MULTIMAX'S CATCH 22 REFUND POLICY

[Ragged Robin]

Just to add that I am extremely grateful to wnd for raising this question on this Board. Had he not done so , I could have been in the same position as he is but (not knowing him or his private affairs) in a far less able position to deal with it. I thought this was a large part of the value of a forum like thi that people could ask others for help, share their problems and warn others of potential pitfalls. Not everyone may have my walking probems - in fact I am a lot more fortunate than many - but there are other reasons why people, particularly elderly expats, cannot personally collect cheques from MM offices. Are MM taking action to let others who may have signed up with them relying on the guarantee of the conditions that they place on cancellation of the contract.?

I am surprised that there is no connection between Multimax and Kibkom as that is not the impression I get - sacred cows again!

NB To avoid misunderstanding I am not commenting on the time needed by Multimax - I have insufficient knowledge in this field (although I think they should be solving their own problems, not expecting their customers to do it for them) but on the question of contract conditions, which I do know about.

Waddo: I accept your apology. I thought I had mentioned my disability : I dont really like having to make a thing about it, but I did say I intended to raise the matter on another thread rather than take this off thread. I will do that asap - currently as well as my own health problems I have a lame dog to cope with and all this is taking too long!

I note that MM have not responded to the question of accessibility of their offices - nor the point I keep making about a go ahead modern company actually providing internet access, being unable to do an electronic transfer! It continues to mystify me , and annoy me since I do not really like dealing by internet but had to spend money and time I could ill afford because it became inevitable.

[kbasat]

I note that MM have not responded to the question of accessibility of their offices - nor the point I keep making about a go ahead modern company actually providing internet access, being unable to do an electronic transfer! It continues to mystify me , and annoy me since I do not really like dealing by internet but had to spend money and time I could ill afford because it became inevitable.

Central Bank of North Cyprus does not allow interbank transfers if the amount is less than 7000TL. And this has been mentioned before, what part of this is mystifying to you? Maybe you should open a new thread and start complaining about how weak and outdated the banking system is in NC, and we will happily join in.

[kbasat]

Not too many people requests refund from MM, but there are a few and most of them are cancelling because they are actually moving to outside of MM coverage area. Do you know how many of those we had problems with coming to an amicable cancellation terms? Just ONE

You are entitled to a refund unconditionally, and your cancellation of service application was accepted and your entitlement to a refund was indeed granted unconditionally.

I assume nowhere in the world this 'unconditional money back guarantee' entitles the customer to stick their nose into inner workings and procedures of the supplying company and have that customer determine how the refund is processed.

You are trying to do just that, and we did go 'above and beyond' as we put you up to a priority position even if you are a leaving customer, promised a turnaround time of 1 week even though the procedures normally takes 2-3 weeks depending on the company workload.

I have spoken to the legal department about partial refund and the answer is this: With MM, there is only one contract and it is when you sign up with us, all subsequent payments are simply renewals. Emphasizing that MM does not force customers to renew before their time is up. MM is NOT a bank, where you get to deposit and withdraw money out of as you please.

All cancellation requests are granted unconditionally no questions asked, and THEN processed PROPERLY!

from MM perpective, you already got 2 very viable options:
1) Cancel 1 week before your departure and MM will prioritize your case so that all work is processed in this time, instead of the usual 2-3 weeks
2) POA

[PoshinDevon]

Just to add that I am extremely grateful to wnd for raising this question on this Board. Had he not done so , I could have been in the same position as he is but (not knowing him or his private affairs) in a far less able position to deal with it. I thought this was a large part of the value of a forum like thi that people could ask others for help, share their problems and warn others of potential pitfalls. Not everyone may have my walking probems - in fact I am a lot more fortunate than many - but there are other reasons why people, particularly elderly expats, cannot personally collect cheques from MM offices. Are MM taking action to let others who may have signed up with them relying on the guarantee of the conditions that they place on cancellation of the contract.?

I believe it has been mentioned in this thread that in extreme circumstances i.e. If someone was disabled or not physically able to collect the cheque, arrangements could be arranged to deliver the cheque to the named person on a mutually agreed date and time

I am surprised that there is no connection between Multimax and Kibkom as that is not the impression I get - sacred cows again!

Soner has already answered this, so unsure why it has been raised again.

NB To avoid misunderstanding I am not commenting on the time needed by Multimax - I have insufficient knowledge in this field (although I think they should be solving their own problems, not expecting their customers to do it for them) but on the question of contract conditions, which I do know about.

My experience of working for many years in the service sector have made me understand that a contract is a necessary document pulled together and agreed between the parties signed up to it. However; and this is not to take away the contractual liability of any company, when it comes to actually delivering and administering a service there are many ways to interpret the contract to ensure it works for both parties. In my experience if we are at the stage of quoting contract terms and conditions then its very difficult to recover from and work together on a mutually agreeable compromise

Waddo: I accept your apology. I thought I had mentioned my disability : I dont really like having to make a thing about it, but I did say I intended to raise the matter on another thread rather than take this off thread. I will do that asap - currently as well as my own health problems I have a lame dog to cope with and all this is taking too long!

I note that MM have not responded to the question of accessibility of their offices - nor the point I keep making about a go ahead modern company actually providing internet access, being unable to do an electronic transfer! It continues to mystify me , and annoy me since I do not really like dealing by internet but had to spend money and time I could ill afford because it became inevitable.

Office accessibility is probably for another topic - there are many companies/organisations in North Cyprus whose offices are probably not that accessible. Not something that will change soon. As regards internet access, Erol has suggested a number of options and compromises to try and help the customer. Pretty sure the question re electronic transfers and rules around this have been covered off earlier in the topic

[erol]

The way I understand the situation is WND are not looking for a “win at all costs” solution to all this. I think various attempts have been suggested but met with no action. I do feel for Erol in his position as a go between and would have thought someone from MM in authority would have got involved (off board) to shut this damaging issue down .
I think the refund of a pre paid portion of the service not yet even started is perfectly reasonable in my eyes and why this should have to be put to a “legal dept” baffles me….surely a 100% refund for any unused portion of the service means just that?. And then sort out the remainder of the existing contract as a separate item.
The bottom line here is a refund of 1299tl about £270 it’s not a major amount of money considering the amount of damage this may be doing to MM
JMO…

Turtle I do appreciate you trying to help here. The issue with a refund only for the future contract or contract extension is that the refund policy even as it is stated on the website is for 'customer who wish to cancel their service'. What we are talking about here is a customer who wishes to cancel a future contract / contract extension whilst keeping the current contract and service active. This is something that has never arisen before and I just do not have the authority within MM to make a determination on if this, hence the referral to management. The whole concept behind the refund offer was that customer who are not happy with our service do not feel and are not locked in because they may have paid in advance.

