asda ignoring complaint letters - need ceo email ad please

[jayble]

How can customers contact senior executives at asda head office when all e mails and letters sent by royal mail are received by Customer Services who do not even acknowledge receipt or pass them to the person they ere addressed to. They have even failed to respond to an official complaint sent by post. Phone calls are received by Customer Service personnel who promise to "chase it up" but do nothing.

[rebel11]

Hi jay

 

Welcome to CAG

 

Andy Clarke, Chief Executive

[email protected]

Mark it as a Formal Letter of Complaint

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1242161/How--write-letter-complaint.html

[gpmsc]

Hi jay

 

Welcome to CAG

 

Andy Clarke, Chief Executive

 

 

Mark it as a Formal Letter of Complaint

 

He will just pass it on to one of his subordinates and they will refer you back to the store manager

[BazzaS]

He will just pass it on to one of his subordinates and they will refer you back to the store manager

 

Were you planning on "resuscitating" many more years old Asda threads?

[gpmsc]

Were you planning on "resuscitating" many more years old Asda threads?

 

The law still uses statutes dating back to the 1700s, unless a murderer is charged a homicide is still open until the offender is charged and proven guilty, so why should any company that continues with the same practice be year on year be exempt a year or two later? Companies that ignore customer complaints for time in memorial should be held to account for time in memorial. Yours is the sort of response I would expect from the store's management who are in denial and feel they are so big they can walk over their customers.

 

Gerry PM

[BazzaS]

The law still uses statutes dating back to the 1700s, unless a murderer is charged a homicide is still open until the offender is charged and proven guilty, so why should any company that continues with the same practice be year on year be exempt a year or two later? Companies that ignore customer complaints for time in memorial should be held to account for time in memorial. Yours is the sort of response I would expect from the store's management who are in denial and feel they are so big they can walk over their customers.

 

Gerry PM

 

It is just my opinion so feel free to reject it, but if you want to persuade people / get them "onside":

 

Post your tale of woe (oops, you have)

By all means refer there to these previous threads to reinforce your points.

 

With a well crafted post making clear points you'll influence many more people than bringing up years old threads as if they were current.

 

Do you feel that posting on years old threads gives the impression of "reasonable person, wronged" or "ruminative obsessional who can't get past their interpretation of what has happened to them, may not put their complaint in perspective, might then get ignored by the company and is going to be trawling the internet for any posts criticising their personal bête noir"

[gpmsc]

It is just my opinion so feel free to reject it, but if you want to persuade people / get them "onside":

 

Post your tale of woe (oops, you have)

By all means refer there to these previous threads to reinforce your points.

 

With a well crafted post making clear points you'll influence many more people than bringing up years old threads as if they were current.

 

Do you feel that posting on years old threads gives the impression of "reasonable person, wronged" or "ruminative obsessional who can't get past their interpretation of what has happened to them, may not put their complaint in perspective, might then get ignored by the company and is going to be trawling the internet for any posts criticising their personal bête noir"

 

 

 

It is just my opinion so feel free to reject it, but if you want to persuade people / get them "onside":

 

Post your tale of woe (oops, you have)

By all means refer there to these previous threads to reinforce your points.

 

With a well crafted post making clear points you'll influence many more people than bringing up years old threads as if they were current.

 

Without Prejudice

 

BazzerS I greet you well

 

I was taught to be cautious. If you are not a member of the legal profession, judiciary or a Judge I do not wish for your opinion and as for your statement "Post your tale of woe (oops, you have)" I find this statement offensive. You should have at least researched the full extent of my posts on this site prior to expressing your opinion. (You seem to want to gloss over the past which signifies a typical sign of subordinate or management denial when there is something they no longer wish to discuss.) I am viewing the good or bad experiences of others with major retailers who diversify outside of their comfort zone. Many of these I have found to be negative owing to lack of product knowledge and company protocols. Inappropriate use is being made of company policy and staff often take advantage of the "zero tolerance" policy and use it to avoid carrying out the duties for which they are engaged. To be quite frank I have not been researching to get people "onside" and if I need counsel I will seek that of a Judge. I feel this subject is now going off topic and no longer requires a response.

