the damage" was not complete and there were several other similar cases (action in the public interest)
At the first hearing, Free had a specialized lawyer (who came from Paris), and opposite him, there was only another lawyer specialized in consumer law who could act (competence and especially motivation). Free appealed, and so it started all over again!! If we had been alone or facing lawyer fees, we would have given up a long time ago (to Free's great pleasure, who would "win" by attrition.)
The issue of the dissatisfied customer also leaves me perplexed; when he sees that his letters went unanswered, he will return with his tail between his legs to UFC (otherwise he can just check what a lawyer would cost him). In any case, he is in for a dispute lasting over 2 years (at least) with stress if he manages on his own; what a nightmare...
Have a good day
"A Azerty keyboard is worth two"
Indeed, before knowing UFC, I managed on my own; there were registered letters at my expense with no reply, monthly bank withdrawals from Free that were processed (despite having no connection), not to mention the cancellation fees (€85).. I had also started to manage on my own (I am also a lawyer), but I lacked the strength of this association.
As soon as they wrote, there was a response. The case went to court because the "compensation for the damage" was not complete and there were several other similar cases (action in the public interest)
At the first hearing, Free had a specialized lawyer (who came from Paris), and opposite him, there was only another lawyer specialized in consumer law who could act (competence and especially motivation). Free appealed, and so it started all over again!! If we had been alone or facing lawyer fees, we would have given up a long time ago (to Free's great pleasure, who would "win" by attrition.)
The issue of the dissatisfied customer also leaves me perplexed; when he sees that his letters went unanswered, he will return with his tail between his legs to UFC (otherwise he can just check what a lawyer would cost him). In any case, he is in for a dispute lasting over 2 years (at least) with stress if he manages on his own; what a nightmare...
Have a good day
"A Azerty keyboard is worth two"
--For Eny
Membership is only renewable if you renew it!!! No need for favors to stop being a member!!! If you no longer need them, you won't renew your membership!!
The member who comes without a dispute (so to speak) paying a contribution supports the association.
It's like with the SPA, you don’t need to have an animal to pay a membership fee!!
You're getting confused: if UFC writes for you, it's at the association's expense!!! I'm not a volunteer for them, but I don’t think their volunteers are exploiters!!! Look at the hours of availability and tell us if you would agree to "work for free" like that, especially to receive "guy" (like you) who stab you in the back!!!
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
Membership is only renewable if you renew it!!! No need for favors to stop being a member!!! If you no longer need them, you won't renew your membership!!
The member who comes without a dispute (so to speak) paying a contribution supports the association.
It's like with the SPA, you don’t need to have an animal to pay a membership fee!!
You're getting confused: if UFC writes for you, it's at the association's expense!!! I'm not a volunteer for them, but I don’t think their volunteers are exploiters!!! Look at the hours of availability and tell us if you would agree to "work for free" like that, especially to receive "guy" (like you) who stab you in the back!!!
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
Joining a consumer association should be a militant act aimed at advancing consumer issues in the right direction for the common good.
Using it solely as a service provider to resolve your dispute is not very encouraging for the volunteers and does not show them much appreciation.
This mindset is a blessing for suppliers who are little or not at all respectful of the customer, as it reveals the limits of many consumers' commitment. Be careful not to nurture the soil for commercially incorrect practices to proliferate.
If you believe the actions of the associations are not satisfactory, join the volunteers and "roll up your sleeves" rather than criticize; your energy will be more useful.
Using it solely as a service provider to resolve your dispute is not very encouraging for the volunteers and does not show them much appreciation.
This mindset is a blessing for suppliers who are little or not at all respectful of the customer, as it reveals the limits of many consumers' commitment. Be careful not to nurture the soil for commercially incorrect practices to proliferate.
If you believe the actions of the associations are not satisfactory, join the volunteers and "roll up your sleeves" rather than criticize; your energy will be more useful.
--Hello Michel
You are right, especially since here when we read page "1"; we see that Eny asked for advice regarding the folder for his aunt, we can’t believe it when he asks about the reimbursement of his membership fee.
Thanks to UFC Que Choisir for taking the time to respond to him here with politeness, respect, and patience.
"One Azerty keyboard is worth two"
You are right, especially since here when we read page "1"; we see that Eny asked for advice regarding the folder for his aunt, we can’t believe it when he asks about the reimbursement of his membership fee.
Thanks to UFC Que Choisir for taking the time to respond to him here with politeness, respect, and patience.
"One Azerty keyboard is worth two"
In the message from 8/6 at 11:25 PM, Zorro does not say that he has paid for his registered letters; she (since there is an "e" at the end of "gagnantE!") says:
"Just for the amount of the letters with Ac sent by them (or them = UFC) to Free; I am 'gagnante.'
This clearly indicates that the registered letters have not been paid by Zorro!
Moreover, if a registered letter is sent by the association, then it is normal that the association covers the registered mail costs. I will also add that UFC misinformed me and never told me about this! (And another Bravo for UFC!!)
"We understood very well that you wanted to benefit from the Association only if it was of service to you. But that is not the purpose of the association. You need to be a member for any advice or intervention. Period!"
It’s not that I want to "benefit," as you say, from the association. I also understood very well that my membership would serve the interests of others. But I would still have liked it to serve MY interests too... and I was sent back to square one with information that I already had! Something phenomenal, which I do not accept! Period! (It's easy to say "period" like that! I'm just like everyone else; I said everyone!! Anyone who doesn't like being treated like a fool or having their face made a mockery of! Maybe you, but I don’t accept it!)
"I find you aggressive and unpleasant even without knowing you."
Indeed, but why do you think I write in this tone? I am merely responding to messages that are just as aggressive and provocative towards me!
Are you stunned? But what should I feel?! Nothing?!
I was ripped off for €30 by a consumer protection association that can do nothing for me and I shouldn’t say anything? That’s right...
You also insist on the second file. So take the time to reread (maybe calmly, or with a dictionary next to you!) my first message, and you will see that, I quote:
"Result (for the second case): the lawyer confirmed to me that I had taken the right steps (Thank you, I am glad to hear that!) but that there was nothing more to do."
Back to square one, and the fact of going through UFC didn’t help at all...
For the other dissatisfied, it’s not so much that there are at least two on this forum, but especially the fact of informing everyone of what can also happen to each individual who wishes to go to UFC! There is no reason for such a situation to happen to me and no one else! With these messages, I hope to make people understand that just because they go to UFC doesn’t mean their problem will necessarily be solved! (The proof!)
"I find you quite stubborn."
Yes, I am stubborn! Which is perfectly normal when one feels they have been hoodwinked by someone.
"... and always convinced that the person at the reception could not have told you that the check would be returned to you"
Oh really? You are convinced of what someone told me, a person you do not know, in a place where you were not either? And I am the weird one!?!? :s
Furthermore, as I also pointed out:
"I was also told that the person at reception was not supposed to tell me that the check would be returned to me, as it was not practiced. It was a mistake on their part.
(There too, I am very glad to learn: it’s a mistake on THEIR part, which COST me €30)"
=> This is not normal at all!
Zorro said:
"You are not telling the whole truth about your case, it’s your word against that of UFC what to choose"
I don’t see what more I can say, as everything is there and already well written in black and white (or blue! ^^)
(who has no reason to lie)
What does this mean? That I am lying?
What interest would I find in that?
I am simply denouncing the fact that a volunteer from this association can tell you "white" one day, and another volunteer can tell you "black" the next day! Before making such a fuss, the members of this association would do better to tune their instruments, or if it’s already done, not to tell the consumer anything that isn’t true just to get another membership (because in my case, I have even come to think it!)
"there will be lawyers’ fees, bailiffs, court costs (the costs of the opposing party at your expense if you lose, and since you are heading straight for the wall; good luck! When you’re at the court of appeal, it will be just as funny.... the stress will be yours!!"
I’m sorry, but on one hand, who tells you that I am heading straight for the wall (Are you also convinced of things that you totally ignore?) and on the other hand, with the file in question, Free who is playing deaf for 8 months straight, etc. etc... I don’t think I have much to fear regarding a judge’s decision!
And I indeed used “tu” with selma19 in one of my messages, as you pointed out, to respond to her “tu” and also, let me point out, to respond to a message without aggression or provocation from her, not like some other messages... like yours for example: "to receive 'gugus' (like you) (gugus => Who do you think you are?!))
(By the way, in this message, you informally address me at the beginning and formally at the end!...? Anyway ... whatever!)
I believe that what is also disheartening is seeing that people are not capable of admitting, even if a subscription can serve others, that volunteers should not say "white" to someone one day and "black" the next day!
Finally, to conclude, you also say:
"It’s up to you to look for another association and pay another membership (oh yes)"
Well no! I already made the mistake of going to UFC; I will not make the same mistake a second time.
----
It’s a guy at the hairdresser's, and the hairdresser asks him what cut he desires. The guy replies: “I would like: - Shaved on the left side - the pompadour but just on the right and sideways - The brush on top but with a hole in the middle - The nape faded but with a few tufts here and there.” The hairdresser replies that it is not possible because it’s not a haircut. The guy responds: “Oh yeah, yet that’s what you did to me last time...”
(By the way, for that case, the hairstylist shouldn’t have been paid either! lol)
"Just for the amount of the letters with Ac sent by them (or them = UFC) to Free; I am 'gagnante.'
This clearly indicates that the registered letters have not been paid by Zorro!
Moreover, if a registered letter is sent by the association, then it is normal that the association covers the registered mail costs. I will also add that UFC misinformed me and never told me about this! (And another Bravo for UFC!!)
"We understood very well that you wanted to benefit from the Association only if it was of service to you. But that is not the purpose of the association. You need to be a member for any advice or intervention. Period!"
It’s not that I want to "benefit," as you say, from the association. I also understood very well that my membership would serve the interests of others. But I would still have liked it to serve MY interests too... and I was sent back to square one with information that I already had! Something phenomenal, which I do not accept! Period! (It's easy to say "period" like that! I'm just like everyone else; I said everyone!! Anyone who doesn't like being treated like a fool or having their face made a mockery of! Maybe you, but I don’t accept it!)