This really is not about the money per se. There is an issue here about precedent. I do not want customers to think or believe of be under the impression that they can have MM service up to the very day they leave the island at least until, and if indeed such is possible at all, we can first design a workable procedure for that that does not in turn mean giving more priority to such leaving customer than we are able to give to existing customers or new customers. I also have concerns here about creating an impression and idea that any time our standard procedures are not to a customers liking they can get those change merely by applying pressure on kibkom and though me personally, Bringing the issue to the Kibkom forums at such speed has not helped in this regard.

I do appreciate that WND is willing to compromise on some things, like not worrying about a refund for the existing contract only the future one / extension. However it is on this core 'desire' to both have access up till the very last day they are on the island and to also be able to get a refund and this is the very thing on which they apparently will not compromise on.

[erol]

By the way we were dismissed from your office, we rather got the impression, maybe wrongly, that no-one would contact us.

That aside, please read the addition to my last post.

MM generically and myself personally take such matters extremely seriously, as we also do re the claim that 'we did not get back to you'. Hence I have been compelled to review how you were treated when you came to the office to investigate the claim that "By the way we were dismissed from your office, we rather got the impression, maybe wrongly, that no-one would contact us."

Of course such things are subjective but on reviewing the video footage of your visit to the office I really can not agree that you were 'dismissed' or that we gave any reason for you to imagine that we would not get back to you in due course. As to the person being 'embarrassed' that is even more of a subjective call but I would describe them as apologetic that our procedures created these problems for you rather than embarrassed.

What is also apparent from having reviewed you visit is that you did in fact ask if instead of cancelling the policy you could transfer it to a third party and you were told that yes you could do this.

Finally what is also apparent from reviewing your visit is that at one stage one of you says to the other 'we should go the manager' to which the other replies 'how do we do that ?' and the first person replies 'I don't know , go on kibkom ?'

It is of course a customers choice as to if they want to take any issues they have with MM 'public' via forums like kibkom but the reality is choosing to do so before we have even had a reasonable chance to try and resolve the issue amicably in private can make it harder to resolve the issue and that is the point I wish to make in this regard.

[erol]

Just to add that I am extremely grateful to wnd for raising this question on this Board. Had he not done so , I could have been in the same position as he is but (not knowing him or his private affairs) in a far less able position to deal with it.

Hopefully it is now clear to you and people in general that an expectation that you can have MM internet access up to the day you leave the island as well as claiming a refund for any unused portion of your contract after that is not an expectation that MM is currently able to meet and may not ever be able to meet. If it is the case that you now are aware of this then for that I too am grateful to WND. What exactly you can do with this clearer understanding is less clear to me given that no other ISP here that I know provides this facility but regardless the increased clarity is still welcome.

[turtle]

Ooops Erol...

[Ragged Robin]

I note that MM have not responded to the question of accessibility of their offices - nor the point I keep making about a go ahead modern company actually providing internet access, being unable to do an electronic transfer! It continues to mystify me , and annoy me since I do not really like dealing by internet but had to spend money and time I could ill afford because it became inevitable.

Central Bank of North Cyprus does not allow interbank transfers if the amount is less than 7000TL. And this has been mentioned before, what part of this is mystifying to you? Maye you should open a new thread and start complaining about how weak and outdated the banking system is in NC, and we will happily join in.

Please see my post No.68 and the separate thread "Bank Transfers within the TRNC"

It seems you may be a little out of date???!!!!

I agree there is a lot wrong with the TRNC Banking System (also with the UK one and the World Financial market) but I think the TRNC banking system is more likely to take notice of a large and successful company than of an old, disabled and impoverished expat! not to mention you have rather better facilities.

[Ragged Robin]

Just to add that I am extremely grateful to wnd for raising this question on this Board. Had he not done so , I could have been in the same position as he is but (not knowing him or his private affairs) in a far less able position to deal with it. I thought this was a large part of the value of a forum like this that people could ask others for help, share their problems and warn others of potential pitfalls. Not everyone may have my walking problems - in fact I am a lot more fortunate than many - but there are other reasons why people, particularly elderly expats, cannot personally collect cheques from MM offices. Are MM taking action to let others who may have signed up with them relying on the guarantee of the conditions that they place on cancellation of the contract.?

I believe it has been mentioned in this thread that in extreme circumstances i.e. If someone was disabled or not physically able to collect the cheque, arrangements could be arranged to deliver the cheque to the named person on a mutually agreed date and time

Yes I am sorry I missed Erol's comment on this , it was in the middle of a long post on an evening when my internet connection was intermittant! I will start a separate thread when I get the chance. I still await an answer to what happens to those relying on the guarantee who do not read this forum

I am surprised that there is no connection between Multimax and Kibkom as that is not the impression I get - sacred cows again!

Soner has already answered this, so unsure why it has been raised again.

Sonar said tht MM did not advertise on the forum. I still cannot understood why the need for management and mods to rush to their defence/

NB To avoid misunderstanding I am not commenting on the time needed by Multimax - I have insufficient knowledge in this field (although I think they should be solving their own problems, not expecting their customers to do it for them) but on the question of contract conditions, which I do know about.

My experience of working for many years in the service sector have made me understand that a contract is a necessary document pulled together and agreed between the parties signed up to it. However; and this is not to take away the contractual liability of any company, when it comes to actually delivering and administering a service there are many ways to interpret the contract to ensure it works for both parties. In my experience if we are at the stage of quoting contract terms and conditions then its very difficult to recover from and work together on a mutually agreeable compromise

I have no intention or boasting about my experience with contracts on this forum... If you really need my credentials send me a pm and I will arrange todiscuss them and contract conditions. Suffice it that in my long experience of contracts I have usually found that most problems arise from ambigous drafting of the contract which is imho the case here - and be reminded that ambiguities are legally interpreted again the party with the most "clout" - in this case MM.



Waddo: I accept your apology. I thought I had mentioned my disability : I dont really like having to make a thing about it, but I did say I intended to raise the matter on another thread rather than take this off thread. I will do that asap - currently as well as my own health problems I have a lame dog to cope with and all this is taking too long!

I note that MM have not responded to the question of accessibility of their offices - nor the point I keep making about a go ahead modern company actually providing internet access, being unable to do an electronic transfer! It continues to mystify me , and annoy me since I do not really like dealing by internet but had to spend money and time I could ill afford because it became inevitable.

