I contacted Daniel Evans from Rapid Data Recovery (http://www.rapid-data.net/) and was quoted between £97 and £150 to recover approx 120Gb of data from a hard drive with a mechanical fault. Thinking this was a good price I sent the HD off and phoned four days later for an update.
I was told that the engineers were unable to find any data on the HD and that they suspected the PCB on the back. To try another recovery they would have to replace the PCB at a cost of £195, due to the part being ordered from America.
I called Daniel four times over the following week and eventually was told that they had received the new PCB, installed it and tried to recover the information. I was told they were only able to get 2% of the data back before the second PCB broke down, and that the data recovered was all corrupt.

At this point I told Daniel that I was not prepared to pay any more money for further repair attempts, and asked him to return my hard drive. He told me it would be returned in that evening's post, but four days later I had to call again. The UPS tracking number he gave me was incorrect, and I had to call him 3 times to remind him to contact UPS and find my HD.

Eventually I told Daniel that I was considering legal action as I felt he had lost my hard drive. he called me that evening to say he had found it and re-sent it. It arrived the following day, and there is no evidence of any work having been done to the hard drive.

I have since scanned the internet (which I wish I had done first) and found that many people have had the same problem.

Below is a copy of the standard technical report they sent me:-

job number ###### (number removed)

Re: 3.5" Sata - Data Recovery

The diagnosis has been completed on your damaged HDD and the technician involved on the recovery has advised the following:

Diagnosis results have shown that the head assembly unit has failed. The technician has advised the next stage of the recovery process is to replace the complete head assembly unit, rebuild the HDD and then attempt to extract your data. This is a highly skilled process but unfortunately isn't infallible. The chance of a successful recovery once the process has been completed is approximately 85%.

The costs to continue are as follows:

Parts/labour required to attempt HDA transplant - £195 + VAT.

If unsuccessful this initial payment is non-refundable. If successful the following cost to retrieve your data will be applicable:

Data Recovery - £195 + VAT.

At present you have incurred no costs and if you decide against the recovery attempt I can return your disk FOC.

If you decide to continue with the recovery attempt I can accept the initial payment via credit/debit card and the process will be completed in 2-4 working days.

Online order [Order Reference 14331] made to www.smartinks.co.uk on 3 May 2009 for 1 x original Konica Minolta Drum Unit part no. 1710591-001, with £117.44 paid by Visa credit card. Received e-mail acknowledgement but the part was never delivered. Over more than two months I sent some 20 communications to the company by direct email, by online website message, and by telephone and post. In most cases I merely received an automated acknowledgement from helpdesk@smartinks.co.uk promising a response within 8 working hours, a promise never kept. At no time was it ever possible to speak to anyone directly by telephone. I did manage to get an email response from the company on 15 June, which said "Sorry for the delay and inconvenience regarding this order, I will look into this personally and get the item delivered to you by Recorded Delivery or Courier, if you require further assistance please email me direct to damian@smartinks.co.uk ".

Since then I sent another 5 separate email messages to "Damian" without any response (the last one from me was on 15 July 2009), and communications from the company have dried up. I would rather like the drum unit if they would only send it, but otherwise they owe me £117.44. Currently Smartinks is in breach of contract.

- Professor Dennis Russell, Ventnor, Isle of Wight.

Summary.
Computer hard drive not working. Chose Data Clinic (DC) for assistance in recovering data.

Sat 19/09
Rang DC for quotation.
Email from DC confirming quotation.
Email to DC asking whether half price has been taken into account.

Sun 20/09
Email from DC confirming half price offer taken into consideration.

Mon 21/09
Email from DC confirming collection details, job number etc.
Item collected by ParcelForce (PF) courier.

Tue 06/10
Rang DC to ask how recovery going
Customer Contact (CC) called back. Explained that the parcel has gone missing and he will chase up with courier.
Checked PF web site. Item was delivered on 22/09 and signed for by CC.
Rang and spoke to CC. He explained further that the delivery label had come detached from my item. He was checking with PF and would come back to me in a day.

Thu 08/10
16:13 Left message for CC to contact me. He was on another phone call.

Fri 09/10
14:22 Left message for CC to contact me. He was on another phone call. Gent I spoke to said they are still waiting to hear back from courier. I said I'm ringing as I haven't spoken to him in three days. CC went off to lunch whilst I was on phone.
15:17 CC left voice-mail to say no luck at their local PF (Bury) depot. He had since spoken to the collection depot (Exeter) and was waiting to hear back from them. If no luck they would be escalating this.

Tue 13/10
Rang DC for an update (hoping they would have good news). Spoke to CC who said that PF Exeter depot had confirmed the package was not with them. PF were now checking nationally(!) Discussed situation with CC - he explained they would be filing a claim against PF because they hadn't delivered (their agreed service - not my parcel!!) It was left that I would wait to hear from CC when they had some news for me although he did say that this has happened once before and it took the parcel six weeks to turn up.

Wed 04/11
05:35 Emailed DC for update
08:01 Response received from DC advising that CC still chasing up as they have not heard from PF. CC not in til 10am. DC to get CC to call me.

Tue 10/11
Rang CC for update. He explained that to sum up there was now "very little or no chance" of my hard drive being delivered. PF had checked both at collection and delivery depots and because the item had become detached from the delivery paperwork it could be anywhere in the company. I confirmed that any action that I decide to take would be with DC (the arrangement is between me and them). DC in the meantime are considering what to do re PF; PF are in breach of their contract with DC. Discussed with CC that I am going to pursue this by way of complaint and confirmed that email is OK. I also asked whether it was worth me approaching PF direct. CC said I shouldn't be surprised if PF redirected me back to DC. CC also mentioned compensation but said that he needs to discuss this case in full with his manager (who was not in until later this week). I left it that I will be in touch.

I purchased an AMILO Notebook Laptop in February of this year from Argos costing me £449-00. In October the computer would not boot up. I telephoned Fujitsu who had me do various things to get it working however it wouldn't. I was told that they would send someone to collect it and that they would repair it free of charge if it was their fault or let me know the cost if it was something that I had caused. The only instruction I was given was to stick a reference number on that they gave to me. The laptop was collected the following week and I heard nothing until a letter arrived with cost adding up to £457-01 and a brief description of cost:

Mixed cost estimate for the exchange of the display (broken display) the hard drivem back cover and bottom cover - no warrenty becasue mechanically damaged, attached disclaimer documents by UPS

I telephoned Fujitsu and was advised due to not packaging the laptop appropriatly the screen had been broken in transit and therefore the warreny was not valid and I would have to pay for the repair. I was told given the description of the fault it would of been the screen that needed replacing and this would of been done under warrently had it been wrapped properly.

My complaint is that at no time was I advised as to how I should package the laptop, nor that I could of taken out insurance in the event of breakage and that no letter was sent to explain what had occured.

I am now expected to pay another £457-01 (which is more than the cost of a new laptop) in order for it to be in working condition. I feel that I should of been given clear instruction as to who was collecting it and how it should be wrapped or that packaging should of been sent for me to return the laptop in.

I want either the laptop returned with the screen replaced under the warrenty or a new laptop. I do not feel that I have been treated fairly.