"I find you aggressive and unpleasant even without knowing you."
Indeed, but why do you think I write in this tone? I am merely responding to messages that are just as aggressive and provocative towards me!
Are you stunned? But what should I feel?! Nothing?!
I was ripped off for €30 by a consumer protection association that can do nothing for me and I shouldn’t say anything? That’s right...
You also insist on the second file. So take the time to reread (maybe calmly, or with a dictionary next to you!) my first message, and you will see that, I quote:
"Result (for the second case): the lawyer confirmed to me that I had taken the right steps (Thank you, I am glad to hear that!) but that there was nothing more to do."
Back to square one, and the fact of going through UFC didn’t help at all...
For the other dissatisfied, it’s not so much that there are at least two on this forum, but especially the fact of informing everyone of what can also happen to each individual who wishes to go to UFC! There is no reason for such a situation to happen to me and no one else! With these messages, I hope to make people understand that just because they go to UFC doesn’t mean their problem will necessarily be solved! (The proof!)
"I find you quite stubborn."
Yes, I am stubborn! Which is perfectly normal when one feels they have been hoodwinked by someone.
"... and always convinced that the person at the reception could not have told you that the check would be returned to you"
Oh really? You are convinced of what someone told me, a person you do not know, in a place where you were not either? And I am the weird one!?!? :s
Furthermore, as I also pointed out:
"I was also told that the person at reception was not supposed to tell me that the check would be returned to me, as it was not practiced. It was a mistake on their part.
(There too, I am very glad to learn: it’s a mistake on THEIR part, which COST me €30)"
=> This is not normal at all!
Zorro said:
"You are not telling the whole truth about your case, it’s your word against that of UFC what to choose"
I don’t see what more I can say, as everything is there and already well written in black and white (or blue! ^^)
(who has no reason to lie)
What does this mean? That I am lying?
What interest would I find in that?
I am simply denouncing the fact that a volunteer from this association can tell you "white" one day, and another volunteer can tell you "black" the next day! Before making such a fuss, the members of this association would do better to tune their instruments, or if it’s already done, not to tell the consumer anything that isn’t true just to get another membership (because in my case, I have even come to think it!)
"there will be lawyers’ fees, bailiffs, court costs (the costs of the opposing party at your expense if you lose, and since you are heading straight for the wall; good luck! When you’re at the court of appeal, it will be just as funny.... the stress will be yours!!"
I’m sorry, but on one hand, who tells you that I am heading straight for the wall (Are you also convinced of things that you totally ignore?) and on the other hand, with the file in question, Free who is playing deaf for 8 months straight, etc. etc... I don’t think I have much to fear regarding a judge’s decision!
And I indeed used “tu” with selma19 in one of my messages, as you pointed out, to respond to her “tu” and also, let me point out, to respond to a message without aggression or provocation from her, not like some other messages... like yours for example: "to receive 'gugus' (like you) (gugus => Who do you think you are?!))
(By the way, in this message, you informally address me at the beginning and formally at the end!...? Anyway ... whatever!)
I believe that what is also disheartening is seeing that people are not capable of admitting, even if a subscription can serve others, that volunteers should not say "white" to someone one day and "black" the next day!
Finally, to conclude, you also say:
"It’s up to you to look for another association and pay another membership (oh yes)"
Well no! I already made the mistake of going to UFC; I will not make the same mistake a second time.
----
It’s a guy at the hairdresser's, and the hairdresser asks him what cut he desires. The guy replies: “I would like: - Shaved on the left side - the pompadour but just on the right and sideways - The brush on top but with a hole in the middle - The nape faded but with a few tufts here and there.” The hairdresser replies that it is not possible because it’s not a haircut. The guy responds: “Oh yeah, yet that’s what you did to me last time...”
(By the way, for that case, the hairstylist shouldn’t have been paid either! lol)
Eny
You also say white one day ("it's obvious, of course, that the UFC will never get another penny from me! (which doesn't mean that I might never contribute to another consumer protection association, but one that will be more serious!)" and black the next day: "No way! I already made the mistake of going to UFC, I won't make the same mistake a second time."
Moreover, if Free doesn't respond to you, I quote you: "Free that's been turning a deaf ear for 8 months straight, etc. etc... I don't think I have much to fear from a judge's decision!" So everything is going very well for you, it's off to a good start.....(it's even why you went to 'Que Choisir...
I see from your message that stress is getting to you and so are insomnia ... and this is only the beginning. Let go of your hatred for the consumer association, you're targeting the wrong enemy.
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
You also say white one day ("it's obvious, of course, that the UFC will never get another penny from me! (which doesn't mean that I might never contribute to another consumer protection association, but one that will be more serious!)" and black the next day: "No way! I already made the mistake of going to UFC, I won't make the same mistake a second time."
Moreover, if Free doesn't respond to you, I quote you: "Free that's been turning a deaf ear for 8 months straight, etc. etc... I don't think I have much to fear from a judge's decision!" So everything is going very well for you, it's off to a good start.....(it's even why you went to 'Que Choisir...
I see from your message that stress is getting to you and so are insomnia ... and this is only the beginning. Let go of your hatred for the consumer association, you're targeting the wrong enemy.
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
Hello
To read ... (but legitimately yes since when the page and the text are as they are) :
http://www.ufcquechoisir-grenoble.org/association.html
"It is necessary to join to open a file (interventions, advice, detailed examination of documents...)"
It's true that it's not easy to stay calm or not be perplexed about the future for one's own case (I say this from experience) but what can be said when we know that a membership fee can help advance cases from a general point of view and that we are glad when associations manage to condemn the dubious practices of certain merchants or companies, and that we can all benefit from having to endure fewer scams of all kinds.
Note; Mozilla Firefox indicates for "Page Information" (right-click):
Modified on: Fri./29/June/2007 15:59:16
Expires on: Sun./06/July/2008 00:17:24
Size: 6.51 Ko (6,671 bytes)
Thank you
To read ... (but legitimately yes since when the page and the text are as they are) :
http://www.ufcquechoisir-grenoble.org/association.html
"It is necessary to join to open a file (interventions, advice, detailed examination of documents...)"
It's true that it's not easy to stay calm or not be perplexed about the future for one's own case (I say this from experience) but what can be said when we know that a membership fee can help advance cases from a general point of view and that we are glad when associations manage to condemn the dubious practices of certain merchants or companies, and that we can all benefit from having to endure fewer scams of all kinds.
Note; Mozilla Firefox indicates for "Page Information" (right-click):
Modified on: Fri./29/June/2007 15:59:16
Expires on: Sun./06/July/2008 00:17:24
Size: 6.51 Ko (6,671 bytes)
Thank you
A "Ras le bol"
Hello,
Ras le bol said:
"If you go to a lawyer who tells you the same thing, you don't pay for the consultation? And a doctor who tells you that you are fine, you don't pay for the consultation?"
Yes, of course, but I have other examples too:
- If someone goes to a hairdresser to get a haircut while not having a single hair on their head, the hairdresser will not take an appointment! Or even if the appointment has already been made, the hairdresser will not charge for any service if he does not cut a single hair or provide any hair care!
- If someone goes to a dealership to test a car before buying it, the dealer does not charge them for test drives...
Your examples are poorly chosen (as are mine, but to align with yours) because you are talking about businesses while UFC is supposed to be an association that defends consumers!
"By the way, the person who received you at the front desk couldn't have told you that you would be reimbursed. In that case, you would have been asked to write the check only after the consultation."
Here, you want to question my word, but that is exactly what happened! In this association, like in many businesses, it is required to pay upfront, so that, regardless of what happens, the association keeps the check.
Moreover, the lawyers are salaried, there are operating costs and you would want everything to be free; I'm surprised. Learn to read! I never said I wanted everything to be free. The problem originally comes from the fact that the person at the front desk told me that my check would be returned if the association couldn't help me. This implies of course that if the meeting had led to other procedures beyond what I had already done myself, I would have had no qualms about my check being cashed. But that is not the case.
... since only your opinion matters?
And if we don't agree with you, it's because we haven't understood anything...
Again, allow me to point out that I am clearly not the only concerned person! Other testimonies from dissatisfied people have also been posted on this topic! ;) Furthermore, just because you don't agree with me doesn’t mean you didn't understand anything. You defend your ideas, which is normal, so let me defend mine, and openly state (as the people from the UFC did in their premises, in front of other members!) how my case was handled by this branch!
"Ras le bol" said on 06/11 at 10:31:
"I just saw that the person 'ZORRO' is telling you the opposite that she paid for her registered letters."
However, Zorro said on 06/11 at 11:23 (after your message!):
Indeed, before knowing UFC, I managed by myself, there were registered letters at my expense without a reply
Wouldn't you both be "accomplices"? :s
Where and how did you see that Zorro announced that he had paid for his registered letters, when he posted after you? :s (Unless Zorro's message was edited...)
And Zorro also said on 06/10 at 20:24 (!):
"I already indicated that for my part UFC helped me against Free and the case being on appeal, I am happy not to bear the costs"
And you dare to speak of the truthfulness of my statements? But what costs is Zorro talking about? (Sometimes it's covered, sometimes it's not...) Besides the registered letter costs, there could also be lawyer fees, which Zorro wouldn’t have had to pay? Again, if that's the case, this information was not disclosed to me!! Bravo and thank you to UFC!
For Zorro:
Do you know how to read too?
You said:
"The membership is only renewable if you renew it!!! No need for a favor to not be a member anymore!!! If you no longer need them, you simply won't renew your membership!!!" (Well that's good, and thanks for the familiarity, but let’s avoid it!!)
Eny said:
"Moreover, I was clearly explained that the membership was for a duration of one year, renewable only if I still wanted to be a member and benefit from UFC’s services."
The sentence is quite clear there too!
But I am starting to understand better. If the lawyers do not listen to the end of sentences, just as members or volunteers do not read sentences entirely or are not capable of understanding them, it is normal that this association is a mess!