Office accessibility is probably for another topic - there are many companies/organisations in North Cyprus whose offices are probably not that accessible. Not something that will change soon. As regards internet access, Erol has suggested a number of options and compromises to try and help the customer. Pretty sure the question re electronic transfers and rules around this have been covered off earlier in the topic

]]
Agreed new topic. Re internet access please see my earlier reply re internet access

[WotNoDeeds]

Soner wrote

WND - keep calm, do not stress, if told that their Legal Dept are looking into your case, then I am confident all should end well. Just give them some time. It does not help making public problems/misunderstandings caused due to conflicting interpretation of contractual wording, give them a chance to rectify any issues before attempting to damage their business.

Soner, it was never our intention to" damage" Multimax's business, only to secure a refund to which we are legally entitled. We felt other Multimax subscribers should be aware of the Catch 22 situation regarding refunds and could perhaps suggest a solution. Many kibkomers have done just that but these have been unacceptable to Multimax. The fact that so many Kibkomers have posted comments indicates that this is a topic of interest to many and other subscribers could find themselves in a similar situation.
We wish we shared your confidence that all will end well and sincerely hope that this will prove to be the case.


Erol
How about if we un-install the equipment early on the morning of the 28th and fetch it to your office?

[WotNoDeeds]

We have just had a conversation with Erol who kindly 'phoned us on his day off. Unfortunately, we have been unable to resolve this situation and are now resigned to the fact that we have lost our money despite Multimax's 100% unconditional refund policy.

[Mowgli597]

We felt other Multimax subscribers should be aware of the ............ situation regarding refunds and could perhaps suggest a solution. Many kibkomers have done just that but these have been unacceptable to Multimax.

(I can't let this go unchallenged.)

In fairness, WND, other suggestions have also been made which are simple, cheap and effective but because of what seems to be intransigence these have been unacceptable to you.

The problem seems to hinge on the fact that you want to be able to stream television (?) literally until the day (indeed almost the hour) you leave the island. Other technical solutions offered would have satisfied your need for banking and airline access. But no. It seems now to have simply become a matter of principle (or stubbornness).

[turtle]

Don't give up WND...
There must be some sort of compromise even if you do lose some of your money...don't lose it all ..

[Ragged Robin]

O

Just to add that I am extremely grateful to wnd for raising this question on this Board. Had he not done so , I could have been in the same position as he is but (not knowing him or his private affairs) in a far less able position to deal with it.

Hopefully it is now clear to you and people in general that an expectation that you can have MM internet access up to the day you leave the island as well as claiming a refund for any unused portion of your contract after that is not an expectation that MM is currently able to meet and may not ever be able to meet. If it is the case that you now are aware of this then for that I too am grateful to WND. What exactly you can do with this clearer understanding is less clear to me given that no other ISP here that I know provides this facility but regardless the increased clarity is still welcome.

Oh Erol: excuse the personal remarks which are meant in friendly fashion,, but , you usually write such excellent English , far better than many on this board, but you have tried so hard to disguise the unpalatable truth , you tired yourself in knots with that sentence! What you mean is that Mulltimax set no condition on the REASON for cancelling a Contract, but cancellation is subject to an absolute minimum of a week's notice to remove equipment (often more at Multimax's convenience ) and repayment, short of a POA. is by cheque only which has to be collected personally from MMs office, Unfortunately this may also at some stage apply to me: wnd's bringing it to attention has at least enabled me to be prepared for the situation and look at alternatives, not to mention having it in mind at next renewal.

Yes I am now only too clear about that although I do worried what other "Conditions" MM are imposing that may not have beeen expressedin their Contract and advertising.

This is very important, since people may have renewed their contracts with MM early because of the threatened increase in fees rather than changing to a cheaper alternative, on the basis that a condition free contract was worth the extra cost. This of course could lead to a
accusation against MM of false pretences. It is also possible that some of these people may have been leaving the country for health and/or financial reasons and not well enough or without time to query MMs arbitrary conditions.

[Ragged Robin]

I have refrained from querying the suggested alternative of dongle or mobile phone for fear of taking the thread ot and/or exposing my ignorance. I have therefore started a new thread "Dongles and Mobiles................! and should be grateful if people could follow it, and I look forward to comments/suggestions.

[WotNoDeeds]

Ragged Robin wrote

This is very important, since people may have renewed their contracts with MM early because of the threatened increase in fees rather than changing to a cheaper alternative, on the basis that a condition free contract was worth the extra cost. This of course could lead to a
accusation against MM of false pretences. It is also possible that some of these people may have been leaving the country for health and/or financial reasons and not well enough or without time to query MMs arbitrary conditions.

Ragged Robin you tell it as it is. This was exactly why we renewed early and we had confidence (misplaced) to do so because of Multimax's "unconditional" refund promise. We're glad to have highlighted these problems for other subscribers even though we've lost out.

[snd1966]

Whatever happens, I assume
Mm will get their equipment back
A cheque will have to be raised in wnd's name therefore valid for ? Months,

You never know you may miss Cyprus that much and return within three months and even if don't you can frame it and mm will have to explain where the cheque is to the bank .

hopefully when the cheque is sat in the office waiting for your return something can then be sorted out privately due to circumstances , and common sense rules

[erol]

Ragged Robin you tell it as it is. This was exactly why we renewed early and we had confidence (misplaced) to do so because of Multimax's "unconditional" refund promise. We're glad to have highlighted these problems for other subscribers even though we've lost out.

With respect you renewed early, first and foremost, in order to save money and you could have thought when you did so, does this really mean we can leave for any reason at all AND also have internet access from MM till the very day we leave the island and get our refund, and simply asked if that was the case when you went to renew early. I too am glad that other subscribers and potential subscribers that have seen this are now aware that this is not the case and I am also sorry that this has been at your loss, sincerely.

I am however still of the personal opinion that it did not have to be at your loss if you had been willing to compromise on the 'core' desire to both have access from MM until the day you leave and have your refund. Other options, whilst not as attractive as having access till the last day and having your refund, were offered. From you asking when you visited the office originally 'could we transfer the account to another person' and being told 'yes you could do that', to the offer of having to use an alternative internet connection for your last week on the island in order to have your refund, to the suggestion here of using a POA. From my perspective it was and is your choice to turn down all such offers, I do understand that you found all such alternatives unacceptable to you and your reasons why.

I am also of the opinion that you choosing to bring this to the public forums within just over an hour of first discovering that having internet access till the day you leave and getting your refund as well was going to be problematic, made it harder for us to find a compromise that was acceptable to both us and yourselves and limited our options for achieving this. If you had not made this choice and not made the choice to continue to do so even as we sought to find such a compromise I do think there was a greater chance that we could have achieved this. You could have given us a bit more time to try an do this and still been able to have 'warned others' on the forum if we failed in my opinion.

