Building A Case

I feel it is about time I told you a little bit about my life with Paul.

As you know Paul lives in a little corner of Edinburgh that was once quiet and pleasant with lovely neighbours and stunning views of our fair city - from the rolling hills of the Pentlands, to the castle, Arthurs Seat, the coast, and yes, we could even see the Kingdom of Fife on a good day.

We planned that I would move in with Paul, and rent my home. We could use the money we saved to fix up the flat, Paul had not long bought the place and it needed doing up. Then Dunedin Canmore came along and our hopes and dreams came to nothing.

Paul’s street became a building site, the noise, dust and dirt was relentless. Pauls peaceful neighbourhood quickly became (please excuse my language here but this is the most accurate description that I can think of) a shit hole!

No problem, Paul could move in with me and we could rent his flat. Except who would choose to pay to live in a shit hole? Even if we could find someone who didn’t mind the construction work, or the vibrations throughout when the concrete balconies were being ripped from the building, or the power cuts or any of the rest of the hell, we would not be allowed to rent to them (as per the conditions of our financial package for the works being done).

No problem, sell up and get the hell out of there. Nope, we can’t do that either. Who would buy a property under such circumstances? And besides Dunedin Canmore have put a ‘note of potential liability’ onto Paul's title deeds.

So here we are living in two separate homes, paying two separate mortgages, a life in limbo at the mercy of Dunedin Canmore. But maybe I’m being unreasonable. Maybe I’m getting carried away with my own rhetoric. Maybe Paul doesn’t really live in a shit hole and I’m a drama queen who should just shut up and move in already.

Why don’t you decide the truth of the mater? I made a wee film earlier this week (see if you can see anything of the wonderful view I was talking about earlier)

INFORMATION UPDATE: In the interest of fairness I would like to inform my blog readers that our white UHT water had started to clear by Monday. That said I still wouldn't give it to the dog.

Murky Waters

Sorry I've not updated my blog for a while but I have been dealing with The Great Darkness (aka Dunedin Canmore).

I’ve sent oodles of emails, I made many good points -woo-hoo! Oh, that reminds me do any of you blog readers know how to remove brick imprints from your forehead? I could always grow my fringe, actually thinking about it that's the best idea (a fringe would cushion my head next time I have to bash it against The Darkness’s wall).

As a result I have given up! Not the fight but the merry go round of emails, preferring instead to focus on my blog.

Another Day In Hell

We recon the water had been turned off again. Paul and I think this cause Friday evening I went to fill the dogs water bowl, turning on the water caused the tap to rock in its fixture as water jetted forth knocking the bowl out my hand and making me and Paul jump three feet into the air. I quickly turned the tap off.

“What the hell was that?”

“The waters probably just been turned back on. It does that when it’s been off.” Paul said calmly, years of living on a building site appear to have broken his spirit.

Wee bailey was looking at me all thirsty like so I gave it another go. This time the tap behaves and we got water. White water. It was like milk, not the creamy blue milk that you can buy, no, more your watery UHT milk but milk all the same. We watched Bailey's bowl as the water started to settle to a more watery colour. It took about 5 minutes but we eventually got good clear water, we could see it just below the white surface scum and above the chalky silt that had dropped to the bottom.

Needless to say no way was I giving that to The Bailster – we took water from the kettle and bought bottled water to cover us over the weekend.

Sorry the post is so short, I promise to do better tomorrow.

Shouting Louder

I've just sent Dunedin this email:

Hi

Sorry to bother you again but it appears my Google review has been blocked, go figure!?

I have rectified this problem by placing the information onto some user review web sites. I'm sorry I had to do this cause the review web sites, in my opinion, are way worse than the Google reviews in that search engines list the reviews when performing user queries (translation: this review will appear on page one of any search for 'Dunedin Canmore'). Don't worry too much though cause it usually takes a couple of weeks for a search engine to log this new information - plenty time for you to point out any mistakes I may have made.

I wait with baited breath for you to acknowledge my existence, hopefully before this whole stupid situation escalates to Facebook, Twitter and beyond (it's amazing the lengths people will go to to have their genuine complaints dealt with).

Jen

UPDATE: the above review went live about an hour ago and I have already received confirmation from other users that I am not the only one to have suffered at the hands of this organisation.

WOW! I didn't think they were good at anything but they appear to be really good at being horrible.

Silencing The Little People

Frustrated at being ignored I posted a review of Dunedin Canmore using my Google+ account. I then sent Dunedin the following email:

Dear

In the interest of fairness I am sending you a copy of my Google review of your organisation.

Please feel free to let me know if I have made any incorrect statements, and provide evidence in support of your case.

I will honestly review all information received from you regarding this matter as it is my intention to provide the public with as accurate an account of Mr Kings experience with your organisation as possible.

I look forward to hearing from you on this matter.

Kind regards

Jen

Within a very short time of sending this email my review disappeared from Google - I can only assume it was blocked. If only they were this efficient when dealing with customers.

Dunedin Canmore: Unprofessional and Ignorant

I've still not heard back from Dunedin Canmore regarding my earlier email requesting they respond to my complaint and address points raised.

They haven't even acknowledged receipt of my email.

Of course I'm not surprised and neither should anyone reading this.

After contacting their ombudsman I thought it best to once again bash my head against the brick wall and send them another email:

Dear

According to your Customer Complaints Procedure Policy you are obliged to "acknowledge receipt of [my stage two] complaint within three working days". Yet again you have failed to comply to your own policy.

I feel this is an appropriate time to resubmit a comment taken from an email I sent you on the 10th October 2012:

"I have had considerable experience dealing with your organisation and can honestly say that I am not surprised at your inability to provide an adequate response within the time frame provided."

