CEDR - Conflict Resolution Training and Commercial Mediation レビュー 673

I have already documented my own experiences with CEDR on Trustpilot, reading the other negative reviews from claimants there is a clear pattern. CEDR all too often ignore evidence submitted by a claimant and side with the defendant. The defendants are companies and organizations who fund CEDR so it wouldn't be in CEDR's financial interest to uphold too many claims. Furthermore CEDR provides adjudication training, another source of income, and course trainees go on to act as adjudicators. Although they are not directly employed by CEDR they are clearly stakeholders so it is telling that the vast majority of five star Trustpilot reviews are from course attendees, not claimants. According to Trustpilot CEDR actively seeks reviews which supposedly adds credence to the overall score. They never asked me to leave a review, I would wager that the only people they do ask are the trainee arbitrators as they know these will be glowing reviews.
Did you know that CEDR is a registered charity? That means they avoid paying tax. Their accounts are readily available, they have 88 employees and 9 trustees. In year ending 31/3/23 their total income was £10,131,000. Eleven employees received benefits over £60,000, of those 2 received over £100,000, 1 over £140,000, 2 over £150,000 and one hit the jackpot receiving between £200,000 and £250,000. Of the trustees, one or more are directors of subsidiaries and one or more receive payments or benefits from the charity for services provided.
If you are claimant and have concerns about the outcome of your case and about the way CEDR is run you can complain to the Charity Commission and to the Trading Standards Institute.
Edit 26/11. CEDR are obviously rattled by all the bad reviews from claimants. Looks like they are getting desperate - manipulating the overall rating by getting more trainee adjudicators to leave 5 star reviews (3 in the space of an hour). Trustpilot take note!

I would not award 1 star if there was an option.
I bought a brand new house in April 2023 and due to mould, damp and even getting an infestation of plaster beetles after 3 weeks after completing, I was only able to move into the house in April this year. I complained initially to the developer who "as a good will gesture" paid for a heat treatment to be carried out on the house, this was done on 12th July 2023. It did get rid of the infestation, however, it did not get rid of the damp and mould. The developer blamed us for not moving in right away, how could we? the house was full of damp and mould??? Because of the excess damp and awful smell, we had 4 independent specialist reports done on the property all indicating that the house most likely got wet during build and there was excessive mould and damp within the house which was not acceptable. This was true as the cavity wall insulation, on inspection, was soaking wet. The developer refused to help us even after finding the whole of the lounge and dining room wall to be covered in thick black mould. Luckily NHBC took over the complaint and paid for the work to be carried out in February this year after giving the developer a deadline of the 18th December to complete the work required as it was within the first 2 years. The plasterboard was removed in February and we had to dry the cavity wall insulation out before the walls could be reinstated. We had to do this ourselves with funnels and heaters. This took us to April this year when the house was finally fit to live in.
I was advised by NHBC to take my complaint and claim for the expense this had caused me, to CEDR. The developer objected to the complaint but the initial adjudicator at CEDR said that they had no grounds to reject the claim and my claim was within scope. The final adjudicator and final decision maker ruled in favour of the developer and said they do not need to take any further action. I am now in £20000 worth of debt as the house was not fit to live in for the first 12 months and with the added stress and upset caused by the developer blaming us for the issues, how this adjudicator can rule in the developer's favour I and many others, will never know. I am extremely disappointed with their decision and frankly do not agree with it. I am looking further into the situation as I am left in debt and will probably now have to rent the house out or sell to pay off my debt caused by the developer not meeting build standard.
CEDR was my only real hope, because of my debt now, I cannot appoint a solicitor to help me. I have since lodged a complaint with the developer about a different issue and they have just told me to go to NHBC, this is only after 18th months since completion. This is what CEDR would call good practice??? Case:HOME006960

Seems pointless. Extremely complicated and protective of the subject of complaint. Who finances them?