I did sincerely do my best to find a solution that both you and we found acceptable and I failed in this regard and for that I am also sorry.

[erol]

Whatever happens, I assume
Mm will get their equipment back
A cheque will have to be raised in wnd's name therefore valid for ? Months,

You never know you may miss Cyprus that much and return within three months and even if don't you can frame it and mm will have to explain where the cheque is to the bank .

hopefully when the cheque is sat in the office waiting for your return something can then be sorted out privately due to circumstances , and common sense rules

As WND is resigned to not getting a refund MM is resigned to almost certainly not getting it's equipment back. We simply can not even attempt to do so until the contract has expired and the chances that we would be able to so once it has expired and that the equipment is still in working order should we manage that when it has are as close to zero that it is hard to distinguish them from zero.

No refund cheque will be raised because the refund process was never started. It starts with the filling out and signing of a standard 'request for refund' form and this did not happen.

[WotNoDeeds]

Multimax are quite welcome to pick up their equipment on the 28th February up until 3 pm or we will un-install it and drop it into Multimax's office in the morning of the 28th. There is no reason why we would want to keep the equipment after that date.

[turtle]

What actually is this "equipment" you talk about ?

[WotNoDeeds]

Turtle, it's just a small transmitter/receiver on our balcony, nothing to make a big deal about.

[turtle]

So why the big issue about retrieving this equipment ?
There must be loads of these kicking around the island that are left in situ when people do not renew their contract I presume MM have no legal right to enter property to get them back ?

[WotNoDeeds]

Erol wrote
As WND is resigned to not getting a refund MM is resigned to almost certainly not getting it's equipment back. We simply can not even attempt to do so until the contract has expired and the chances that we would be able to so once it has expired and that the equipment is still in working order should we manage that when it has are as close to zero that it is hard to distinguish them from zero.

No refund cheque will be raised because the refund process was never started. It starts with the filling out and signing of a standard 'request for refund' form and this did not happen.



Erol, so be it. As "the refund process was never started" we expect Multimax to let the contract run its full course until its expiry in April 2018. You can then make arrangements to collect your equipment at that time.

I'm sure the thousands of viewers of this long running post will form their own judgement about Multimax's 100%unconditional guarantee and their Catch 22 refund policy.



[/b]

[turtle]

WND
I think it may be a good idea to sign the cancellation form before you leave as I am sure you should have a legal claim to your refund after.

There is more than one way to skin a cat

[snd1966]

Its a shame the buyers of your home do not want internet but I assume you have already gone down that path.

And I also would return the equipment and sign the cancellation form as you never know when you may come back especially if you still have bank accounts here

[Ragged Robin]

1. The only valid legal point MM has raised so far, and one where I do have sympathy with them, is the question of access after the customer is no longer the legal owner or occupier of the premises. This could indeed raise problems, and is all the more reason why MM should sort out alternative means of refund. Have they also thought that even if the customer does not want internet up to the last day, it might well be impossible for him/her in the throes of leaving to give them access when they want it!

I note MM have not responded to my post and separate thread by internal bank transfers? What about transfer to UK Banks - it would cost but it might suit customers returning to the UK better? Or MM could post the cheque to the customers' new address,
I if it were done by recorded delivery or courier they would have a signature proving they had arranged delivery to the customer, which I believe is all they are legally required to do.

2. The whole question of contracts with ISPs gets more worrying the more this thread goes on. The question of damage to equipment. What is the value (second hand) of the equipment? Under what circumstances do MM claim recompense for damage - it seems to me that the most likely cause of damage is "force majeur" or "Act of God" - ie usually weather , particularly wind and rainstorms in this instance. Do MM charge the customer for that, and have they expressely stated that in their contract? How much does an impoverished and sick customers have to budget for if a return to the UK is necessary? If damage is claimed how can the customer know that it was not damaged during removal, or from other cause beyond the customers' control.

[erol]

So why the big issue about retrieving this equipment ?
There must be loads of these kicking around the island that are left in situ when people do not renew their contract I presume MM have no legal right to enter property to get them back ?

There are loads of these kicking around and that get left in situ and the issue is every device we fail to recover increases the cost to us of providing service to customers on a on going basis. Every 1 TL of increased cost to us can be offset either by reducing costs elsewhere, say by reducing staff costs by 1 TL or by increasing income by 10TL (if our net margin are 10%) or 20TL (if our net margins are 5%), in order for us to be in the same net position. That might sound a bit weird but the reason why a 1 TL increase / decrease in costs is equivalent to 10TL or 20TL in sales is explained here

The equipment used to deliver internet access to customers varies from customer to customer, always involving a minimum of a 'transmitter/receiver' and a power adaptor and power over Ethernet injector but may also included other things that all have costs like mounting posts and poles and reflectors. A best guestimate of the average cost of this equipment per customer would be in the region of 300TL. If this cost is to be offset from increasing income rather than reducing costs elsewhere this relates to a need to increase income from 3000TL (if our net margins are 10%) to 6000TL (if our net margins are 5%).

The bottom line is that every single time we fail to recover our equipment from a customer no longer using our service, pressure is placed on us to either reduce costs elsewhere or increase income by a factor of 10 to 20 times the cost of that equipment in order to 'net out' to the same place we were before we failed to retrieve the equipment. So whilst I can understand that if the only perspective you are willing or able to see things from is the singular perspective of a customer in WND position you might be of the opinion that failing to recover our equipment is 'no big deal' and not a 'big issue'. However if you are able or willing to consider a wider perspective I think it is clear that things are no so simple or black and white and that in fact every single failure to recover our equipment has an impact for MM and it's profitability and therefore in turn for it's customer who are continuing to receive service from us. If you then are able and willing to also consider the impact of MM publicly setting a precedent that in turn can only and inevitably lead to an increase in the 'failed to recover' rate generically you can get some idea of the position MM is in here, though I realise the chance of you or WND doing that is extremely low.

[Ragged Robin]

So if the customer were prepared to leave a deposit of 300TL with you, you could refund the remainder of his fees until now, right away, and send the rest and the deposit to him at a later stage if or when you were able to recover the equipment.

Far from ideal - but it would meet Multimax determination to pass commercial risks to its customers in any circs and reduce the cusotomers' loss to a less unacceptable sum.

How long - on average - does removal of the equipment take? Presumably that partly depends on where it is situation in the customers property, and wnd's , being on a balcony rather than the roof would presumably be easier than both.

Please dont nag me about any errors in this - written in a hurry to make the most of the sunshine today!

