On 08/10/2019 14:45, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Tue, 08 Oct 2019 14:26:31 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 08/10/2019 14:22, Peter Parry wrote:
On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 09:14:28 -0000 (UTC), Jethro_uk
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Oct 2019 09:35:37 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Should I insist that they fix it?

This is one aspect of UK consumer law that is total and utter ********
(IMHO). The clowns have ****ed up once. Why on earth are you
*required*
to have any faith in them thereafter ?

It is because the EU puts a premium on "keeping the contract alive" and
inserted the requirement that the company providing an inadequate
service be allowed to fix it. (Consumer Rights Act 2015 S49 to 55.)

So I should write again reminding them that they have not advanced any
proposals to fix it and warning them that if they fail to respond I will
have no recourse but court?

Ignoring the previous non-reply, you can try. However, even if they
ignore you, and you get as far as a court issuing a summons, they can
still apply to have it put aside on the grounds "they missed it". At
which point a court will suspend any action to give them a chance to
respond.

I know that much, because we had a customer skip without paying (long
story) and they ignored all letters, and we got judgement by default. But
the magistrate commented that they could have applied to have the
judgement set aside on those grounds. (They didn't but then neither did
we see the money ....)

Send the letter as a signed for delivery and they can't claim to have
not received it.

Funny isn't it, if you are sent a letter demanding payment by a utility
company, bank or credit card company and threatening court action, you
are DEEMED to have received it, without any proof.

SteveW