Absolutely useless in a straightforward case of cancelled flights by BA and delayed rebooked flights with Iberia their parent company. Over a year later am still awaiting the compensation I am owed. Iberia simply keep breaching the response deadline they continuously ask CEDR for an extension while they 'await advice from their legal team' and CEDR continuously grant these extensions. At this rate I might get compensated in time for the next Ice age...

Review of CICAS Services

Overall, my experience with CICAS was very poor. I felt that CICAS lacked transparency regarding time delays and extensions. Despite committing to deadlines, extensions were still granted to both my communications provider and CICAS themselves, which happened in my case on multiple occasions with both parties.

I didn’t feel that CICAS genuinely listened to my concerns. Although I “won” a monetary settlement, I had made it clear to CICAS that my account setup with TalkTalk (my previous provider) was severely flawed. This setup prevented me from accessing any billing information, and I was very clear that I wanted a net zero balance and compensation (thus clearly any early termination fees any other fees TalkTalk choose to apply on the account) — especially as one of my issue had been that the contracted service had never even been installed.

Unfortunately, I still ended up having to contact TalkTalk to settle these fees, in order to be able to discuss them, as CICAS did not explicitly state that these charges would be cleared as part of the settlement. In fact, CICAS advised me that this would be my next step.

This process has felt like a complete waste of time, especially as I spent an additional 10 hours going back and forth with TalkTalk to resolve an account setup that was never done properly. Ultimately, I ended up paying them more than what I received in the settlement due to late fees and other fees TalkTalk applied without transparency!

This experience has been deeply disappointing and frustrating.

The training was fantastic - from start to finish, the organisation and communication was excellent. The trainers were engaging, thoughtful and clearly expert in their field. I really enjoyed the training and would highly recommend.

A very well organized and valuable course taught by faculty members who gave 110% in every aspect of it. It really encouraged you as a participant to give your all. I am already recommending it to people.

It was a great opportunity to meet top professional and passionate people both sides, trainers and participants.
The course is well structured and optimized for its purpose. The virtual study area technologically advanced, rich of contents and friendly to use.

In my case I lost over £15000, My credit score went down to 200 from 800, it caused family issue, damaged business ... ets....I proved all these and finally Cedr says: the company must apologies. That was my fist time, and definitely my last time to contact them for any issue I may have.

I tend to agree with the reviews left about CEDR.

They are not independent of the SRA, CEDR are its handmaidens, as the former pays their wages.

Even if CEDR agree with what you say, then make recommendations to the SRA, the SRA are not duty bound to respond or do anything whatsoever. The CEDR have no powers and are entirely pointless, making monies for old rope, supporting their pals at the SRA.

Both the SRA and CEDR defend complaints until the end, knowing that once CEDR have concluded their review, if you remain unhappy, you would then need to apply for a Judicial Review of its decision.

A daunting and potentially very expensive process for the many, which places 'Judicial Reviews' out of reach for the average person on the street. This is by design of course, which matches the bogus SRA complaint and CEDR review process. Its a process designed to silence the legitimate complaints made about malpractice.

CEDR also supply an annual review of complaints made against the SRA. On checking these, as if by magic, they are remarkable similar year on year. Giving a glowing report, yet the reviews on this platform are damning, as was a recent call for evidence about the SRA.

CEDR are professional complaint handlers, their aim is to make complaints about equally bogus solicitors disappear.

This is revealed if you look at the data both (SRA & CEDR) supply in relation to complaints, and that which is in the public domain via requests for information under the SRAs laughable 'Transparency Code'.

Its worth looking at recent calls for evidence in relation to the use of NDA's, to see what the public thinks of the SRA and its role as the alleged regulator.

The CEDR complaints system is remarkably similar to that of the SRA, it lacks transparency and sets people up to fail, as its weighted heavily towards its paymasters.

Both see all of your evidence in relation to your complaint, you're made to reveal your hand, whilst the SRA and CEDR never reveal theirs.

Once they know what evidence you have, the defending and alternate explanations commence.

Their so-called independent reviews are nothing more than templates which contain generalised information, and a regurgitation of the known facts.