[erol]

I note MM have not responded to my post and separate thread by internal bank transfers? What about transfer to UK Banks - it would cost but it might suit customers returning to the UK better? Or MM could post the cheque to the customers' new address,
I if it were done by recorded delivery or courier they would have a signature proving they had arranged delivery to the customer, which I believe is all they are legally required to do.

RR we are reviewing all possible options for the future in response to this situation but do understand that the 'priority' , meaning in effect how quickly we conclude such a review, is determined by the fact that this is an issue that pertains only to a very small number of our total customer base. As far as the information in the other thread about electronic transfers between banks within the TRNC we are investigating this as well, though it does seem to me from that thread that whilst the situation would appear to have changed from the 'impossible for transfers of less than 7000TL' it used to be, now it is 'it may be possible depending on what bank is used'. As I say we are investigating this in light of the thread.

What is the value (second hand) of the equipment?

The value of the equipment we use in order to be able to provide service to customers is in the region of 300TL. I do not really understand the 'second hand' part. If we fail to recover equipment from customers leaving us we have to replace that equipment and there is no viable 'second hand' market for such equipment that we could use to do so.

Under what circumstances do MM claim recompense for damage

I know of no case to date where MM has charged a customer for damage to our equipment outside of 'cabling'. So I can recall a case where a customer's dog chewed through the cable inside their house and another where a customer mistakenly cut our cable outside and in those cases we did charge a call out charge of 30TL and a charge of 1 or 2TL per meter for replacement cable. For cable failures that are the result of degrading by weather over time we do not charge to replace the cabling. We do however 'reserve the right' to charge customers for damage to our equipment that is the fault of the customer.

Do MM charge the customer for that,

No we do not.

How much does an impoverished and sick customers have to budget for if a return to the UK is necessary?

If you mean in terms of any potential liability to their ISP specifically then I would say nothing. They may need to budget for arranging an alternative means of connecting to the internet if they intend to allow us to collect our equipment before they leave, rather than just not bothering because such is not a 'big deal' to them. If they also wish to claim a refund for unused service paid for in advance on their contract that they no longer need under our refund policy, rather than prepare in advance by moving to monthly payments, that does requires them to first allow us to collect our equipment and in a manner that does not require us to place greater priority and urgency on this collection than we place on customers waiting for us to visit them to repair equipment or cabling or for new customers awaiting installation.

If damage is claimed how can the customer know that it was not damaged during removal, or from other cause beyond the customers' control.

Common sense and 'reasonableness' is used in the first instance and to date that has always proved sufficient. Like in the case where a customer tells us 'their dog ate it'.

Can I ask you a question RR. Does MM accrue any credit with you from engaging with you directly here on this public forum and trying to answer your questions, given how 'atypical' such behaviour is from a company ?

[erol]

So if the customer were prepared to leave a deposit of 300TL with you, you could refund the remainder of his fees until now, right away, and send the rest and the deposit to him at a later stage if or when you were able to recover the equipment.

As I say we are reviewing this whole thing and looking at all possibilities to try and avoid this happening in the future and I thank you for you suggestions which will be fed into this process of review.

Far from ideal - but it would meet Multimax determination to pass commercial risks to its customers in any circs and reduce the cusotomers' loss to a less unacceptable sum.

I do not really understand what you mean by 'MM's determination to pass commercial risk to it's customers' to be honest ? Those people that have invested in MM, that have put in the money up front to allow its's creation and operation, have and are taking a risk that MM will in turn be able to operate and produce profits such that their initial investment is protected and that they will get a return on that money grater than they could have got investing it elsewhere or leaving it in a bank. If MM fails to make a profit both this return on their investment and the sum invested itself are at risk of being lost. This risk is not 'passed on to customers' as far as I can see but as I say maybe I am misunderstanding what you are saying entirely ? MM has to make a profit, if it does not in a sustained manner such that it ceases to trade then everyone looses as far as I can see, MM investors, MM staff and employee's and MM customers ?

How long - on average - does removal of the equipment take?

As per Kemal's earlier post on this thread "uninstallation of equipment is scheduled, and performed (usually in 7-14 days)"

Presumably that partly depends on where it is situation in the customers property, and wnd's , being on a balcony rather than the roof would presumably be easier than both.

Any future system and procedure that we might design and implement to replace the current one will need to take in to account that whilst some customer's installation's may allow easy access for us to uninstall the equipment or even potentially for the customer to do it themselves, something that MM explicitly is NOT suggesting customers do, it will also have to account and accommodate the fact that other installations may be significantly harder and time consuming and hazardous to achieve.

Please dont nag me about any errors in this - written in a hurry to make the most of the sunshine today!

I'll do my best not too and hope that such effort is reciprocal.

[turtle]

However if you are able or willing to consider a wider perspective I think it is clear that things are no so simple or black and white and that in fact every single failure to recover our equipment has an impact for MM and it's profitability and therefore in turn for it's customer who are continuing to receive service from us. If you then are able and willing to also consider the impact of MM publicly setting a precedent that in turn can only and inevitably lead to an increase in the 'failed to recover' rate generically you can get some idea of the position MM is in here, though I realise the chance of you or WND doing that is extremely low.

Yes Erol I am Willing and more than able to consider the wider perspective but how and why do you "realise" the chance of this would be very low ?

Costs in the business that I run are constantly being assessed and altered as and when they can, it's part of running any business but please please don't blame your customers for MM failing to collect equipment and then passing the cost onto them. If MM don't have sufficient means or T&Cs to do this then that is the companies fault not the customers.
But I would guess the chance of MM or you reviewing this would be extremely low ?

Anyway the reason I asked the question about recovery was that part of the ongoing saga about a refund (lets not forget about that here) was a need to recover the equipment but I now realise that is not the case here.
A question…..If one of your customers is on one of your Freedom Packages and is out of the country when the renewal is due but does not take this renewal up how do to recover the receiver ?

I don’t wish to spoil this thread by getting into a direct clash with you Erol but I will take no lessons from you about running a business.

[erol]

Yes Erol I am Willing and more than able to consider the wider perspective but how and why do you "realise" the chance of this would be very low ?

In the case of WND based on my dealings with them to date. In your case based on the way you seemingly were so readily agreeing with WND that not collecting equipment either in this specific case or generally was not a 'big issue'. In hindsight and in light of your subsequent post I do accept that the 'accusation' towards you is perhaps somewhat unfair and so I apologise for suggesting it and 'retract it' unreservedly.

Costs in the business that I run are constantly being assessed and altered as and when they can, it's part of running any business but please please don't blame your customers for MM failing to collect equipment and then passing the cost onto them. If MM don't have sufficient means or T&Cs to do this then that is the companies fault not the customers.

