Jump to content

rhino666

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by rhino666

  1. That's not fraud. No more than it is under normal circumstances. I wish I'd thought of that in the past. Top marks to him.
  2. Doesn't have to be some bloke , could be next door, and someone passing by if they willing to stay there long enough. The technology for this hasn't moved in years. It's old and vulnerable!
  3. My point being if its possible to get to security of that level then getting round a noddy o2/SKY/BT box isn't going to be hard. I remember watching a TV program about how easy it is to break into wi-fi quite a few years ago.
  4. The thing is there's lots of software ( some free ) out there that allows people to hack into Wifi and tutorials on Youtube on how to do it. Nothing digital is secure anymore. If people can break into the pentagon then cracking some mass produce, and overused consumer password system isn't going to be hard. They might as well go after anyone with a Yale lock key!!!
  5. I've just done a google search on "breaking into WI-FI" and it appears there's 100's of easy ways of doing this not to mention tutorials on youtube!!! plus some of the software to do this is free. Its madness of them to think everyone wants their crass low budget videos using software that can found on the internet with tutorials the encourage wi-fi break in.
  6. Is there anyway of getting confirmation of this: Golden Eye would only be granted access to data in relation to Ben Dover Production films, not the titles by twelve other production companies that Golden Eye were acting on behalf
  7. Thank you. from wiki In July 2012, the High Court ruled that Golden Eye would only be granted access to data in relation to Ben Dover Production films, not the titles by twelve other production companies that Golden Eye were acting on behalf of (including Terry Stephen's One Eyed Jack Productions and Justin Ribeiro Dos Santos's Joybear Pictures[74]) and would take 75% of any "damages" paid , which Mr Justice Arnold stated "would be tantamount to the court sanctioning the sale of the intended defendants’ privacy and data protection rights to the highest b
  8. Now the threats have really started. I'm not the downloader as these people have suggested. but I'm also not 100% how to go about answering either. If I've got 1 then others will be getting them too.
  9. I'd go as far as saying 90% of the job on there are fake and definitely not checked. It's a well known fact that agencies post jobs on there that don't exist because it costs them nothing to do this. Why do it? so you can approach employers and tell them you have x000 people on your books looking for work so they can be picked above other agencies. Then there's lots of old vacancies that should have been taken off. and vacancies that just don't add up!!!, links are wrong, wrong contact details that weren't checked, commission only jobs etc etc. and then there's agencies that list a job
  10. Out of curiosity does anyone know if other countries put up with this ?.
  11. This is there way of saying "They've lost control and the public must now pay". It's the only way they have of fighting back..... the dirty way!!! Time to get rid of the I.T think tanks as they're no longer needed arguing the toss with the customer is now the order of the day. The only way not to get ripped by these highway robbers is if we all go back to stashing money under the bed!
  12. What actions? Personally I'd ignore it until they produce another letter specifying what actions.
  13. They won't bite the hand that feeds them. Fact!
  14. "Kent County Council charges 15p per day for books that are returned late, up to a maximum of £6." I've read that sentence a thousand times now.!! Why would anyone send a DC out to collect £6 ????
  15. OK, I'll get on with it and read them. Fingers crossed.
  16. As the Collection Dept is part of Lloyds and it's clear letter what the money is for , surely their admin is at fault rather than me being at fault, It was the collections dept that were dealing with me in the first place. + if there is no CCA as they themselves have said in writing surely the last thing in the world I want, or anyone else wants, is a CCA giving them the right to take me to court. Yes I am trying to avoid paying but I'm doing so for a damn good reason.... I NEVER withdrew the funds and was NEVER supplied a CCA in the first place which is what they're supossed to do in the f
  17. The bank is LLoyds and the DCA is credit security and the original £1 was sent to their (Lloyds) collections dept as cash , but like I said it was sent recorded delivery and the deduction of £ is there on a statement. so it can all be backed up. Sure their bad administration is not my problem if I can prove I've obeyed the law and I made it PERFECTLY clear in the letter requesting a CCA. and if they close the complaint down that's their problem. As said ... they've admitted they don't have it the CCA in writing! The thing is I haven't made a complaint. I merely laid dow
×
×
  • Create New...