Furthermore, I also want to say that given the (useless) information that has been expressed, it is clear that I don’t really want to return there... even though every case is different, even good, given the service the first time...
Zorro2007 said on 06/11 at 11:35:
"...especially to receive 'gugus' (like you) who stab you from behind!!!"
Because a volunteer who tells a consumer that he is taking his check, that he will return it if the association cannot do anything to help him, and takes advantage of the consumer having their back turned (in this case, I was explaining the disputes to the lawyers) to quickly fill out the membership card for the association and store the check at the back of a drawer to no longer have to bring it out again, that's not a stab from behind maybe?!!!
In any case, you defend this association, which certainly did something for you, like for many consumers, but that does not mean I don't have a say on the actions of this association! For me, it's clear that UFC cashed €30 and did not provide me with any additional help, which I find utterly unacceptable! I will therefore continue, as I have already said, to criticize this consumer protection association, which, in my opinion, does not deserve such a reputation!
It goes without saying, of course, that UFC will never again receive a single cent from me! (which does not mean that I might never contribute to another consumer protection association, but one that is more serious!)
Hello,
Ras le bol said:
"If you go to a lawyer who tells you the same thing, you don't pay for the consultation? And a doctor who tells you that you are fine, you don't pay for the consultation?"
Yes, of course, but I have other examples too:
- If someone goes to a hairdresser to get a haircut while not having a single hair on their head, the hairdresser will not take an appointment! Or even if the appointment has already been made, the hairdresser will not charge for any service if he does not cut a single hair or provide any hair care!
- If someone goes to a dealership to test a car before buying it, the dealer does not charge them for test drives...
Your examples are poorly chosen (as are mine, but to align with yours) because you are talking about businesses while UFC is supposed to be an association that defends consumers!
"By the way, the person who received you at the front desk couldn't have told you that you would be reimbursed. In that case, you would have been asked to write the check only after the consultation."
Here, you want to question my word, but that is exactly what happened! In this association, like in many businesses, it is required to pay upfront, so that, regardless of what happens, the association keeps the check.
Moreover, the lawyers are salaried, there are operating costs and you would want everything to be free; I'm surprised. Learn to read! I never said I wanted everything to be free. The problem originally comes from the fact that the person at the front desk told me that my check would be returned if the association couldn't help me. This implies of course that if the meeting had led to other procedures beyond what I had already done myself, I would have had no qualms about my check being cashed. But that is not the case.
... since only your opinion matters?
And if we don't agree with you, it's because we haven't understood anything...
Again, allow me to point out that I am clearly not the only concerned person! Other testimonies from dissatisfied people have also been posted on this topic! ;) Furthermore, just because you don't agree with me doesn’t mean you didn't understand anything. You defend your ideas, which is normal, so let me defend mine, and openly state (as the people from the UFC did in their premises, in front of other members!) how my case was handled by this branch!
"Ras le bol" said on 06/11 at 10:31:
"I just saw that the person 'ZORRO' is telling you the opposite that she paid for her registered letters."
However, Zorro said on 06/11 at 11:23 (after your message!):
Indeed, before knowing UFC, I managed by myself, there were registered letters at my expense without a reply
Wouldn't you both be "accomplices"? :s
Where and how did you see that Zorro announced that he had paid for his registered letters, when he posted after you? :s (Unless Zorro's message was edited...)
And Zorro also said on 06/10 at 20:24 (!):
"I already indicated that for my part UFC helped me against Free and the case being on appeal, I am happy not to bear the costs"
And you dare to speak of the truthfulness of my statements? But what costs is Zorro talking about? (Sometimes it's covered, sometimes it's not...) Besides the registered letter costs, there could also be lawyer fees, which Zorro wouldn’t have had to pay? Again, if that's the case, this information was not disclosed to me!! Bravo and thank you to UFC!
For Zorro:
Do you know how to read too?
You said:
"The membership is only renewable if you renew it!!! No need for a favor to not be a member anymore!!! If you no longer need them, you simply won't renew your membership!!!" (Well that's good, and thanks for the familiarity, but let’s avoid it!!)
Eny said:
"Moreover, I was clearly explained that the membership was for a duration of one year, renewable only if I still wanted to be a member and benefit from UFC’s services."
The sentence is quite clear there too!
But I am starting to understand better. If the lawyers do not listen to the end of sentences, just as members or volunteers do not read sentences entirely or are not capable of understanding them, it is normal that this association is a mess!
Furthermore, I also want to say that given the (useless) information that has been expressed, it is clear that I don’t really want to return there... even though every case is different, even good, given the service the first time...
Zorro2007 said on 06/11 at 11:35:
"...especially to receive 'gugus' (like you) who stab you from behind!!!"
Because a volunteer who tells a consumer that he is taking his check, that he will return it if the association cannot do anything to help him, and takes advantage of the consumer having their back turned (in this case, I was explaining the disputes to the lawyers) to quickly fill out the membership card for the association and store the check at the back of a drawer to no longer have to bring it out again, that's not a stab from behind maybe?!!!
In any case, you defend this association, which certainly did something for you, like for many consumers, but that does not mean I don't have a say on the actions of this association! For me, it's clear that UFC cashed €30 and did not provide me with any additional help, which I find utterly unacceptable! I will therefore continue, as I have already said, to criticize this consumer protection association, which, in my opinion, does not deserve such a reputation!
It goes without saying, of course, that UFC will never again receive a single cent from me! (which does not mean that I might never contribute to another consumer protection association, but one that is more serious!)
So you’re fighting against the entire association just because of one employee who messed up in their statements
and personally I also think that UFC is not obligated to find a solution, but rather to help you look for one
and the membership fee seems valid to me, whether a solution comes out of it or not.
I would be more inclined to agree with the example of the doctor, he examines you, looks for what he can do, and if there’s nothing, we still pay 20 €
I indeed can’t understand how one could spend 20 minutes with a lawyer saying if you help me, I’ll pay you, otherwise I want my 30€ back, it’s a matter of perspective
I understand your problem, and I completely agree that we should talk about it, because it shouldn't be hidden, but I find your reaction disproportionate in relation to the issue,
this is just my point of view
--
As for those fierce soldiers, I say it’s not to gossip, but they do nothing but roar in our countryside.
and personally I also think that UFC is not obligated to find a solution, but rather to help you look for one
and the membership fee seems valid to me, whether a solution comes out of it or not.
I would be more inclined to agree with the example of the doctor, he examines you, looks for what he can do, and if there’s nothing, we still pay 20 €
I indeed can’t understand how one could spend 20 minutes with a lawyer saying if you help me, I’ll pay you, otherwise I want my 30€ back, it’s a matter of perspective
I understand your problem, and I completely agree that we should talk about it, because it shouldn't be hidden, but I find your reaction disproportionate in relation to the issue,
this is just my point of view
--
As for those fierce soldiers, I say it’s not to gossip, but they do nothing but roar in our countryside.
I am stunned. It was in the message from "ZORRO" sent on June 8, 2008, at 11:25 PM that I read that this person had paid registered letters. You are really twisted! I wrote this morning!!!
We fully understand that you wanted to take advantage of the Association only if it was of service to you. But that's not the purpose of the association. You must be a member for any advice or intervention. Period!
I find you aggressive and unpleasant even without knowing you.
As for the legal actions of the UFC, with coverage of attorney fees (according to what I understood from ZORRO's explanations), it is the UFC that takes legal action for a group of consumers having the same problem, and individuals join the case. It's not complicated to understand. It seems that this is not the case with your dispute. But you say nothing about the other case: Banking or FREE?
You talk about dissatisfied people from this AL on the forum: there are two, one of which concerned another AL.
I find you quite tenacious. As I am fed up (hence my nickname) with reading you whining and always convinced that the person at the reception couldn't have told you that your check would be returned, I will leave you and not return to this conversation because no matter what we say, you will try (I do mean you will try) to land on your feet again.
We fully understand that you wanted to take advantage of the Association only if it was of service to you. But that's not the purpose of the association. You must be a member for any advice or intervention. Period!
I find you aggressive and unpleasant even without knowing you.
As for the legal actions of the UFC, with coverage of attorney fees (according to what I understood from ZORRO's explanations), it is the UFC that takes legal action for a group of consumers having the same problem, and individuals join the case. It's not complicated to understand. It seems that this is not the case with your dispute. But you say nothing about the other case: Banking or FREE?
You talk about dissatisfied people from this AL on the forum: there are two, one of which concerned another AL.
I find you quite tenacious. As I am fed up (hence my nickname) with reading you whining and always convinced that the person at the reception couldn't have told you that your check would be returned, I will leave you and not return to this conversation because no matter what we say, you will try (I do mean you will try) to land on your feet again.
Good evening "Fed up"
As we cross paths again there will be a new novel "Zorro is fed up" (that's the only connection I make)
As for the example of the hairdresser:
"a bald man goes to the hairdresser every morning, why?" I give the answer "because it's the hairdresser"
Have a nice evening
--
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
As we cross paths again there will be a new novel "Zorro is fed up" (that's the only connection I make)
As for the example of the hairdresser:
"a bald man goes to the hairdresser every morning, why?" I give the answer "because it's the hairdresser"
Have a nice evening
--
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
Zorro,
I think I have already done enough volunteering for my sports association.
Furthermore, even if it was ironic, I understood it well, it is now out of the question that I show the slightest gratitude to the UFC of Grenoble, even though this association, (like many others!), has made a name for itself and has also done a lot for consumer protection.
(Sorry, but one time I'm taken for a fool is enough, not twice!)
"Student at a business school":
Hello,
I don't know if you took the time to read everything I wrote (even though everything is clearly stated from my first message), but:
- I have also sent registered letters with acknowledgment of receipt, so that suppliers cannot deny having received my letters.
- I understand how the Grenoble association works (certainly like many other associations, by the way), but I denounce the fact that the volunteer told me he would return my check to me if the UFC could do nothing for me.