We do not place the blame of our failure to collect our equipment on customers in general terms. There are times where such failure can be the customer's fault and some times when it is our fault and some times when it is both or neither. What I was trying to do was point out the relationship between such failures and our cost in terms of providing service in response to the suggestion by WND and then 'backed up' by yourself that such failures were not a 'big deal' - whoever's fault that failure might be. Multimax does constantly review it's cost base, seeking to find ways to reduce such where ever possible, including in regards to recovering equipment from customers when they stop service with us and are doing so even more following the pressures on costs and prices the drastic shift in TL to Dollar and Euro currencies that has occurred in last 8 months or so has created. I welcome any constructive suggestions that could help us do so in regards to collection of equipment when customers end service with us though at this point I remain sceptical than any significant gains could achieved in this regard by changing our T&C's as you suggest above.

But I would guess the chance of MM or you reviewing this would be extremely low ?

As far as the above is 'reciprocating' for my suggestion earlier that the chance of you being willing or able to see things from a 'wider perspective' were very low, then ok I will again say sorry for doing that. As far as it is a 'serious' question I would ask 'what leads you to think we do not constantly review things such as this' ?

A question…..If one of your customers is on one of your Freedom Packages and is out of the country when the renewal is due but does not take this renewal up how do to recover the receiver ?

In such a scenario we would attempt to contact the customer via email and work with them in order to come to an agreement acceptable to them that allowed us to collect our equipment. Depending on the exact details of where the equipment is on the property, what the current ownership of the property is and other factors that may result in them granting us permission to do so for the 'external' equipment without their or anyone else's supervision or to do so in conjunction with a nominated third party, either friend or management company or to do so at some later date when they may themselves be returning to Cyprus. I would say that most times this can be achieved. However there are also times when it can not be achieved, either the property where the equipment is is no longer owned by them, in which case we would seek permission from the new owner either by ringing on the door or via contacting them if the previous owner is able to provide such contact details. Then there are times, much less frequently where all attempts to contact the customer fail or even where we get replies along the lines of 'sorry not our problem'.

I don’t wish to spoil this thread by getting into a direct clash with you Erol but I will take no lessons from you about running a business.

And as far my explaining how and why failing to recover such equipment is an issue for us in business terms in the face of you asking "why the big issue about retrieving this equipment ?" has been seen by you as 'teaching my grandma to suck eggs' and has offended you, I again apologise. Having said that I do also have to say that it has been my experience to date when interacting with yourself on these forums turtle that you often 'do not appreciate' things being done to you that you yourself appear to be more than willing to do to others. If that also offends you I will apologise in advance but that is how it has felt to me on more than one occasion.

[Mowgli597]

We seem to have lost the run of ourselves in this discussion. To try to get back to the root "problem" let's recap.

• WND is a MM customer who, because he has sold his property quicker than he thought would happen, wants to terminate his contract with MM on or about 28th February.
  
  MM have a standard termination procedure which requires 2-3 weeks notice, at the end of which WND would receive a FULL refund of his outstanding subscription. This is in contrast to many (most?) other such companies which would not give a refund saying that the customer (WND) broke the contract.
  
  At the end of the 2-3 weeks period WND would go to the offices of MM to collect his full refund cheque.
  
  WND, instead of giving the 2-3 weeks notice, insists on keeping his MM service until literally the day he leaves the TRNC, citing MM's "unconditional refund guarantee" as meaning he could do this. He wants his refund cheque paid by some other means than a personal call to MM's office - the standard procedure followed by the vast majority of MM customers who terminate their contract.
  
  When told this was not possible WND proceeds to this Forum to air his grievances with MM rather than negotiating directly and personally with them.
  
  Because of the Forum posting other subscribers, and Erol on behalf of MM, suggest perfectly feasible technical suggestions as to how WND can continue to have Internet access for all his needs at a cost of circa TL22 EXCEPT streaming television. Erol even offers to record TV if that would help.
  
  In addition MM offer to reduce their standard termination time to one week (instead of 2-3) but this is unacceptable to WND.
  
  Instead he is willing to forgo his full refund of over TL1000 (?) in order to make a point.

Have I captured everything?

Oh. One thing that's puzzled me regarding WND's wish to have (MM) internet access (since no other, it seems, would suffice) because it's a problem we ran into when we arrived here. And that is printing his airline tickets. We didn't have our printer since it was in our goods and chattels being shipped over. The shippers, and other bodies, needed printed copies of things. We had internet access (via a smartphone personal hotspot - one of the suggestions made to WND) but no printer. So we asked kind neighbours and friends who were only delighted to help.

Isn't your printer already packed WND? Or are you carrying it on the aircraft with you? Just curious because, as I said, it was a problem we ran into on our arrival here.

[turtle]

Having said that I do also have to say that it has been my experience to date when interacting with yourself on these forums turtle that you often 'do not appreciate' things being done to you that you yourself appear to be more than willing to do to others.

Erol, you are very skilled at deflecting disagreements away from yourself and onto others (not just me) and turning these into bigger issues than they actually are...that's your way....so be it.


Mowgli wrote

Have I captured everything?

Yes everthing that you wish to write that is ? You paint WND as a totally unreasonable person on here and I don't think that is the case my opinion is they only wanted some flexibility in what was/is a difficult situation for them but that wasn't to be...
That's all I have to say on the matter... and I'm out as they say.

I wish WND all the best in their move and hope everything works out OK for you in the future...Good luck.

[Mowgli597]

Mowgli wrote

Have I captured everything?

Yes everthing that you wish to write that is ? You paint WND as a totally unreasonable person on here and I don't think that is the case my opinion is they only wanted some flexibility in what was/is a difficult situation for them but that wasn't to be....

Turtle. Please tell me what I've missed out of the essence of the issue? Or are there some "alternative facts" as President Trump would say?

It wasn't/isn't a difficult situation and there was/is a perfectly reasonable solution to WND's requirement for internet access up until the day/hour of his departure. The unreasonableness seems to be in his desire to have streaming TV access until that final hour AND that this be provided by MM.

IMHO, of course.

[PoshinDevon]

Having said that I do also have to say that it has been my experience to date when interacting with yourself on these forums turtle that you often 'do not appreciate' things being done to you that you yourself appear to be more than willing to do to others.

Erol, you are very skilled at deflecting disagreements away from yourself and onto others (not just me) and turning these into bigger issues than they actually are...that's your way....so be it.


Mowgli wrote

Have I captured everything?

Yes everthing that you wish to write that is ? You paint WND as a totally unreasonable person on here and I don't think that is the case my opinion is they only wanted some flexibility in what was/is a difficult situation for them but that wasn't to be...
That's all I have to say on the matter... and I'm out as they say.