Followed usually by the odd line or two, which in almost every case, upholds the decisions made by the bogus regulators the SRA.

The reviews by CEDR contain a narrative which is not supported by tangible evidence. In many cases their responses are inaccurate, some might say this is evidence of 'gaslighting'. I would tend to agree it. Both the SRA and CEDR are experts in this field.

If you compare the complaints reviews by both the SRA and CEDR, you'd be forgiven if you thought these had been written by the same people, there is little difference in how they formulate and present their responses.

There have been many recent articles written about the SRA and its bogus regulatory practices, like CEDR, its Trustpilot reviews are simply horrendous.

The majority of positive reviews for CEDR are in relation to those who have attended its courses, and not in relation to its regulatory oversight or review.

The responses left on this platform, in respect of CEDR review of SRA complaints are all 'bad', returning 1 - 5 rating. Which speaks for itself.

The SRA and CEDR processes are designed to protect the malpractices within the legal profession, rather than uphold the public interest.

Asking CEDR to intervene is a pointless task, part of an equally pointless and toothless review process.

Which is nothing more than a con to appease the unsuspecting public, into believing these two entities are legitimate.

The symbiotic relationship between the two is nothing more than a 'lawyers club', a system which protects itself.

If you have a gripe with the SRA or CEDR, my advice would be to go public, that's the only way they will do anything positive with your complaint. Due to the pressure and public interest/media interest.

If you are still unsure, check out the SRA and CEDR on Trustpilot, along with a quick google search provides much information to reveal both as bogus entities.

The legal profession lacks the necessary probity from the SRA and CEDR to ensure that the profession is regulated in a proportionate and legitimate manner.

Don't be fooled by the comments provided by CEDR after you've posted a review on Trustpilot. These are part of the SRA and CEDR propaganda campaign.

It's vacuous and empty rhetoric, part of its 'Gaslighting' of the parties leaving the reviews.

It might take a long-time or a particular case, but I have no doubt that one day the SRA and CEDR, will be exposed for the duplicitous organisations that they are.

Please keep exposing their nonsense, holding them to account. Don't let them silence your voices.

I was highly impressed by the course. We were given very helpful preparatory materials and instructions. Then, throughout most of the course-days, we were able to put what we'd learned into immediate practice in a series of very credible mock mediations and, latterly, two days of practice assessments. The instructors were very able, very helpful, and very encouraging.

Waste of breathe trying to get help with these people

Royal Mail complaint and CEDR are repeating the same thing over and over again to waste time with the case so it shows how much they care to help , if by anything it’s just a scam to get help from these people

====================
Update, November 1st POST007037

No point sending you an email as you took side of Royal Mail which was typically straight forward as you wasted time by asking repeating the same question over and over

You wasted my time
Postrs wasted time in which resulted in it being closed with no respect towards me

Bit obvious you would take their word over mine with everything that has gone wrong in the last few months , so if you wish this to be removed make a reverse decision about the lies POSTRS and RM have said as their management promised to fix things and they never did

Upto you to email me

The CEDR Mediator Skills Training program was a very well designed and comprehensive experiential learning program of utmost high-quality, from the pre-course preparations to post-course action plans beyond the classroom. I was very impressed with the entire program, especially the opportunity to be trained by very skilled instructors and practicing mediators.

Absolutely shocking experience and the so called adjudicator Kier Plaster must be plastered when he just makes his adjudication,s...I complained to Talk Talk in 2022 about the poor broadband connection and they sent me a booster but problems still continued then another company told me they've connected my broadband through a landline line when a simple test tells them we have full fibre connectivity in our area..But this clown of an adjudicator said they have no record of my complaint and when i told him did i just dream it up and did they just send me a booster as a free gift...! This just looks like another waste of charity money and needs everyone jumping on board and lobbying your MP,s to get this operation shutdown...And if you look this is a business set up as a charity and is mainly funded by companies its ment to be independently adjudicating about...? So in a nutshell an absolute comedy show..Getting the consumer thinking they are getting independent mediation when really their wages come from the private businesses 🤔....