- I fully understand your case, where you covered the costs of sending the registered letters, even though the letters were sent by the UFC. (And I find that normal!) In Zorro's explanations, he says that he did not have any costs to bear when the UFC sent the registered letters on his behalf. If he is mistaken (since you are asking him for explanations on this subject, by the way), that would also prove that he is trying to defend the UFC, while he is mistaken about what he is saying despite being directly concerned by his own case! (Why don't you question the accuracy of HIS statements?)
- I assure you that I did not misunderstand what the volunteer told me. I can still clearly recall the action:
While we were face to face, the volunteer placed his hand on the check that was on the table, pushed it towards me (and towards a corner of the desk) and said:
“Listen, here’s what we’re going to do. You write your check, you go see the
lawyers, and if the association can help you, you join, otherwise, I’ll return your check to you,” while giving the check a small nudge with his hand, suggesting "the check is here, it will stay here as long as you don’t leave the office with the lawyer."
This is crystal clear to me.
- It’s not so much that the Free case was rejected, especially with all the steps I had already taken. The lawyers told me I was the only one who could file a complaint since that was the only thing left to do, and that the UFC could not legally intervene on my behalf. Indeed, an association cannot file a complaint for a consumer, that’s the law.
I understand that you are skeptical, but that’s what was announced to me.
You also understood very well why I did not claim my check from the very first day. I went home, and I analyzed everything that was said with the lawyers, realizing that, in fact, their intervention had been totally useless, as I was exactly at the same point as before going to see them.
I had also explained this in my first message:
“So I packed up my things and looked more closely, at home, at everything that had been said. ...”
(16th line from the end, + the following ...)
That’s why I went back the next day.
- “Even if you obtain satisfaction by going directly before the judge, it will be thanks to the work of UFC Que Choisir (including Grenoble), which has been fighting against this ISP for years (since 2003-2004).”
There, I completely agree! But once again, I am not denouncing the actions undertaken by consumer associations (especially not!) and I am not trying to stop consumers from going to these associations! What I am denouncing is the fact that a volunteer told me nonsense (and as I also said, I even came to suspect him of having deliberately handed the check to the person in charge when my back was turned!), and even more unacceptable, that another volunteer, the next day, told me, “well, too bad for you, your 30 € will serve others” (but not for me, thank you!).
What I want to make clear to all readers is that they must stay vigilant, even if they go to a consumer protection association, and here specifically, the UFC of Grenoble.
I think I have already done enough volunteering for my sports association.
Furthermore, even if it was ironic, I understood it well, it is now out of the question that I show the slightest gratitude to the UFC of Grenoble, even though this association, (like many others!), has made a name for itself and has also done a lot for consumer protection.
(Sorry, but one time I'm taken for a fool is enough, not twice!)
"Student at a business school":
Hello,
I don't know if you took the time to read everything I wrote (even though everything is clearly stated from my first message), but:
- I have also sent registered letters with acknowledgment of receipt, so that suppliers cannot deny having received my letters.
- I understand how the Grenoble association works (certainly like many other associations, by the way), but I denounce the fact that the volunteer told me he would return my check to me if the UFC could do nothing for me.
- I fully understand your case, where you covered the costs of sending the registered letters, even though the letters were sent by the UFC. (And I find that normal!) In Zorro's explanations, he says that he did not have any costs to bear when the UFC sent the registered letters on his behalf. If he is mistaken (since you are asking him for explanations on this subject, by the way), that would also prove that he is trying to defend the UFC, while he is mistaken about what he is saying despite being directly concerned by his own case! (Why don't you question the accuracy of HIS statements?)
- I assure you that I did not misunderstand what the volunteer told me. I can still clearly recall the action:
While we were face to face, the volunteer placed his hand on the check that was on the table, pushed it towards me (and towards a corner of the desk) and said:
“Listen, here’s what we’re going to do. You write your check, you go see the
lawyers, and if the association can help you, you join, otherwise, I’ll return your check to you,” while giving the check a small nudge with his hand, suggesting "the check is here, it will stay here as long as you don’t leave the office with the lawyer."
This is crystal clear to me.
- It’s not so much that the Free case was rejected, especially with all the steps I had already taken. The lawyers told me I was the only one who could file a complaint since that was the only thing left to do, and that the UFC could not legally intervene on my behalf. Indeed, an association cannot file a complaint for a consumer, that’s the law.
I understand that you are skeptical, but that’s what was announced to me.
You also understood very well why I did not claim my check from the very first day. I went home, and I analyzed everything that was said with the lawyers, realizing that, in fact, their intervention had been totally useless, as I was exactly at the same point as before going to see them.
I had also explained this in my first message:
“So I packed up my things and looked more closely, at home, at everything that had been said. ...”
(16th line from the end, + the following ...)
That’s why I went back the next day.
- “Even if you obtain satisfaction by going directly before the judge, it will be thanks to the work of UFC Que Choisir (including Grenoble), which has been fighting against this ISP for years (since 2003-2004).”
There, I completely agree! But once again, I am not denouncing the actions undertaken by consumer associations (especially not!) and I am not trying to stop consumers from going to these associations! What I am denouncing is the fact that a volunteer told me nonsense (and as I also said, I even came to suspect him of having deliberately handed the check to the person in charge when my back was turned!), and even more unacceptable, that another volunteer, the next day, told me, “well, too bad for you, your 30 € will serve others” (but not for me, thank you!).
What I want to make clear to all readers is that they must stay vigilant, even if they go to a consumer protection association, and here specifically, the UFC of Grenoble.
Hello
Paying a subscription without direct service for oneself or for the common good:
You don’t tell someone "white" one day and "black" the next, whether you’re in a consumer advocacy group or not
(You paid a subscription even though you were promised you wouldn't have to if they couldn't help you)
I completely agree, but we need to keep living without ruining our health because of others “C@!n3n”A3hURgd !!“
And for my part, my problem was resolved quite easily thanks to myself “Thank you (me) !!”
For Free, if it's a technical issue, try to find a technician and offer a tip
For a potential refund from UFC, I believe I’ll stick to the fact that it might help others; all of us, as I mentioned above, in order to ease your burden (Eny) (that’s the case to say it ;)) by trying to help you put things into perspective (Eny).
Thank you
Paying a subscription without direct service for oneself or for the common good:
You don’t tell someone "white" one day and "black" the next, whether you’re in a consumer advocacy group or not
(You paid a subscription even though you were promised you wouldn't have to if they couldn't help you)
I completely agree, but we need to keep living without ruining our health because of others “C@!n3n”A3hURgd !!“
And for my part, my problem was resolved quite easily thanks to myself “Thank you (me) !!”
For Free, if it's a technical issue, try to find a technician and offer a tip
For a potential refund from UFC, I believe I’ll stick to the fact that it might help others; all of us, as I mentioned above, in order to ease your burden (Eny) (that’s the case to say it ;)) by trying to help you put things into perspective (Eny).
Thank you
Hi... "double" Anonymous,
You suggest Eny to put into perspective the fact that she paid 30 euros without receiving the help she expected from this association and why ask for a refund since this money will help others! Oh really, great comfort!!
Eny has disputes she wants to resolve as quickly as possible and in a logical approach, she contacts an association that basically says: "okay, we'll take your money, but we can't do anything for you!!" You're right, she has every reason to be outraged!
I would have reacted the same way and if it's to get this kind of response from an association of this stature, she might as well wait a bit and consult a free legal advisor at her local town hall!
Now, if consumer associations are starting to do the same, where are we heading???
I also need to go to a UFC branch for a dispute I have with NeufTélécom, not to name names, and if I hear the same thing as Eny, well no, I won't give 30 euros to keep the wheels turning just because it’s important to be supportive, but to get the help I hope to find there!!!
There you go, Eny, you're right, we’re fed up with being taken for fools and good luck with your problems!
You suggest Eny to put into perspective the fact that she paid 30 euros without receiving the help she expected from this association and why ask for a refund since this money will help others! Oh really, great comfort!!
Eny has disputes she wants to resolve as quickly as possible and in a logical approach, she contacts an association that basically says: "okay, we'll take your money, but we can't do anything for you!!" You're right, she has every reason to be outraged!
I would have reacted the same way and if it's to get this kind of response from an association of this stature, she might as well wait a bit and consult a free legal advisor at her local town hall!
Now, if consumer associations are starting to do the same, where are we heading???
I also need to go to a UFC branch for a dispute I have with NeufTélécom, not to name names, and if I hear the same thing as Eny, well no, I won't give 30 euros to keep the wheels turning just because it’s important to be supportive, but to get the help I hope to find there!!!
There you go, Eny, you're right, we’re fed up with being taken for fools and good luck with your problems!
I am the person who received this gentleman the next day when he came to request a refund of the membership fee he had paid the day before. I am exercising my right of reply and will stop at the writing of this email.
I also spoke with the volunteer who had received him, as I was surprised that this volunteer could (according to him) promise him a refund of his check, given that any association can only deal with its members, which is why there is a reception desk where this is clearly stated, and there is a membership process before the meeting with the legal advisor.
The membership fee requested is not in exchange for a service rendered (even though this gentleman spent between 20 to 30 minutes with the advisor). However, it is a prerequisite for any handling of a dispute between a consumer and a professional. The UFC-Que Choisir associations inform, advise, and support their members based on the training, experience, and commitment of their volunteer or salaried activists. I would like to thank all the volunteers who work within our association and all the very loyal members who, even without a dispute, continue to pay their membership fees. By paying these fees, the voice of consumers is stronger, better heard, and respected.
This person was adamant about seeing the legal advisor; she wrote her check and became a member. She could have left without becoming a member but without seeing the legal advisor.
I also spoke with the volunteer who had received him, as I was surprised that this volunteer could (according to him) promise him a refund of his check, given that any association can only deal with its members, which is why there is a reception desk where this is clearly stated, and there is a membership process before the meeting with the legal advisor.
The membership fee requested is not in exchange for a service rendered (even though this gentleman spent between 20 to 30 minutes with the advisor). However, it is a prerequisite for any handling of a dispute between a consumer and a professional. The UFC-Que Choisir associations inform, advise, and support their members based on the training, experience, and commitment of their volunteer or salaried activists. I would like to thank all the volunteers who work within our association and all the very loyal members who, even without a dispute, continue to pay their membership fees. By paying these fees, the voice of consumers is stronger, better heard, and respected.
