Consumer Dispute Resolution レビュー 175

After Currys left me with an unsafe, uninstalled fridge freezer and repeatedly misled me about engineer visits that were never booked, I took my complaint to CDRL/RetailADR. I provided a detailed chronology, written correspondence and evidence showing:

I had paid for installation which was not carried out.

I was told on two separate days to stay at home for visits that literally did not exist in Currys’ system.

A Currys staff member falsely claimed their notes showed I had refused access and did not want anyone from Currys near my property – something Currys later admitted was not supported by their own records.

Despite this, CDRL concluded that Currys had done nothing wrong and that I effectively had no case. In other words, an ADR scheme that is supposed to provide independent redress looked at an unsafe non‑installation, two wasted days built on misinformation, and a false allegation recorded against me, and still found no meaningful fault on the retailer’s side.

The whole process felt one‑sided and opaque. I was required to submit detailed evidence and arguments, but the outcome read as if the bar for criticising the retailer had been set so high that almost nothing would ever qualify. It is very hard to see how an ordinary consumer could look at my case and feel that the decision was fair, balanced or proportionate.

CDRL markets itself as an independent body approved to help consumers resolve disputes with retailers. In my experience, it functioned more as another layer of defence for the retailer than as a genuine check on unfair treatment. If you are a consumer considering using this scheme, be aware that it may consume a lot of time and energy for very little prospect of meaningful redress, even in cases where the retailer has already admitted serious failings.

CDR lacks the technical competence to deal with even slightly complex issues and fails to fully review all the information available. Our complaint was about a fridge we had bought online from Currys. We realised after some time that the thermostat setting were being changed when we took things out / put them into the fridge- this posed a health threat and I eventually discovered this was an unlawful design.
By agreeing to use CRD you abandon your legal rights unless you have the money to go to the High Court, so we are left with a potentially dangerous fridge.

Absplutely ablismal.
The claim was about breach of data.
ICO doesn't offer compensation.
Told me to contact ICO for the issue which I already have done.
So they want me to be left compensationless for a breach of GDPR laws? (6 months)

A pointless layer of bureaucracy, but one that you have to endure before you can take court action.
Toothless, unhelpful, dismissive, and ultimately unable to interpret law.
Once it got to court, the company I complained about conceded and paid up immediately.

I'm not quiet sure what CDRL would accept as failings for the retailer!!

The retailer's staff have lied (told false information!) and been disciplined, letters of complaint were ignored,staff never returned calls despite promising to do so....

But, apparently, none of that matters.

What a bloody stitch up!

As stated elsewhere 93% 1* ratings - 93% of people contacting them aren't happy... maybe CDRL are the issue?

The whole process is awful, Cannot upload documents to the website then they only uploaded half the documents I sent. No one on the telephone is trained to actually help you with a query, just take a message and pass on. My complaint was against British Gas regarding a new boiler that has constantly broken down and needed numerous repairs. I was looking for a remedy of either a full refund or an undertaking that if it breaks down again it will be replaced or refunded. The decision by the CDRL was to reject ny complaint as the boiler is currently working from the 12th repair, nevermind that we have suffered for the last 18 months with it. Waste of time and the utilities who fund and use them know this hence don't take consumer complaints seriously.

Dont waste your time. Spent an age sending them so much evidence vs the defending company providing nothing other than anecdotal stuff - yet the outcome (after an absolute age of waiting) was found to be against me. Same as Ombudsman - just a generic admin process rather than someone actually considering the case in balance. I will not bother in future - which speaks volumes for what a waste of space this service is

Let me just start by saying that 93% is a very big number - 93 out of every 100 people who have used this service has found it "not fit for purpose" which is ironic as it is that same terminology which forms the basis of most claims against retailers. Only 2% of people have found the service satisfactory (literally two out of every 100 people - can the others all be wrong?) and what you will see if you read some of the reviews is CDR's 'copy and paste' replies feeding each and every consumer with more patronising nonsense.

I can only add to the other reviews, nearly all of which are negative (that must tell you something, surely?) The retailers who subscribe to this dispute resolution pay for this service and, as such, the outcomes are obviously balanced in favour of the retailer. To put it simply, can you approach with a well-organised case with clear and irrefutable facts to support, and they will always find in favour of the retailer. This process is further designed to discourage legitimate claimants from pursuing retailers through the courts where, most of the time, the outcome would be fair and justified.

My advice to you, if you are reading this prior to taking any action, is to simply avoid Consumer Dispute Resolution as you will waste so much of your time and resources as they place a very thick wall between you and the retailer - and the 'wall' protects the retailer, not you.

Either take whatever complaint you have on the chin, or otherwise take the retailer straight to court where your chances of success will be so much greater. Courts are not paid by the retailer and are therefore impartial and, if the Law supports your case, the outcome will be fair and appropriate if you go to Court rather than through the rather biased Consumer Dispute Resolution route.

