CEDR - Conflict Resolution Training and Commercial Mediation Opiniões 677

Appalling service. I went to them in regards to the treatment I received from TalkTalk broadband provided evidence asked them to bare with me as I'm not technically minded if they wished to get more information just to ask and I'd have an intermediary assist me received an email yesterday point blank refusal in looking at the case

From my experience, the CISAS service from CEDR is free to the complainant because no one in their right mind would pay for its arbitration. I provided CISAS with high quality verifiable evidence about the ISP Company but they completely ignored it - and questions I had too. Apparently the ADJUDICATOR CAN DECIDE WHAT OF MY EVIDENCE THEY WANT TO LOOK AT. How fair is that? I attempted to appeal the adjudicator's decision but CISAS refused. Later when I complained about their service I discovered that THEY tell YOU WHAT YOU CAN COMPLAIN ABOUT!

During the case I rejected a paltry settlement from the ISP, only for CISAS to AWARD ME NOTHING AT ALL IN ITS DECISION! NOT EVEN AN APOLOGY. When I checked the one star reviews here on Trustpilot, 38% of people say that CISAS was a waste of time and at least 15% say CEDR is biased. I found over 110 references to CISAS CORRUPTION experienced by the complainants. A small percentage of the reviews interpret the bias as incompetence, but like me, 13% or more reviewers say their evidence has been ignored, isn't that BIAS?

CISAS derives income from the companies being complained about. It also derives income from running training courses which accounts for about 66% of the 5 & 4 star Trustpilot reviews i.e. not the quality of its adjudication. It does not publish data on CUSTOMER SATISFACTION and the number of COMPLAINTS it receives about ITS OWN SERVICE and the rate of COMPLIANCE with any upheld outcomes. It has also published misleading data. Its table titled 'CISAS Case Outcome Data' on its website is really a combination of CISAS and the Communications Ombudsman's data. Incidentally, the Communications Ombudsman's website doesn't do likewise. That is, admit that its stats are merged with those from CISAS (they are). But that's another can of worms...

I also wonder about CISAS so-called "oversight and approval". From the reports I've read, its process of quality-control has not been overseen by a totally uninfluenced invigilator, more like a chummy old friend. Shouldn't the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIARB) oversee the CISAS? I see that three CEDR adjudicators are members of the CIARB, but isn't the CISAS an embarrassment to it?

What is Ofcom doing about CISAS's make-believe arbitration? IMHO we can only hope that Ofcom's report 'Strategic review of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in telecoms' will shake up these services that promise impartiality but do not deliver it. At present consumers have a choice between two 'evils' while telecoms companies have a choice between two ALLIES. I strongly recommend that if you can, avoid the utter waste of time with either the Communications Ombudsman or CISAS. If your complaint is strong enough (and you are) take your case to the County Court. And of course, leave a review of the ISP etc., on Trustpilot. Thank goodness that honest, ordinary people can publish their reviews on this site. Good luck.

Complete Waste of Time. Don’t spend hours submitting a case. They will just side with the company.

A high quality course, with both theory and practical aspects. Very knowledgeable mentors and valuable feedback during the course. I will have great use of all the lessons learned from the course in many aspects.

The role play was an incredibly good learning experience. The only problem was that there were so many cases and so many different role paly instructions to read. This affected the quality of some colleagues' performance (and my own possibly) and also meant that we had less time reflecting on what we just learned in a particular role play.

Incompetent, dishonest and not fit for purpose.
They made no reference to anything I had submitted in their defence of BA. Please remember that CEDR is funded by the company you're complaining about. Case number: 681165

CEDR rejected my case on the basis that "The company provided convincing evidence that the customer missed the BA296 from ORD to LHR" which was completely and utterly false. The journey I made was from Tampa to Chicago, then a connecting flight from Chicago to London Heathrow (this second flight is what I was in dispute with BA about). I was on the specified flight from Tampa to Chicago to make my originally planned connection. However, I was given boarding passes for (the wrong flight) AA46, which should have departed earlier than BA296 - the flight British Airways didn't put me on. So there was no way I could have been late or missed that flight. In the end, the AA46 flight was delayed by over 5 hours.

I provided evidence that I was supposed to be on BA296, again the adjudicator had decided the outcome from the point above and said this was untrue. This was clearly to help them maintain their biased argument.

BA/AA didn't give me a boarding pass for BA296 even though I was booked on it. I don't know how I was supposed to get back without taking the AA46 flight. It's an offence to board a plane without a boarding pass, and I'm not sure how I'm supposed to get past the gate?

I'm completely baffled by the adjudicator's conclusion and can only assume that they haven't read the case properly, doesn't understand the merits of the case and is biased in favour of the airline. To make completely inaccurate allegations to dismiss the case on these grounds has broken any trust or confidence in CEDR to deal properly with people's cases. I hope that in future this adjudicator won't show the same level of malice towards other complainants and allow airlines to get away with bad behaviour.

Also, when I inquired about making a formal complaint - guess what - there was none.