This person was adamant about seeing the legal advisor; she wrote her check and became a member. She could have left without becoming a member but without seeing the legal advisor.
selma 19,
It is distressing to see how stupid people can be; you do not shine by your intelligence either!
First point: on what grounds do you allow yourself to endorse Eny's false and unfounded criticisms without knowing UFC? When you don't know, you keep quiet!
Second point: Since you would have reacted the same way if the same comments were directed at you ..., since you think it's better to consult a free legal advisor ...
THEN WHY DO YOU WANT TO GO TO A UFC OFFICE FOR YOUR DISPUTE?
You are already negative towards them. So you have no business being there; going with prejudices is utterly useless; you will waste the time of people who have other things to do than trying to defend people like you who frankly do not deserve it.
You must be naive to make such statements! And above all, follow your advice and go see a legal advisor! Leave this remarkable association that is UFC alone!!!!!
I had a dispute; they were extraordinary. Everything ended well, and today I continue to be a member to help them "keep the place running," to quote you. They exist thanks to these memberships.
30 euros a year to be helped or to help, there's no reason to write such idiotic statements.
But maybe you lack the ability to understand!
It is distressing to see how stupid people can be; you do not shine by your intelligence either!
First point: on what grounds do you allow yourself to endorse Eny's false and unfounded criticisms without knowing UFC? When you don't know, you keep quiet!
Second point: Since you would have reacted the same way if the same comments were directed at you ..., since you think it's better to consult a free legal advisor ...
THEN WHY DO YOU WANT TO GO TO A UFC OFFICE FOR YOUR DISPUTE?
You are already negative towards them. So you have no business being there; going with prejudices is utterly useless; you will waste the time of people who have other things to do than trying to defend people like you who frankly do not deserve it.
You must be naive to make such statements! And above all, follow your advice and go see a legal advisor! Leave this remarkable association that is UFC alone!!!!!
I had a dispute; they were extraordinary. Everything ended well, and today I continue to be a member to help them "keep the place running," to quote you. They exist thanks to these memberships.
30 euros a year to be helped or to help, there's no reason to write such idiotic statements.
But maybe you lack the ability to understand!
MACHA said:
"First point: by what right do you allow yourself to endorse the false and unfounded criticisms of eny, without knowing UFC? When you don’t know, you keep quiet!”
By what right do you judge this story (and me, since I would then be a liar!) when there is no lie and everything is well-founded?
The proof is also that "bénévole" wrote a message (after selma19’s!) which proves that this story is very real!
MACHA said:
When you don’t know, you keep quiet!
=> Isn’t that right!!!
You went to UFC for your (or your) issue(s) and everything went well. Believe me with certainty, I am really happy for you!
But how would you have reacted if the volunteers of the association had responded to you the same way they did to me? And that you had left with your issues (and €30 less!), and alone to sort it out?
MACHA said:
But maybe you do not have the capacity to understand!
=> Isn’t that right!!!
"First point: by what right do you allow yourself to endorse the false and unfounded criticisms of eny, without knowing UFC? When you don’t know, you keep quiet!”
By what right do you judge this story (and me, since I would then be a liar!) when there is no lie and everything is well-founded?
The proof is also that "bénévole" wrote a message (after selma19’s!) which proves that this story is very real!
MACHA said:
When you don’t know, you keep quiet!
=> Isn’t that right!!!
You went to UFC for your (or your) issue(s) and everything went well. Believe me with certainty, I am really happy for you!
But how would you have reacted if the volunteers of the association had responded to you the same way they did to me? And that you had left with your issues (and €30 less!), and alone to sort it out?
MACHA said:
But maybe you do not have the capacity to understand!
=> Isn’t that right!!!
Personally, I wouldn't have reacted like you.
In fact, I wouldn't have quibbled over the €30 before going to see the lawyer, so the problem wouldn't have arisen.
But everyone has their way of acting.
--
As for those fierce soldiers, I'm saying it not to gossip, but they do nothing but roar in our countryside.
In fact, I wouldn't have quibbled over the €30 before going to see the lawyer, so the problem wouldn't have arisen.
But everyone has their way of acting.
--
As for those fierce soldiers, I'm saying it not to gossip, but they do nothing but roar in our countryside.
Good evening
Eny
The same association from the same town for the same problem (Free) has taken all the procedures against Free:
Just for the amount of letters with Ac sent by them to Free; I am "winning."
They provided us with their lawyer who won (Free's appeal). I only paid the first year of membership even though there was an appeal, Que Choisir didn't require me to pay a new membership fee.
I'm sharing your post on a public forum with them so they can respond..
In any case, your membership is valid for the entire year for all consumer disputes. You need to see them before you resolve your dispute yourself.
Have a good evening
--
"A Azerty keyboard is worth two"
Eny
The same association from the same town for the same problem (Free) has taken all the procedures against Free:
Just for the amount of letters with Ac sent by them to Free; I am "winning."
They provided us with their lawyer who won (Free's appeal). I only paid the first year of membership even though there was an appeal, Que Choisir didn't require me to pay a new membership fee.
I'm sharing your post on a public forum with them so they can respond..
In any case, your membership is valid for the entire year for all consumer disputes. You need to see them before you resolve your dispute yourself.
Have a good evening
--
"A Azerty keyboard is worth two"
--Eny
You are not telling the whole truth about your case, it's your word against that of UFC Que Choisir (which has no interest in lying)
You spend a lot of energy trying to "bring down this association," your words sum it all up!!!
You ask me what expenses I'm talking about!!! I can't believe it; you will soon understand since you want to be all alone against Free and you don’t want to step back into UFC... there will be lawyer fees, bailiff fees, court fees (the opposing party's expenses will be your responsibility if you lose, and since you're heading straight for a wall; good luck! When you get to the court of appeal, it will be just as amusing.... the stress will be on you!!
As for the use of the informal "tu," you also use it sometimes (for example towards an internet user: Thank you for sharing your testimony...), it’s not the most serious as long as there is respect. Given that you believe I’m an accomplice of "ras le bol"; I add that I do not know him, just because he agrees with my testimony doesn’t mean we are accomplices (ridiculous) especially since he cites a specific case.
Finally, regarding your example: "If someone goes to a hairdresser to get a haircut while they have no hair left on their head...." there's no need to go further, lol, it's just as desperate as your story.
Feel free to go see another association and to pay another membership fee (yes indeed): "you can't have your cake, the money for the cake, and the baker's favors"
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
You are not telling the whole truth about your case, it's your word against that of UFC Que Choisir (which has no interest in lying)
You spend a lot of energy trying to "bring down this association," your words sum it all up!!!
You ask me what expenses I'm talking about!!! I can't believe it; you will soon understand since you want to be all alone against Free and you don’t want to step back into UFC... there will be lawyer fees, bailiff fees, court fees (the opposing party's expenses will be your responsibility if you lose, and since you're heading straight for a wall; good luck! When you get to the court of appeal, it will be just as amusing.... the stress will be on you!!
As for the use of the informal "tu," you also use it sometimes (for example towards an internet user: Thank you for sharing your testimony...), it’s not the most serious as long as there is respect. Given that you believe I’m an accomplice of "ras le bol"; I add that I do not know him, just because he agrees with my testimony doesn’t mean we are accomplices (ridiculous) especially since he cites a specific case.
Finally, regarding your example: "If someone goes to a hairdresser to get a haircut while they have no hair left on their head...." there's no need to go further, lol, it's just as desperate as your story.
Feel free to go see another association and to pay another membership fee (yes indeed): "you can't have your cake, the money for the cake, and the baker's favors"
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
I have already asked you to avoid using the informal "tu", thank you!
When I say that I am not going to make the same mistake a second time, it means that I'm going to look for another association for the same issue, since there is no reason why another association could provide me with complementary help, while UFC cannot. Or else, it would mean that the advice from UFC is highly questionable and leaves much to be desired! (In which case, that would further damage UFC!)
I do admit, however, that 8 months is a long time, but personal and professional obligations prevented me from taking care of this file more quickly. That doesn’t mean I handled it poorly! The proof is that the legal advisors from UFC themselves told me that I had taken all the right steps, and that the only thing left was to file a lawsuit, which I had to do on my own. (In short, apart from telling me: "Well done, you did everything correctly, now you must file a complaint, but we can do nothing for you," UFC hasn’t been of much help, meaning very little!) I now have more time to take care of this case, and I intend to see it through to the end!
With a lawsuit, Free will this time be obliged to account for itself.
My visit to UFC was to find out if there was anything else to do between the letters I had already sent to Free and the lawsuit. I’m also starting to get tired of repeating myself, it is something I have already stated:
“I decided to inquire with the UFC Que Choisir association in Grenoble to know if there were other actions (besides the ones I had already taken) to settle my disputes amicably, and to find out if the association 'accompanied' consumers in their legal process, should that prove necessary.” (Which clearly indicated that I intended to take such action if there was no "intermediate step" proposed by UFC!)
“I see from your message that stress is getting to you”
But who are you and how can you dare to judge that, knowing that you don’t even know me?! Just because someone has a legal case doesn’t mean it should ruin their life with stress!
So fine, conducting a legal case may not be everyone’s forte, nor is it something that one engages in every day, but we must keep things in perspective...
For my part, when I open the Free file, I focus on it, but when I close it, the file is closed and I move on to something else!
“...and the insomnia”
So we still don’t know each other, do we?! I already tend not to sleep much.
But I also want to point out that not everyone has office hours or fixed time slots, hence several of my messages around 2 in the morning, which for me is completely normal! (And bam! Another missed opportunity to stay silent... But that’s not a reason for you to get offended and only read the beginning of the next sentences, huh! ;))
Finally, I am not mis-targeting this, am I? This topic indeed concerns the actions of the AL in Grenoble!