In terms of content, methodology and of course the high quality of the trainers, I think this is a highly recommendable course. The week was very demanding, but totally worth it.

I am deeply disappointed with the outcome of my complaint to CEDR regarding the negligent Homebuyer Survey conducted by surveyors for my property. Despite clear evidence that the surveyors had failed to identify serious issues with the roof windows, the dispute service came back saying that the surveyors did everything correctly and do not need to take any action. This is an unacceptable conclusion.

The dispute service claims that a Condition Rating 2 for the windows was appropriate, but they have completely ignored the fact that the surveyor's report explicitly stated, "the windows do not need replacing." How can they stand by this when we experienced a significant roof leak within six months, requiring over £11,000 to replace all seven roof windows? The leak caused serious structural damage, and the survey should have given the windows a Condition Rating 3, reflecting the urgency and severity of the issue.

By siding with the surveyors and dismissing our concerns, the dispute service has failed to acknowledge the fundamental contradiction: if the windows didn’t need replacing, why did we then need to replace them six months later due to a leak? It seems they are more interested in defending the surveyors than addressing the real issues. Indeed, they clearly do not take complaints seriously as our request timed out once and we had to go through the whole process again.

This has left us with financial stress and no compensation. I would advise against using this service for dispute resolution; however, unfortunately we are not given the option. The system is broken. Their failure to hold the surveyors accountable for their negligence is appalling.

Absolute waste of time. Took them 2 months to accept my case for resolving dispute with BA then told the deadline had been extended past my flight date. Phoned customer services who was a complete human robot so cancelled. Don't bother!

British Airways (BA) ruined my family’s three suitcases on an outward flight from Heathrow in April 2024. I would expect a reputable airline to acknowledge the damage, provide compensation and work with Heathrow and relevant companies to improve its baggage handling service.

Instead BA shirked its responsibility: The BA website baggage form wasn't working, it doesn’t even offer any contact email address for damaged baggage claims, the BA damaged baggage team cannot be contacted by phone, the BA Customer Relations team respond with poorly written, unclear emails which appear to follow a strict generic template (or are drafted using an inexperienced AI tool) and make no reference to the details of my complaint and my specific circumstances.

BA's response to CEDR was woeful, citing 200 pages of irrelevant legislation and BA conditions of carriage (which I am already familiar with).

A long 4 month process with CEDR ended with a mysterious Adjudicator simply siding with BA with little rationale. I asked CEDR to confirm the independence of the Adjudicator and explain the decision further but the Enquiries team simply say they don't have any access to information.

What is the point of CEDR if it doesn't attempt to resolve disputes and explain the Adjudicator's rationale to the complainant?
Why doesn't CEDR hold BA accountable for its terrible customer service?
Case Reference Number: 679306

Don't waste your time. somehow now tv didn't cancel my membership. this is a known issue. they kept charging me without informing me on my membership email. according to CEDR I should have gotten paranoid and kept checking my nowtv account to understand whether I am being charged or not. they don't even understand that once people think they cancel their subscription they won't go back to their account. they also think that I should know now tv belongs to sky Ltd. I didn't. so I should be punished and charged for this.
edit to add: as you can see from their reply to me, they expect me to go to an account I thought I cancelled continously to make sure that I have really cancelled. this is unreasonable and inhumane because it would make a person paranoid so avoid avoid avoid. no responsibility to the system which doesn't send you correct bills or correct information. very unreasonable

Reading the reviews for CEDR i was really disappointed and surprised how badly people have been treated. I actually thought i would be ok because of all the evidence i have - How wrong was I!

I have been in battle with Barratt Homes for nearly 3 years, they have clearly breached Builders Code of Practice with all the evidence i have provided to CEDR, but CEDR still side with Barratts.

I had one adjudicator who said i had a claim and then another who said i hadn't, because the evidence wasn't suitable. They clearly haven't checked the evidence

I'm now challenging CEDR

I'm lost for words