CDR (Consumer Dispute Resolution) almost always find in favour of the retailer (who is paying them) - so your chances of success via this route are virtually zero. Someone really ought to put a stop to this utterly useless service unless they re-name it "Retailer Protection Service" - then the consumer will be able to make a more informed choice before wasting their time and energy on this pointless retailer-biased service.

I await the outcome of my complaint but so far I am unimpressed by CDRL. Their website is badly designed and difficult to use. Complex input is required which is not saved so one must complete a complaint in one session. This obvious feature is totally lacking and is a major shortcoming. The site also seems to be unstable.

*UPDATE: I received a trite and hollow 'defence' from CDLR (below) which makes no mention of the inconvenient truth that their 'adjudicators'' salaries are funded by the very companies they are supposed to provide independent judgements re. service failure complaints on behalf of the customer. This only further reinforces my strong belief that this outfit and its (partisan, imho) decisions should be scrutinised by a trustworthy independent body or investigative journalists!

Completely unfit for purpose: seems to me this is designed as a buffer or a front for the big companies - as other reviews here have stated, they always side with them; the procedure to make a complaint is so obviously flawed (and skewed against the consumer) and there appears to be no interest in evidence or the nuances of a respondent's case.

An Ombudsman is defined as "an independent, impartial official appointed to investigate and resolve complaints". CDRL fails on so many counts - and should be replaced with a proper body that represents the consumer and not the big companies it appears to defend.

Don't waste the ink on your laptop or phone, completely rubbish

Complete waste of time. No investigation, no review of any evidence, no request for further evidence. Just pick the side of the retailer and now I will have to take the company to court. Ikea kitchen installation still unfinished after 11 months. Has not been installed to plan and paid for items which are unused as they cannot be installed due to the incorrect fitting.

Absolutely awful service!!! Read all the reviews, they ALWAYS side with the big companies, no matter what!! British Gas have treated me terribly and damaged my property due to incompetence!! It 100% falls under the consumer rights act 2015 yet CDRL still sided with BG. They should be investigated as this is not right!! I provided all evidence, writing up every detail and BG gave a short and sweet response yet they still sided with them. Absolutely disgusting!!!!

Huge time wasters who promise satisfaction and deliver frustration. Calor Gas referred me to them (I now know why) after endless no reply, then demands for extensive additional information which all has to be converted to pdf, they say despite Calor stating in writing, as evidenced, they will abide by their decision, they state that Calor are no longer happy and they cannot make a decision. OK got it - if the complainant has a case then the defendant has the right to fail to respond and the case is dropped. So its a case of don't bite the hand that feeds you a total con and a waste of time?

Thank you for your reply - think I have got it - if your client - in this case Calor Gas has a strong csae you adjudicate - if they have no case you drop it - seems like you are flying under false colours and this is a case for advertising standards - stand by!

I spent a ton of time compiling evidence against Currys who had a subcontractor install our washing machine, and who did not check water was off and flooded my house. I provided photographs, call logs, timelines, and correspondence, all consistently showing the damage and that it was caused by their subcontractors, and that they were wilfully fobbing me off on the subcontractor, who just lied and said he hadn’t done it. Currys’ defence was one blurry photo of my washing machine, an incomplete call log, and a statement that they were satisfied they’d investigated (without providing any substantiating evidence of this) and that I couldn’t prove the damage was their fault. CDRL sided with the retailer. Completely pointless.

Dont bother taking the time, painstakingly raising a case. They are completely biased to currys. If your thinking of buying from currys do it through pay pal so you have some protection if currys make a mistake. As the customer service is appalling.

Reported OVO for failing to provide the boiler service that was part of our contract, despite chasing them several times and eventually getting radio silence from them.

As a result, I made a claim for compensation of the alternative boiler service I had to arrange to maintain our boiler warranty. The claim failed on the basis that the work was "not approved by the Respondent prior to the Claimant employing the third-party". Had I waited any longer for OVO's approval, the boiler warranty would have lapsed.

I would say the current 1.3-star rating on TrustPilot is well justified since you cannot rely on this service to resolve a dispute outside of court, as the service was intended to achieve.

What an absolute farce this arbitration service is. Not interested in providing any sort of justice for the consumer and only there to protect the big businesses that refer you to them.
Next stop is the small claims court for me as I am not letting this drop

After seeing the reviews here, am I surprised that CDRL sided with Currys, despite a clear breach of my consumer rights? Absolutely not.
Don't bother wasting your time appealing with them - they're clearly biased against the customer and will rule in favour of the retailer every time, it seems.

CDRL closed my case without giving me an adjudication outcome or even contacting me. I was assigned an adjudicator, and then silence until I checked the portal weeks later and found it marked "closed." No communication, no fair process.

Completely unacceptable.