The day in question:
- A volunteer informs me that he would return my check if the association cannot help me. (Here’s the "white")
- The legal advisors were unable to provide me with any additional information compared to what I already knew (but if there wasn’t any, I understand them, and they weren’t going to make anything up either)
The day after:
- Another volunteer tells me that the association does not refund checks (and here’s the "black")
- This same volunteer keeps cutting me off increasingly often, to prevent me from speaking and impose his point of view. What a lack of respect.
- This same volunteer even admits ("dares to admit" would be more accurate) that the volunteer from the previous day had no right to tell me what he said, but too bad for me, my check will help other people, even if the association cannot do anything for me. (Fine, and what about me in this story?)
If you accept and turn a blind eye when they're making a fool of you like this, it means you do not have much respect for yourself!
As for me, that’s not the case!
I therefore denounce this unacceptable attitude towards consumers who come seeking help and support, and who (like me) can also be treated like fools.
When I say that I am not going to make the same mistake a second time, it means that I'm going to look for another association for the same issue, since there is no reason why another association could provide me with complementary help, while UFC cannot. Or else, it would mean that the advice from UFC is highly questionable and leaves much to be desired! (In which case, that would further damage UFC!)
I do admit, however, that 8 months is a long time, but personal and professional obligations prevented me from taking care of this file more quickly. That doesn’t mean I handled it poorly! The proof is that the legal advisors from UFC themselves told me that I had taken all the right steps, and that the only thing left was to file a lawsuit, which I had to do on my own. (In short, apart from telling me: "Well done, you did everything correctly, now you must file a complaint, but we can do nothing for you," UFC hasn’t been of much help, meaning very little!) I now have more time to take care of this case, and I intend to see it through to the end!
With a lawsuit, Free will this time be obliged to account for itself.
My visit to UFC was to find out if there was anything else to do between the letters I had already sent to Free and the lawsuit. I’m also starting to get tired of repeating myself, it is something I have already stated:
“I decided to inquire with the UFC Que Choisir association in Grenoble to know if there were other actions (besides the ones I had already taken) to settle my disputes amicably, and to find out if the association 'accompanied' consumers in their legal process, should that prove necessary.” (Which clearly indicated that I intended to take such action if there was no "intermediate step" proposed by UFC!)
“I see from your message that stress is getting to you”
But who are you and how can you dare to judge that, knowing that you don’t even know me?! Just because someone has a legal case doesn’t mean it should ruin their life with stress!
So fine, conducting a legal case may not be everyone’s forte, nor is it something that one engages in every day, but we must keep things in perspective...
For my part, when I open the Free file, I focus on it, but when I close it, the file is closed and I move on to something else!
“...and the insomnia”
So we still don’t know each other, do we?! I already tend not to sleep much.
But I also want to point out that not everyone has office hours or fixed time slots, hence several of my messages around 2 in the morning, which for me is completely normal! (And bam! Another missed opportunity to stay silent... But that’s not a reason for you to get offended and only read the beginning of the next sentences, huh! ;))
Finally, I am not mis-targeting this, am I? This topic indeed concerns the actions of the AL in Grenoble!
The day in question:
- A volunteer informs me that he would return my check if the association cannot help me. (Here’s the "white")
- The legal advisors were unable to provide me with any additional information compared to what I already knew (but if there wasn’t any, I understand them, and they weren’t going to make anything up either)
The day after:
- Another volunteer tells me that the association does not refund checks (and here’s the "black")
- This same volunteer keeps cutting me off increasingly often, to prevent me from speaking and impose his point of view. What a lack of respect.
- This same volunteer even admits ("dares to admit" would be more accurate) that the volunteer from the previous day had no right to tell me what he said, but too bad for me, my check will help other people, even if the association cannot do anything for me. (Fine, and what about me in this story?)
If you accept and turn a blind eye when they're making a fool of you like this, it means you do not have much respect for yourself!
As for me, that’s not the case!
I therefore denounce this unacceptable attitude towards consumers who come seeking help and support, and who (like me) can also be treated like fools.
My troubles with UFC Que Choisir
Hello,
I am a student in Montpellier but my family is in Grenoble and members of UFC Que Choisir in Grenoble.
It seems that you are not familiar with the workings of UFC Que Choisir associations.
I became interested due to my parents' problems and my school curriculum.
Firstly, associations can only assist their members, hence the membership. This is indicated in several documents. The first step for a consumer, whether before or after visiting an association, is to send a registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt (a personal step from the consumer), because if the file ends up later at UFC, and then at court, the provider can claim that they were never contacted by their client (in my investigation, I found that this has happened before). My parents have had several disputes, two of which are very significant with FREE and VOGICA.
UFC has written at least three times by regular mail without being able to resolve the two issues amicably. As the two files were going to court, UFC helped my parents prepare the case. It is indeed UFC that might have sent the registered letters addressed to the providers to inform them of the judge's seizure, but it was my parents who paid for the registered mail (I believe Zorro is referring to this system; I would like him to give his opinion). In my investigation, I did not only focus on the AL in Grenoble.
Each AL, even if federated, has its own organization. Membership fees differ. In many ALs, you pay the membership fee to be heard (as in Grenoble), but afterwards, there are costs incurred by the consumer for each dispute (between €5 and €8, or even more for subsequent cases). I believe you misunderstood the idea that you would be refunded, and why not ask for the check when leaving... I am skeptical. I will repeat myself, but I think you misunderstood or that you pondered for 24 hours. Furthermore, you should know that the AL in Grenoble is one of the associations with the lowest membership fee.
What I find very surprising is that the FREE case was refused when you had taken the first steps (contacting FREE, sending a registered letter with AR, etc.). all ALs in France (and there are between 160 and 170 ALs) have at least one FREE case, and in Grenoble, there are many. Some have already been judged favorably, others will be (my parents' case) and more are coming to the Associations. Again, I am skeptical about the truthfulness of your statements. If someone from the Association could provide an answer, it would be interesting. I find this bizarre.
Even if you achieve satisfaction by going directly before the judge, it will be thanks to the work of UFC Que Choisir (including Grenoble), which has been fighting against this ISP for years (since 2003-2004).
In my investigation, I learned that Grenoble has about 3000 members (2848 in 2006, I do not know the number for 2007 and it has been growing each year, even if some members come only for their dispute and stay only one year). Many members join or rejoin without a dispute (this is often the case for volunteers), fortunately for the Associations, because a dispute costs more than a membership.
I believe that your story will not prevent consumers from rightly trusting these Associations by turning to them and allowing the people who work in these Associations to sleep soundly.
Acting for consumers requires energy and courage, and I commend them because what you describe is neither the method nor the functioning of these Associations, and especially that of Grenoble.
I will contact my parents to inform them.
Hello,
I am a student in Montpellier but my family is in Grenoble and members of UFC Que Choisir in Grenoble.
It seems that you are not familiar with the workings of UFC Que Choisir associations.
I became interested due to my parents' problems and my school curriculum.
Firstly, associations can only assist their members, hence the membership. This is indicated in several documents. The first step for a consumer, whether before or after visiting an association, is to send a registered letter with acknowledgment of receipt (a personal step from the consumer), because if the file ends up later at UFC, and then at court, the provider can claim that they were never contacted by their client (in my investigation, I found that this has happened before). My parents have had several disputes, two of which are very significant with FREE and VOGICA.
UFC has written at least three times by regular mail without being able to resolve the two issues amicably. As the two files were going to court, UFC helped my parents prepare the case. It is indeed UFC that might have sent the registered letters addressed to the providers to inform them of the judge's seizure, but it was my parents who paid for the registered mail (I believe Zorro is referring to this system; I would like him to give his opinion). In my investigation, I did not only focus on the AL in Grenoble.
Each AL, even if federated, has its own organization. Membership fees differ. In many ALs, you pay the membership fee to be heard (as in Grenoble), but afterwards, there are costs incurred by the consumer for each dispute (between €5 and €8, or even more for subsequent cases). I believe you misunderstood the idea that you would be refunded, and why not ask for the check when leaving... I am skeptical. I will repeat myself, but I think you misunderstood or that you pondered for 24 hours. Furthermore, you should know that the AL in Grenoble is one of the associations with the lowest membership fee.
What I find very surprising is that the FREE case was refused when you had taken the first steps (contacting FREE, sending a registered letter with AR, etc.). all ALs in France (and there are between 160 and 170 ALs) have at least one FREE case, and in Grenoble, there are many. Some have already been judged favorably, others will be (my parents' case) and more are coming to the Associations. Again, I am skeptical about the truthfulness of your statements. If someone from the Association could provide an answer, it would be interesting. I find this bizarre.
Even if you achieve satisfaction by going directly before the judge, it will be thanks to the work of UFC Que Choisir (including Grenoble), which has been fighting against this ISP for years (since 2003-2004).
In my investigation, I learned that Grenoble has about 3000 members (2848 in 2006, I do not know the number for 2007 and it has been growing each year, even if some members come only for their dispute and stay only one year). Many members join or rejoin without a dispute (this is often the case for volunteers), fortunately for the Associations, because a dispute costs more than a membership.
I believe that your story will not prevent consumers from rightly trusting these Associations by turning to them and allowing the people who work in these Associations to sleep soundly.
Acting for consumers requires energy and courage, and I commend them because what you describe is neither the method nor the functioning of these Associations, and especially that of Grenoble.
I will contact my parents to inform them.
Hello Business School Student
For my case, the dispute with Free is being handled directly by the lawyer from UFC-Que Choisir, who has taken on the risk of a possible condemnation for UFC in the first instance.
We are now at the appeal stage (an appeal by Free, which has been condemned in the various cases of the many members brought together to form a single case and relieve the Tribunal). The additional costs have been covered by the association (hence the necessity of membership). In any case, UFC is requesting that Free reimburse all incurred costs.
Have a good day
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
For my case, the dispute with Free is being handled directly by the lawyer from UFC-Que Choisir, who has taken on the risk of a possible condemnation for UFC in the first instance.
We are now at the appeal stage (an appeal by Free, which has been condemned in the various cases of the many members brought together to form a single case and relieve the Tribunal). The additional costs have been covered by the association (hence the necessity of membership). In any case, UFC is requesting that Free reimburse all incurred costs.