IF I COULD THIS DESERVES NO STARS AT ALL..TRUSTPILOT..CANT YOU DO ANYTHING ABOUT THIS COMPANY!!....ITS RIDICULOUS THEY HAVE SO MANY BAD REVIEWS..ALL THE GOOD ONES ARE FROM PEOPLE ON THEIR COURSES TO DO MEDIATION!!!!!!!!!!....WE SHOULD GET TOGETHER ALL THOSE PEOPLE THAT HAVE NEW HOUSES!!! AND TAKE IT TO PARLIAMENT AND ALL THE ROGUES INVOLVED THAT SUPPORT COWBOY DEVELOPERS..
REALLY REALLY JUST DONT WASTE YOUR TIME ON

CEDR...THE ADJUDICATOR DID NOT READ ALL THE PAPERWORK....KEPT HARPING ON ABOUT PHOTOS BEING OUT OF DATE..WHEN ALL THE DATES TAKEN WERE ON THEM....I AM SURPRISED THE COMPANY IS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE....THERE SHOULD BE MORE SUPPORT FOR BUYERS OF NEW HOMES, NOT SIMPLY WARRANTIES AS THERE IS NO SUPPORT THERE AT ALL....I WOULD NEVER EVER BUY A NEW HOME...AND I WOULD DISCOURAGE ANY ONE ELSE TO BUY A NEW HOME!..COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME...THE DEVELOPER WHO IS DISHONEST IS SIMPLY ALLOWED TO 'GET AWAY' WITH HIS TERRIBLE BEHAVIOUR....NEEDS TO BE TAKEN TO PARLIAMENT TO STOP ROGUE DEVELOPERS!!!!

This training is a change maker for the people who does it and for society.
The process is incredibly powerful.

Fantastic learning experience with CEDR. Amazing teaching and great content! Preparation is key as you can then make the most of it during the training!

It is quite obvious that CEDR work for the companies. The only evidence referenced in their response was from the company. We were offered £500 by the company initially as they knew they had made mistakes. I wish I had just taken it now as we are now left with nothing after our roof has been relayed and drive dug up twice!! Absolute waste of hours of time and huge amounts of financial and emotional stress. None of which was considered by cedr.

Avoid using this company at all costs. Totally unprofessional and do not understand British law. They've been dealing with a case with pop Telecom and me and according to them it's okay for pop Telecom to increase my bill by 48% and ignore all contact with me so they would not give me a refund zen pop Telecom cut my Wi-fi service and according to them that is fine there will be more to come after I've finished in court I will give you the proper judges decision

CEDR are flawed and even the mobile networks know this. Hence why everyone accept Vodafone use the Communication Ombudsman now as there ARD. CEDR Agent has made numerous mistakes in my case, they have agreed and the evidence all points to this. However as a ARD ironically they have no process in place to resolve mistakes made by their agents. I am now out of pocket because of their mistakes. These ARD's are not regulated, they can get away with whatever they want, does that sound like a fair impartial service to you!

Very happy with CEDR for my claim with BA regarding a missed connection and therefore a 24 hours delay arriving at my destination. Good service.

I first dealt with CEDR back in the July of 2022.

Long story short, my father in law who has dementia, was sold a Sky package. He was told at the time for him to have TV and Telephone service, it would be cheaper to get basic as well as this was actually cheaper than the two separately.

Fast forward, Sky billed him as agreed, but then decided to add Superfast Broadband at an additional £30 a month. When I complained to Sky, they refused to amend the bill, and subsequently went directly to a man they knew had dementia and gave him £200. Far less than owed.

After getting CEDR involved, they found nothing wrong with this arrangement. They also provided me with the wrong dates to submit my final appeal. When I did, they said they had made their final decision and my entire defence these “comments would not have amended the published decision in any way.”

I have found out today that he has still be paying for Superfast Broadband even though he has never received any equipment from Sky!

Way to go CEDR 🙌🏻 unsurprisingly you are funded by the likes of Sky! Now I will actually take it to court to get some real unbiased resolution.

*I would urge anyone not to consider using you absolute monkeys! Hence your atrocious score here!!*

What can I say. CEDR were given their allotted timeframe to respond (20 days) on the last day they sent a note stating they can not do anything without my authorisation to allow my husband to go ahead with the claim on my behalf. In my opinion it was an excuse to gain a further 7 days only to come back and tell us that we have no solid evidence. This issue was in relation to our conservatory which is 8 years old. We moved in, in May and the rain comes in through the roof. They had the audacity to suggest that as they could see no water damage to the floor we must not be telling the truth. The floor is stone!!! Despite the hard photo evidence and multiple quotes from legitimate contractors stating the conservatory was not fit for purpose. They close the complaint. Even taking an additional unnecessary 6 days. I am completely outraged by the whole situation. I know also they won’t even read this. They will only respond to the 5 star reviews but it’s good to get it off my chest.

Very intensive but rewarding course - learnt a lot.

The CEDR programme was a very well structured and delivered experience that took well tested principles and applied them in a really practical way. It was intense but extremely enjoyable and had the added benefit of being shared with a diverse group of smart, warm and fun people

The training was excellent. It was challenging, comprehensive and enjoyable. I was exhausted but extremely satisfied after the week of intensive training.

Enjoyable and instructive

Organisation pretends to have an independence, and an illusion, in reality - semi-atomatic responses created by robots and against own procedures and the law - sitting squarely with the businesses that funding CEDR. Should be ashamed of themselves.