I wish WND all the best in their move and hope everything works out OK for you in the future...Good luck.

WND did indeed want some flexibility, unfortunately they showed no flexibility themselves. In my opinion Erol has provided very valid explanations and also offered many suggestions as to how this issue could have been resolved. He has also apologised for some comments made, personally I think he had no reason to go as far as he did

The explanation given by Erol following the video evidence of what happened in the MM offices is very enlightening.

This whole sorry saga should have been discussed in private but it appears WND was quick to post on the forum and once the thread was started there was little chance of a compromise. Loss of face comes to mind.

By all means complain and highlight issues but give the service provider, shop, person etc the opportunity to come to an amicable agreement.

Mowgli has summed up this thread perfectly.

[Ragged Robin]

Posh: (and Erol please read, it will address some of your points) I do not agree with , nor sometimes believe, everything that has been said on this thread, and I dont like the way some say it, but I do believe that it is an excellent thing that an issue that could be disastrous for some people has been brought to light, and a rather difficult situation has effectively been subjected to what I consider to be brain storming, with several issues that need addressing highlighted., To my mind a the raison d'detre for a forum, but perhaps you have other priorities?i

It is a sad fact that many British people here are suffering from financial/medical problems and increasingly are being forced to UKTh often in deep distress and poor health and effectively facing a new country after many years here. They are facing a tremendous ordeal and need to be made aware of any additional burdens they have to face and given a chance to prepare for it

and this is before the effects of Brixit have seeped through or we have a decision on Reunification.

. Multimax will inevitably lose customers, but they will be OK as there will be others to replace them - and human nature being what it is they will be every bit as difficult, demanding and b...........minde d as the Brits - and may also have the advantage of doing in it Turkish! Multimax should be glad that they have been made aware of the problems before they escalate and even, possibly, subjected to the harsh light of European "nanny" legislaton!

I really do understood that some customers and some posters, can be trying and even insulting, but that is life if you want to enter a competitive , lucrative field. Provided they have clear consciences there really is no need for MM to be paranoid about constructive criticism or the need to discuss genuine problems and share ideas with others in what for some of us is the only means available.

The fact that wnd's is the first complaint we are aware of does not mean that there have not been others - I have a horror that many have put up with unrecoverable losses, because they are two overwhelmed or sick, to complain. Also it does not mean it will not happen in future.

PS This way MM do at least have the chance to see what is being said, and put their view, which would not be the case if the victims were restrictd to discussing it in the pub, coffee shop, supermarket isle, etcc.

[Ragged Robin]

I note MM have not responded to my post and separate thread by internal bank transfers? What about transfer to UK Banks - it would cost but it might suit customers returning to the UK better? Or MM could post the cheque to the customers' new address,
I if it were done by recorded delivery or courier they would have a signature proving they had arranged delivery to the customer, which I believe is all they are legally required to do.

RR we are reviewing all possible options for the future in response to this situation but do understand that the 'priority' , meaning in effect how quickly we conclude such a review, is determined by the fact that this is an issue that pertains only to a very small number of our total customer base. As far as the information in the other thread about electronic transfers between banks within the TRNC we are investigating this as well, though it does seem to me from that thread that whilst the situation would appear to have changed from the 'impossible for transfers of less than 7000TL' it used to be, now it is 'it may be possible depending on what bank is used'. As I say we are investigating this in light of the thread.

Good - that makes it all worthwhile

What is the value (second hand) of the equipment?

The value of the equipment we use in order to be able to provide service to customers is in the region of 300TL. I do not really understand the 'second hand' part. If we fail to recover equipment from customers leaving us we have to replace that equipment and there is no viable 'second hand' market for such equipment that we could use to do so.

I was actually thinking about Insurance and since my household policy coming up to renewal whether I ought tobe including MM equipment . "New for old" is not easy to get here, and most policies only give you the second hand value, however much it cost toreplace.

Under what circumstances do MM claim recompense for damage

I know of no case to date where MM has charged a customer for damage to our equipment outside of 'cabling'. So I can recall a case where a customer's dog chewed through the cable inside their house and another where a customer mistakenly cut our cable outside and in those cases we did charge a call out charge of 30TL and a charge of 1 or 2TL per meter for replacement cable. For cable failures that are the result of degrading by weather over time we do not charge to replace the cabling. We do however 'reserve the right' to charge customers for damage to our equipment that is the fault of the customer.

Fair enough. That is why I do not allow my dogs in the study unless I am there. Perhaps you could explain to them why, as I cant. (joke!)

Do MM charge the customer for that,

No we do not.

How much does an impoverished and sick customers have to budget for if a return to the UK is necessary?

If you mean in terms of any potential liability to their ISP specifically then I would say nothing. They may need to budget for arranging an alternative means of connecting to the internet if they intend to allow us to collect our equipment before they leave, rather than just not bothering because such is not a 'big deal' to them. If they also wish to claim a refund for unused service paid for in advance on their contract that they no longer need under our refund policy, rather than prepare in advance by moving to monthly payments, that does requires them to first allow us to collect our equipment and in a manner that does not require us to place greater priority and urgency on this collection than we place on customers waiting for us to visit them to repair equipment or cabling or for new customers awaiting installation.

Note

If damage is claimed how can the customer know that it was not damaged during removal, or from other cause beyond the customers' control.

Common sense and 'reasonableness' is used in the first instance and to date that has always proved sufficient. Like in the case where a customer tells us 'their dog ate it'.

Unforutnately common sense and reasonableness has been noteworth for its absence on this thread, by most parties.

Can I ask you a question RR. Does MM accrue any credit with you from towith you directly here on this public forum and trying to answer your questions, given how 'atypical' such behaviour is from a company ?

See my response "Posh" above, also separate thread below.

[PoshinDevon]

Sorry RR but I have to say I am having trouble following your posts, mainly because they seem to be covering a huge array of subject matter which are off topic and probably better split out and covered on new threads.

As far as this topic is concerned, whilst you may not agree, Mowgli in my opinion summed things up very well.

It does seem to me that wanting to have the internet service right up to departure from the island is the crux of the issue and when it wasn't possible then out comes the contract paperwork. I find the reasons given to retain the internet a little strange. Is it really about printing off flight tickets, is it really about on line banking or is it about wanting to watch tv? Or could it be that once the original post was up on the forum for all to see it was then a matter of principal and difficult to back track?

I would have thought it reasonable to try and sort out this issue privately and allow the service provider to be given time to investigate, work with the customer and suggest possible solutions. This clearly did not happen. Erol has attempted to provide a number of what I and many believe to be very sensible suggestions as to how both parties could have reached a compromise. A bit of prior planning by WND and working with MM would in my opinion resulted in a positive outcome.