Have a good day
"An Azerty keyboard is worth two"
Zorro said:
"Hello Business School Student
In my case, the dispute with Free is handled directly by the lawyer from UFC-Que Choisir who has taken on the risk of a potential conviction of UFC in the first instance.
We are currently at the appeal stage (Free's appeal against the various cases of many members consolidated into one case to relieve the court). The ancillary costs have been covered by the association (hence the necessity of membership). In any case, UFC is requesting reimbursement from Free for all incurred expenses.
Have a great day!"
Thank you for this testimony!! Because UFC never told me or made me understand that the costs would be borne by the association if it intervened. (But that's normal, since anyway, UFC had no intention of intervening on my behalf!)
Why would certain members have more "privileges" than others?
And if the costs are systematically covered by UFC, why was I not informed of this?
Again, UFC's role in providing information and advice leaves much to be desired...
I wish you never lose your lucky star!
"Hello Business School Student
In my case, the dispute with Free is handled directly by the lawyer from UFC-Que Choisir who has taken on the risk of a potential conviction of UFC in the first instance.
We are currently at the appeal stage (Free's appeal against the various cases of many members consolidated into one case to relieve the court). The ancillary costs have been covered by the association (hence the necessity of membership). In any case, UFC is requesting reimbursement from Free for all incurred expenses.
Have a great day!"
Thank you for this testimony!! Because UFC never told me or made me understand that the costs would be borne by the association if it intervened. (But that's normal, since anyway, UFC had no intention of intervening on my behalf!)
Why would certain members have more "privileges" than others?
And if the costs are systematically covered by UFC, why was I not informed of this?
Again, UFC's role in providing information and advice leaves much to be desired...
I wish you never lose your lucky star!
Zorro said:
"There are no privileges; the UFC grouped cases with the same problem
And took on the corresponding costs for these cases, which has never been offered for mine!
So, privilege or not?! Why was I unable to benefit from the same "advantages" as other members?!
and defended the collective interest, the consumer's right. Measures have been requested to advance the law, for example on cancellation, waiting time...."
=> Off topic!
I never said otherwise, and that does not correspond to what I want to demonstrate here!
What I want to make clear is that within the same association, volunteers are not even on the same wavelength, and some can also say anything to consumers!
"There are no privileges; the UFC grouped cases with the same problem
And took on the corresponding costs for these cases, which has never been offered for mine!
So, privilege or not?! Why was I unable to benefit from the same "advantages" as other members?!
and defended the collective interest, the consumer's right. Measures have been requested to advance the law, for example on cancellation, waiting time...."
=> Off topic!
I never said otherwise, and that does not correspond to what I want to demonstrate here!
What I want to make clear is that within the same association, volunteers are not even on the same wavelength, and some can also say anything to consumers!
Hello PierreCastor,
it's true that to err is human, but personally, when I'm shown A+B that I've made a mistake, I do my utmost to fix it and not cause harm to others, whether it's an individual or a legal entity.
But you, how do you determine that a person is sufficiently competent and qualified to answer your questions?
Aside from asking the same question multiple times to different people and comparing the answers, I don't really see how.
What a hassle to get reliable information!
In this regard, it's better to consult a specialized lawyer, or there are free consultations available at certain town halls or at the lawyers' house.
Anyway, when you're not competent, you don't volunteer.
And in my case, I'm only talking about one person (although I'm learning here that the legal experts could have informed me much better than they did!), but who says this doesn't concern other people as well?
None of this would have happened if I hadn't been told nonsense.
it's true that to err is human, but personally, when I'm shown A+B that I've made a mistake, I do my utmost to fix it and not cause harm to others, whether it's an individual or a legal entity.
But you, how do you determine that a person is sufficiently competent and qualified to answer your questions?
Aside from asking the same question multiple times to different people and comparing the answers, I don't really see how.
What a hassle to get reliable information!
In this regard, it's better to consult a specialized lawyer, or there are free consultations available at certain town halls or at the lawyers' house.
Anyway, when you're not competent, you don't volunteer.
And in my case, I'm only talking about one person (although I'm learning here that the legal experts could have informed me much better than they did!), but who says this doesn't concern other people as well?
None of this would have happened if I hadn't been told nonsense.
Eny, you’re digging yourself in deeper.
I went to the UFC, and nothing happened as you say.
First of all, you mention the first name of the young man at the front desk while maintaining your anonymity; that’s completely inappropriate. Furthermore, this young man deserves credit for volunteering after having paid his membership fee and without any disputes.
He never said he would return the check to you. He is well aware of how the association operates, and that system doesn’t work that way. You are a liar. In fact, the next day you said: it's my word against his. It’s precisely him that we believe because, conveniently, he would have only mentioned it to one person, and guess what, that person is you!!! Ridiculous!
To the lawyer, you only talked about your bank issue. She told you that if you went to court, it would be at your own expense, as your dispute was an isolated case. So there’s no point in whining about "why are they taking care of them and not me?" Otherwise, I would reply because you are the ugly duckling, as they didn't like your face... It’s truly laughable.
As for the "FREE" file, you never spoke about it to the lawyer, only to the person who saw you the next day, specifying that it was for your aunt. The person then told you that if the file didn’t have the same name or address, your membership couldn’t apply. Second lie.
The next day when you came back to complain, there was a second volunteer and many people in the waiting room. This volunteer and others stated that it was you who was talking all the time; the first volunteer had a hard time explaining how the association works to you. You stormed out, and members in the waiting room called you "hysterical." Third lie.
It’s obvious that you will say everyone is lying and that you are the one telling the truth.
The UFC has dealt with a difficult person; even if it’s not often, it must happen sometimes, and the reputation of UFC Que Choisir is not tarnished because of it.
Now that the UFC has confirmed your lack of honesty, I will no longer visit this discussion forum.
That’s it.
I went to the UFC, and nothing happened as you say.
First of all, you mention the first name of the young man at the front desk while maintaining your anonymity; that’s completely inappropriate. Furthermore, this young man deserves credit for volunteering after having paid his membership fee and without any disputes.
He never said he would return the check to you. He is well aware of how the association operates, and that system doesn’t work that way. You are a liar. In fact, the next day you said: it's my word against his. It’s precisely him that we believe because, conveniently, he would have only mentioned it to one person, and guess what, that person is you!!! Ridiculous!
To the lawyer, you only talked about your bank issue. She told you that if you went to court, it would be at your own expense, as your dispute was an isolated case. So there’s no point in whining about "why are they taking care of them and not me?" Otherwise, I would reply because you are the ugly duckling, as they didn't like your face... It’s truly laughable.
As for the "FREE" file, you never spoke about it to the lawyer, only to the person who saw you the next day, specifying that it was for your aunt. The person then told you that if the file didn’t have the same name or address, your membership couldn’t apply. Second lie.
The next day when you came back to complain, there was a second volunteer and many people in the waiting room. This volunteer and others stated that it was you who was talking all the time; the first volunteer had a hard time explaining how the association works to you. You stormed out, and members in the waiting room called you "hysterical." Third lie.
It’s obvious that you will say everyone is lying and that you are the one telling the truth.
The UFC has dealt with a difficult person; even if it’s not often, it must happen sometimes, and the reputation of UFC Que Choisir is not tarnished because of it.
Now that the UFC has confirmed your lack of honesty, I will no longer visit this discussion forum.
That’s it.
OK, well I’ll go there too then, and we’ll see if the person at the reception has the guts to look me in the eye and say that she never said she would give me my check back!
Pathetic!
And I also talked about the Free case with the lawyer, but we weren’t in her office yet! ;)
Make sure to get better informed next time.
But I'm going to leave it at that as well, which won’t stop me from thinking and talking about this story to those around me, you can be sure of that!
Pathetic!
And I also talked about the Free case with the lawyer, but we weren’t in her office yet! ;)
Make sure to get better informed next time.
But I'm going to leave it at that as well, which won’t stop me from thinking and talking about this story to those around me, you can be sure of that!
Hello Eny,
The novel continues, and not in your favor.
You lied repeatedly, and you want to be credible in front of internet users. Stop right now because we are not fooled. You wanted, according to your statements, TO BRING DOWN THE ASSOCIATION, and it is you who has fallen. Talk about it around you; but know that intelligent people will know how to differentiate things.
I am also a member, by conviction. I acknowledge the work done. And many laws are evolving thanks to QUE CHOISIR. Moreover, FREE filed a complaint against the National President and the Publishing Director for defamation, and the people from UFC were acquitted. As a member, if you have chosen not to set foot in the Association again, even for information, it's your loss; the Association has plenty of work (you know, over 1000 disputes handled last year), user representations, letters to deputy officials to advance legislation, field surveys, etc. Just attend a general assembly to keep informed.
At one point, you say you recognize their work, but earlier you wanted to bring them down???
Now, about your €30; you had to be a member to meet the lawyer (because the association can only assist its members); even if she only confirmed that your initial steps were correct, she saw you, and the volunteer at the entrance couldn't tell you that he would return your check because the association is not a business, and the volunteer does not earn a commission for each membership. The person in charge who saw you the next day was right to respond as she did. As for me, I would not agree to pay a membership without having a dispute for it to serve people like you who come seeking information, even supplementary or confirmation, without joining. Nonsense!
Regarding the opposition to your check: no, we're not saying you don't have the right; but the bank would have told you. Unless you're telling another lie (stolen or lost check). With everything you've written, your bank won't be fooled. I suggest that internet users who think well of the association stop intervening and let you rant unless there's a blatant falsehood.
GOODBYE.
The novel continues, and not in your favor.
You lied repeatedly, and you want to be credible in front of internet users. Stop right now because we are not fooled. You wanted, according to your statements, TO BRING DOWN THE ASSOCIATION, and it is you who has fallen. Talk about it around you; but know that intelligent people will know how to differentiate things.