I have contacted the SPSO for information on how best to proceed. Following their direct advice, and while I wait for them to send me further information regarding this matter, I am submitting this email to you in the hope that you decide to treat this issue with the professionalism and decency that your own policy demands.

Regards

Jen

Stage Two

I have written to Dunedin The-Great-Darkness Canmore pointing out that since they never addressed any of the points raised in any of my emails about my original complaint that it would probably be best they progress my complaint to Stage Two of their complaints procedure.

Before I show you what I wrote to them I would like you to take another look at the before and after pictures of Mr Kings street.

Before Dunedin. Before factoring charges. Before the £20K bill sent to all home owners

After Dunedin. After factoring charges. After £20K bill sent to all home owners

I would like the good readers of this blog to answer a wee question - which version of this street would you rather live in?

Here's what I wrote:

Dear

As you are unable to respond to my original complaint/questions/request for information, I am forced to request that the following issues are addressed by 'stage two' of your complaints procedure.

The following have been directly cut and pasted from my original emails and represents issues raised by me (the only issues raised by me) that were ignored by you:

Original complaint and request for information  sent 9^th October 2012

I would like you to provide me with all data you have that shows Mr King is liable for this expense. If you cannot prove that Mr King is legally obliged to pay factoring costs then I would like you to confirm that his details will be removed from your database and that he will no longer receive letters from your organisation regarding this matter. If you are unable to perform either one of these simple tasks then I would like you to provide me with a full explanation why.

A rewording of my original complaint and request for information sent 11^th October 2012

• Evidence that Mr King is legally obliged to pay the factoring costs - the fact that you are sending him bills and demands shows that you believe he is liable for this payment and I would like to see the legal documents that confirm this. 
• If you have no legal documents or know of no legal precedence that states Mr King is liable for this payment then I want you to confirm that his details will be removed from your files as you have no right to send him letters demanding payment

Further rewording of my original complaint and request for information sent 12^th October 2012

Confirm to me that Mr King is liable to pay your factoring costs.

Provide the paperwork that shows this is the case or admit you are sending Mr King statements and final demands for a bill that he is not liable for.

Further rewording of my complaint (you can see I’ve given up on the evidence part cause this getting information from you is soooooooo bloody hard that I'm reduced to breaking things down to their simplest components) sent 19^th October 2012 (over three hours ago, a five year old child can cut and paste a piece of text in this time)

Provided below are two statements, statement number one and statement number two. I would like you to choose which statement is legally correct. Hover your mouse over the statement that you have selected and pressing the left mouse button drag your cursor over that statement, this will highlight your selection. Now, right click the mouse while the cursor is hovering over the correct statement that you have chosen and select 'copy' from the drop down menu that appears. Open a new email, right click your mouse in the empty email and select 'paste' from the drop down menu. Then address this email to me and hit send.

And your choices are:

    1. Yes, Mr King is legally obliged to pay Dunedin Canmore's factoring charges

    2. No, Mr King is not legally obliged to pay Dunedin Camore's factoring charges

---------------

I look forward to eventually hearing from you.

Kind regards

Jen



When's An Answer Not An Answer?

When it's provided by Dunedin Canmore.

Boom, boom!

Do you get the joke?

The joke is me, it's Mr King, it's every other poor sod that is being hounded by Dunedin The-Great-Darkness Canmore.

They emailed a reply to my complaint. In the brief moment it took my laptop to open the email and it's attached document I allowed myself to believe that it was finally over, finally we would know if the bills and threatening letters that they sent were valid and legal.

Taking all things into account my response was remarkably restraint:

Good morning

That was a very lovely, eloquently put letter and I can see how it would take you 'five working days' to produce.

Your definition of factoring fees was masterful. Your story of Dunedin taking over a run down area of Edinburgh and investing in it's beauty reminded me of Shrek - you know the bit where Prince Farquaad took Shreks swamp and was going to improve it but that damned Ogre was just an unsophisticated monster who knew nothing. Here's a thought, maybe there's a princess in a tower that Mr King could save for you in exchange for his swamp.

Unfortunately, while I do appreciate the beauty of your letter, I can't for the life of me see the part of this letter that responds to my original points:  

• Evidence that Mr King is legally obliged to pay the factoring costs - the fact that you are sending him bills and demands shows that you believe he is liable for this payment and I would like to see the legal documents that confirm this. 
• If you have no legal documents or know of no legal precedence that states Mr King is liable for this payment then I want you to confirm that his details will be removed from your files as you have no right to send him letters demanding payment

Maybe you could help me out with this one. Maybe, out of the goodness of your heart, you could highlight the part of the letter that responds to the above questions that I have repeatedly asked and then send it back to me.

Oh, oh I have a better idea! This is a beauty and wont take you five minutes but it does come with instructions so bear with me.

Instructions:
Provided below are two statements, statement number one and statement number two. I would like you to choose which statement is legally correct. Hover your mouse over the statement that you have selected and pressing the left mouse button drag your cursor over that statement, this will highlight your selection. Now, right click the mouse while the cursor is hovering over the correct statement that you have chosen and select 'copy' from the drop down menu that appears. Open a new email, right click your mouse in the empty email and select 'paste' from the drop down menu. Then address this email to me and hit send.

And your choices are:

    1. Yes, Mr King is legally obliged to pay Dunedin Canmore's factoring charges

    2. No, Mr King is not legally obliged to pay Dunedin Camore's factoring charges

 

I look forward to hearing from you.

If I don't hear from you then I will look into alternative means of resolving this issue.

Kind regards

Jen