Unfortunately this looks like it will not happen.

[Ragged Robin]

"Can I ask you a question RR. Does MM accrue any credit with you from towith you directly here on this public forum and trying to answer your questions, given how 'atypical' such behaviour is from a company ?"

Yes Erol, you and MM , to my mind do deserve a lot of credit for addressing probems in public on this forum. Unfortunately it is necessary because it is difficult an expensive to contact MM;s call system helpline by telephone and most, repeat most, of the responses are from someone who has limited English and stock replies tostock situations. For anything out of the ordinary I have to enlist th help of a native Turkish speaker. It should of course also help MM to cover various queries from several people in one go so to speak and to have what couldbe a brainstorming session on difficulties.

As far as this thread is concerned the whole things seemed to grow like Topsy as various unexpected (at least by me) issues and problems emerged.I ask you to be patient with me while I explain my reaction to this thread.

1. Read it, Felt vaguely sorry for op.

2 read it and responses next day. Realised it was a case of "there but for the Grace of God go I" Read it again carefully and saw the main issue, the interpretation of "Condition" was related to what was once my area of expertise. Since that was a long time ago and in another country, spent an evening checking my facts,interpretations of the word and the results of ambiguity in contract clauses. Spent another evening phrasing this carefully because of course I am not qualified to advise on legal issues here(though those in queston ae prettty universal) and have no professionall indemnity insurance

3. Followed the usual defensive reaction from MM and the less pleasant aggressive ones from their supporters and my attempts to explain..

4 In the course of studying the thread more carefully than most I noted several anomalies in MMs post. and various worrying issues that arose from their replies and others comments. For brevity concentrated on the most serious (bank transfers) and another poster kindly started a new post. I hd to bring it back here because MM did not respond..

5. I was pleased to note that MM have now realised the necessity of checking their procedures. I am sure that it will be to their benefit in the longrun

6. Further posts by others raised a point that I had previously missed. The question of access for Multimax after their customer had left the premises. Surprised that MM had not previously stressed this aspect as it seemed to me their strongest point is justifying their delays in refunding. Realising that I might be unknowingly acquiring a financial liability I was unaware of , I asked further questions to clarify just what my exposure was and whether it should be insured. I think there are ways round this, but at the moment am too tired and in pain to research them. Others have raised the question of whether MM are devoting sufficient resources to the removal of equipment, but I am too tired to follow this up here. The question of insurance of MMs property should also be addressed at some stage.

I am sorry that there is so much lack of compassion on this forum for those who are through no fault of their own are impoverished, are not physically strong and particularly not technologically gifted. I hope to bring to MMs attention that some of their procedures may cause unnecessary suffering to these, and also that lack of expertise in one field indicates stupidity but that for some having to tackle unfamiliar types of technology may really be a damaging and even dangerous imposition ata time of distress.

[WotNoDeeds]

The posters who criticize us for not trying to sort this problem out privately and for posting on Kibkom are forgetting one other important point. If we had made alternative provision for internet for our last week, we still would not have been a refund for 2-3 weeks. Also, Multimax will only pay a refund in person by cheque, so this condition alone would have meant we would not have got a refund - a Catch 22 situation.

[waddo]

As WND started this thread on the 6th of Feb and will not leave till the 28th of Feb then that is over three weeks - enough time to get the refund back - in person - instead of constant complaints about lack of service. It's all about compromise in the end.

[erol]

The posters who criticize us for not trying to sort this problem out privately and for posting on Kibkom are forgetting one other important point. If we had made alternative provision for internet for our last week, we still would not have been a refund for 2-3 weeks. Also, Multimax will only pay a refund in person by cheque, so this condition alone would have meant we would not have got a refund - a Catch 22 situation.

from http://www.kibkomnorthcyprusforum.com/v ... 96#p175397

I have suggested that we collect the equipment on the 20th of Feb and that if we can then we will commit to having the refund available for collection by the person named on the contract by the 27th.

[WotNoDeeds]

Unfortunately we will not have the use of a vehicle on the 27th, having sold ours, so would not be able to collect a cheque from Multimax's office, so this would still not have been a feasible solution from our point of view. Erol has stated that Multimax are intending to change the wording of their contract and we believe this needs to be done. An "unconditional" guarantee should not have retrospective conditions attached to it.

[jock2]

Tell you what Wnd you must have more money than sense to walk away losing your money because you to lazy to get a friend taxi or bus to go to collect your cheque from multimax to me you sound like someone who can't get his own way when he throws the dummy out the pram

[PoshinDevon]

Whilst appreciate you may not have a vehicle during your last few days on island and could not get to the MM offices to collect your cheque, could you not have come to an agreement with MM for them to meet you at a convenient location close to you to hand over the cheque?

There may have been a good reason why this could not happen, but if it was a possibility I am sure it would have been a good compromise. From what I have read it does appear that MM have offered a number of options, suggestions and solutions to help. Its a pity this could not have been discussed off line.

[erol]

Unfortunately we will not have the use of a vehicle on the 27th, having sold ours, so would not be able to collect a cheque from Multimax's office, so this would still not have been a feasible solution from our point of view.

This is the first time that I have been made aware that this was a reason that the 'one week' offer was unacceptable to yourselves WND. If I had been made aware of this it may well have been possible to find a solution to this specific issue for you, as an exception to our standard procedures, given your circumstances, just as it may be possible to make exceptions to the standard procedure in this regard for those with disabilities and for whom collection of a refund cheque may be problematic. What we are unable to do is explicitly or implicitly commit to doing this (deliver refund cheques to customers) generically for anyone who may simply prefer this option.

[WotNoDeeds]

Thanks for your insults Jock2. If we had gone done the road of Multimax collecting their equipment early, or us dismantling the equipment and returning it to them, then obviously we would have made provision to get to Multimax even if our own vehicle was sold. In fact, it has only just been sold a few days ago.

PoshinDevon, when we went to their office at the beginning of February, the uncompromising attitude of the Multimax staff member there made us feel that it was highly unlikely we would get a refund. If my memory serves me right, I think we actually asked to speak to a manager or Kemal ( you'd have to check the video to see if this is, in fact, true) but no-one was. In fact I wonder if anyone would have bothered to contact us if we hadn't posted on Kibkom We went on Kibkom, to see if anyone else had been in a similar position and could suggest a solution.

At the end of the day we (and many others?) renewed our contract early to save money because Multimax said there was going to be a 20% price hike.
We had the confidence to renew four months early because they offered an "unconditional" refund guarantee.
This "unconditional" guarantee was not unconditional but came with conditions which, unfortunately were not acceptable to us.