Jump to content

rhino666

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by rhino666

  1. Yes it was Listened to them give wrong date after wrong date, argue between themselves and now enough is enough. Even harsh language hasn't worked. Listened to them give one excuse after the next, use harsh language, threaten to jump ship. They haven't full filled their end of a contract which is to provide a service.
  2. Summary of problems: Admitted they overcharged me for 3 yrs, eventually got money back, Want to go on sky fibre, but had to cancel my existing broadband to do so as this was on a separate contract, cancel as they said And now 4 weeks later after placing an order over the phone I still have no broadband and now no telephone. Keep being told start date after the next to point I'm now so sick of it I'll have to go else where. I've been given wrong numbers, told wrong policies, Told incorrect contract lengths, and a whole lot more. Please someone tell me I'm within my right
  3. Oh great as if things aren't bad enough: http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/133145-if-you-re-with-sky-and-use-torrents-your-details-might-already-be-in-the-hands-of-copyright-trolls#
  4. section 9 http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1740.html and this might also help https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Golden_Eye_International , But reading through https://acsbore.wordpress.com/ yes they are on the prowl again. 3rd para https://acsbore.wordpress.com/2014/01/
  5. They're ignoring what the high court said and about 18months too late. ask them to prove who was at the PC at the time of the supposed infringement as the courts would be very interested in as many people have access to your pc and the bill payer can't be held responsible for every adult.
  6. So how are you supposed to prove you A) Bought one B) bought more than one.
  7. You should be OK now as there 12months to get hold of people expired many moons ago. They ignore most the court orders so if you do get a letter from them ignore it as they were supposed to have got people by approx Dec last year and supposed crime is supposed to have taken place with 3 years of them moaning about it.
  8. They can't take what you do not have! and they've probably rejected what you offered because it's their job to. They want more ... but reality says "That's your lot, take it or leave it!". I wouldn't take any notice of what they reject. Just give them what you can afford and tell them to take it or leave it. Seriously even a judge can't make you give what you do not have because it physically isn't there!!! And as for Moorcroft treat them with a much contempt as want. They have no legal right to demand ANYTHING off. it doesn't mattter if they say Our client this and out client th
  9. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Millions down the drain!! Software company 1 Taxpayer 0
  10. If ever there's an expense to the jobseeker cough up BEFORE starting a job you can almost guarantee it's fishy!
  11. Yep, it's not hard but it's too simple for those in charge. The amount of bureaucracy involved in doing anything with Gov't is laughable. if any council in the UK was a business they'd all go out of business. Someone somewhere is accountable for the UJM and person is trying to protect their job and your expense. its pretty obvious the UJM wasn't tested properly but it was signed off as fit for purpose by someone in a govt who's scared of failure and doesn't want to seen as wasting public money.....Well guess what!!
  12. Yep sorry wrong thread. I had a the same problem once where I didn't give them an option in accepting a token payment. I paid it, they didn't send it back thus it was accepted. This was done via a bank account payment so it couldn't be rejected. Maybe I was lucky. I'm not sure where each party stands if you make a payment to them and they don't return the payment , because I'm sure it wouldn't look good in court if they returned what you'd paid.
  13. They should also ban self-employed positions. You're almost guaranteed to end up back where you started .
  14. They could start with: If it's an agency ask for the name of the company even if they don't publish it on the site 2) random checks on the company 3) take the agency to court if they are found to advertising fake jobs. But to accomplish this they'd need their own task force.
×
×
  • Create New...