I am also a member, by conviction. I acknowledge the work done. And many laws are evolving thanks to QUE CHOISIR. Moreover, FREE filed a complaint against the National President and the Publishing Director for defamation, and the people from UFC were acquitted. As a member, if you have chosen not to set foot in the Association again, even for information, it's your loss; the Association has plenty of work (you know, over 1000 disputes handled last year), user representations, letters to deputy officials to advance legislation, field surveys, etc. Just attend a general assembly to keep informed.
At one point, you say you recognize their work, but earlier you wanted to bring them down???
Now, about your €30; you had to be a member to meet the lawyer (because the association can only assist its members); even if she only confirmed that your initial steps were correct, she saw you, and the volunteer at the entrance couldn't tell you that he would return your check because the association is not a business, and the volunteer does not earn a commission for each membership. The person in charge who saw you the next day was right to respond as she did. As for me, I would not agree to pay a membership without having a dispute for it to serve people like you who come seeking information, even supplementary or confirmation, without joining. Nonsense!
Regarding the opposition to your check: no, we're not saying you don't have the right; but the bank would have told you. Unless you're telling another lie (stolen or lost check). With everything you've written, your bank won't be fooled. I suggest that internet users who think well of the association stop intervening and let you rant unless there's a blatant falsehood.
GOODBYE.
Hello,
Indeed, I agree with Mulan; we have to keep bleating.
When you want to kill your dog, you say it has rabies. It becomes clear that Eny has not discussed the FREE case with the lawyer and claims to have done so before entering the office: laughable; he starts the conversation before entering the office and, as if by chance, brings up his aunt's case who is not a member; implausible. I am the father of the student from Montpellier and thanks to UFC, we were recently reimbursed by VOGICA for a very significant amount, as for FREE, we are still waiting. Stop saying, "why not me?" It's just that UFC doesn't have a magic wand; so saying the next day, they promised to reimburse me... Give me a break, but not to us who have been members for many years (my wife and I each have our membership card, because we believe that with its actions, this association is worth it). Additionally, we subscribe to the "QUE CHOISIR" magazine.
Regarding the check opposition, Mulan is right; the bank would have refused to consider it; you wrote your check voluntarily, it was not a security deposit, and still, the bank could not make an opposition (I know what I'm talking about, I worked in a bank). There was either amicable UFC (and yes, we're back to that), or justice.
A BLESSED ONE, who doesn't say, "why did they take care of our cases and not theirs"? Because we know the answer; UFC takes very good care of its members, but you shouldn't ask it to do the impossible. So, keep bleating, you’ll be doing it in vain.
I have responded, now I am following Mulan's advice, I am withdrawing from this forum.
Indeed, I agree with Mulan; we have to keep bleating.
When you want to kill your dog, you say it has rabies. It becomes clear that Eny has not discussed the FREE case with the lawyer and claims to have done so before entering the office: laughable; he starts the conversation before entering the office and, as if by chance, brings up his aunt's case who is not a member; implausible. I am the father of the student from Montpellier and thanks to UFC, we were recently reimbursed by VOGICA for a very significant amount, as for FREE, we are still waiting. Stop saying, "why not me?" It's just that UFC doesn't have a magic wand; so saying the next day, they promised to reimburse me... Give me a break, but not to us who have been members for many years (my wife and I each have our membership card, because we believe that with its actions, this association is worth it). Additionally, we subscribe to the "QUE CHOISIR" magazine.
Regarding the check opposition, Mulan is right; the bank would have refused to consider it; you wrote your check voluntarily, it was not a security deposit, and still, the bank could not make an opposition (I know what I'm talking about, I worked in a bank). There was either amicable UFC (and yes, we're back to that), or justice.
A BLESSED ONE, who doesn't say, "why did they take care of our cases and not theirs"? Because we know the answer; UFC takes very good care of its members, but you shouldn't ask it to do the impossible. So, keep bleating, you’ll be doing it in vain.
I have responded, now I am following Mulan's advice, I am withdrawing from this forum.
Good evening Eny,
I have just discovered the forum and the exchanges of messages between you and the UFC Que Choisir association. These date back to June, but I would like to share a few remarks myself.
It can be said that some comments seem excessive, but after all, they are normal reactions. I do not completely approve of everything you said, but I must admit that I felt a certain similarity with what I experienced after my first meeting with a "jurist" from my regional association.
Having contacted the association by phone, I accepted an appointment for Tuesday, September 23, 2008, at 10 a.m., forcing my husband and me to cancel a trip 400 km from our home. Like you, we were given documents at the reception for membership (I had been notified). However, I must admit that I found it a bit "cavalier" that the person at the reception came to take the membership fee check while I had not finished filling out the other documents that I was reading. If we came to the association, it was because we had troubles!... (and not minor ones), we were not going to be taken in again by signing papers... without reading them...
In short, after a short wait, we were received by a young jurist to whom I handed a well-structured file that had taken me hours to prepare. She said to us, "Okay, I'm listening." And there I was, telling my story, while I had typed a very detailed 5-page report, accompanied by all supporting documents sorted chronologically. She didn't even open the file. Surprised by her almost indifference, I asked her what needed to be done. "We are waiting for their response to your registered letter; you did well to send a letter, we'll see, but you have little chance of getting satisfaction. We know their sales methods and you signed an order form... So, the only option left will be legal action, the association is not authorized but we can advise you!"!!! ...
I want to specify that this concerns a dispute with VOGICA it's well-known throughout France, there are hundreds and hundreds of messages on various forums. It is thanks to these forums that I discovered the Que Choisir association. I admit I deeply regret having contacted them because I really wasted my time, and after the meeting, my husband and I wondered what we had come for!
I should mention that I contacted the Fraud Prevention Service (I submitted exactly the same file). I was contacted by phone and then received by an advisor who took the trouble to read the report. He made annotations referring to precise texts (law on withdrawal, aggressive sales methods, abuse of weakness, intent to deceive...), etc... with photocopies. It is a very competent and entirely free service.” I also contacted the legal service (to whom I submitted the same file) of my insurance (free service) which, if it comes to trial, covers part of the lawyer's fees.
Here is my testimony.
We still have not received a response to our registered letter. We have just filed a complaint with the Tribunal de Grande Instance. The case is ongoing.
We must not generalize all the remarks that can be made; fortunately, there are competent and serious people who strive to provide satisfaction. But there are also, unfortunately, incompetent and sometimes irresponsible individuals who can provide erroneous information leading to understandable reactions of annoyance, especially when faced with often stressful and distressing disputes.
I have just discovered the forum and the exchanges of messages between you and the UFC Que Choisir association. These date back to June, but I would like to share a few remarks myself.
It can be said that some comments seem excessive, but after all, they are normal reactions. I do not completely approve of everything you said, but I must admit that I felt a certain similarity with what I experienced after my first meeting with a "jurist" from my regional association.
Having contacted the association by phone, I accepted an appointment for Tuesday, September 23, 2008, at 10 a.m., forcing my husband and me to cancel a trip 400 km from our home. Like you, we were given documents at the reception for membership (I had been notified). However, I must admit that I found it a bit "cavalier" that the person at the reception came to take the membership fee check while I had not finished filling out the other documents that I was reading. If we came to the association, it was because we had troubles!... (and not minor ones), we were not going to be taken in again by signing papers... without reading them...
In short, after a short wait, we were received by a young jurist to whom I handed a well-structured file that had taken me hours to prepare. She said to us, "Okay, I'm listening." And there I was, telling my story, while I had typed a very detailed 5-page report, accompanied by all supporting documents sorted chronologically. She didn't even open the file. Surprised by her almost indifference, I asked her what needed to be done. "We are waiting for their response to your registered letter; you did well to send a letter, we'll see, but you have little chance of getting satisfaction. We know their sales methods and you signed an order form... So, the only option left will be legal action, the association is not authorized but we can advise you!"!!! ...
I want to specify that this concerns a dispute with VOGICA it's well-known throughout France, there are hundreds and hundreds of messages on various forums. It is thanks to these forums that I discovered the Que Choisir association. I admit I deeply regret having contacted them because I really wasted my time, and after the meeting, my husband and I wondered what we had come for!
I should mention that I contacted the Fraud Prevention Service (I submitted exactly the same file). I was contacted by phone and then received by an advisor who took the trouble to read the report. He made annotations referring to precise texts (law on withdrawal, aggressive sales methods, abuse of weakness, intent to deceive...), etc... with photocopies. It is a very competent and entirely free service.” I also contacted the legal service (to whom I submitted the same file) of my insurance (free service) which, if it comes to trial, covers part of the lawyer's fees.
Here is my testimony.
We still have not received a response to our registered letter. We have just filed a complaint with the Tribunal de Grande Instance. The case is ongoing.
We must not generalize all the remarks that can be made; fortunately, there are competent and serious people who strive to provide satisfaction. But there are also, unfortunately, incompetent and sometimes irresponsible individuals who can provide erroneous information leading to understandable reactions of annoyance, especially when faced with often stressful and distressing disputes.
- 1
- 2
Suivant
I too have been misled by UFC from another department...
I propose that all the individuals disappointed by these associations, which only get involved if they wish for a good publicity stunt (!!) and forget that there is joint representation in court (!!), testify to INC (60 million consumers): https://www.inc-conso.fr/
UFC presents itself as follows (excerpt): "Legal action
Access to justice is a right for all citizens. The local support provided by local UFC-Que Choisir associations to their members can extend to legal action. This right has been exercised by UFC-Que Choisir since 1976 before all jurisdictions, criminal, civil, or administrative."
So why, when it comes to consumer law problems, are they so sluggish? => it would be a question of false advertising for a standard supplier!!!
The response I received from Paris is that these are volunteers who handle the cases and that membership does not grant any rights or "services". So why don’t they simply say it before one becomes a member? In other words, volunteers: there is nothing to expect, so move along.
From time to time, a "publicity stunt" operation through a legal action to polish their image! And soon after, they quickly forget the decision rendered! At the same time, recurring problems shouldn’t be resolved too easily. Otherwise, how could they justify the need for the association and collect subsidies (our taxes)? How could they collect membership fees?
As for me, I regret having got to know them, and knowing many people with consumer disputes, I will know whom not to recommend!