[BazzaS]

It is just my opinion so feel free to reject it, but if you want to persuade people / get them "onside":

 

Post your tale of woe (oops, you have)

By all means refer there to these previous threads to reinforce your points.

 

With a well crafted post making clear points you'll influence many more people than bringing up years old threads as if they were current.

 

I've sorted out your "mangled quotation", by the way.

What I wrote is attributed to me now, with what you wrote attributed to you.

 

Without Prejudice

 

BazzerS I greet you well

 

I was taught to be cautious. If you are not a member of the legal profession, judiciary or a Judge I do not wish for your opinion and as for your statement "Post your tale of woe (oops, you have)" I find this statement offensive. You should have at least researched the full extent of my posts on this site prior to expressing your opinion. (You seem to want to gloss over the past which signifies a typical sign of subordinate or management denial when there is something they no longer wish to discuss.) I am viewing the good or bad experiences of others with major retailers who diversify outside of their comfort zone. Many of these I have found to be negative owing to lack of product knowledge and company protocols. Inappropriate use is being made of company policy and staff often take advantage of the "zero tolerance" policy and use it to avoid carrying out the duties for which they are engaged. To be quite frank I have not been researching to get people "onside" and if I need counsel I will seek that of a Judge. I feel this subject is now going off topic and no longer requires a response.

.

 

Apologies if my saying " a well crafted post" may have given you that impression that I am a Mason, given the Masonic references in your reply.

I'm not a Mason.

Some of my friends probably are, but since they seem public-spirited, reasonable people I'm unsure why Freemasonry has even crossed your radar.

 

My writing "well crafted post" was because yours wasn't well crafted, for the reasons I gave, not for any Masonic reference.

 

Neither am I a "member of the legal profession, judiciary or a Judge" : since your initial post didn't state that was a qualification required to reply how was I (or other non-lawyers) expected to know of your requirements?.

 

You re-opened (for reasons still unclear to me) a years old thread. Thus my replies aren't 'off topic' since the inappropriateness of doing so has become the topic.

 

As for you only seeking "counsel of a judge", and feeling the need to make your reply "without prejudice" : I'm not likely to be looking to the law courts to resolve an online debate.

 

I again suggest that such a reply gives the impression of a not entirely balanced individual : taken with your previous response - are you known to a psychiatrist / CPN / psychologist? Might they wish to review you?.

 

(Who writes "without prejudice" [with or without bolding] on an openly visible forum post, anyhow?. Risible.)

Edited October 5, 2013 by BazzaS

[gpmsc]

I've sorted out your "mangled quotation", by the way.

What I wrote is attributed to me now, with what you wrote attributed to you.

 

.

 

Apologies if my saying " a well crafted post" may have given you that impression that I am a Mason, given the Masonic references in your reply.

I'm not a Mason.

Some of my friends probably are, but since they seem public-spirited, reasonable people I'm unsure why Freemasonry has even crossed your radar.

 

My writing "well crafted post" was because yours wasn't well crafted, for the reasons I gave, not for any Masonic reference.

 

Neither am I a "member of the legal profession, judiciary or a Judge" : since your initial post didn't state that was a qualification required to reply how was I (or other non-lawyers) expected to know of your requirements?.

 

You re-opened (for reasons still unclear to me) a years old thread. Thus my replies aren't 'off topic' since the inappropriateness of doing so has become the topic.

 

As for you only seeking "counsel of a judge", and feeling the need to make your reply "without prejudice" : I'm not likely to be looking to the law courts to resolve an online debate.

 

I again suggest that such a reply gives the impression of a not entirely balanced individual : taken with your previous response - are you known to a psychiatrist / CPN / psychologist? Might they wish to review you?.

 

(Who writes "without prejudice" [with or without bolding] on an openly visible forum post, anyhow?. Risible.)

 

BazzerS

 

You are scraping the barrel now. I am not known nor have I been refered to a psychiatrist / CPN / psychologist? Perhaps you could recommend me yours. your final word sums your whole conversation up. You can be as rude as you wish but please do not expect me to revert.

 

Gerry

Edited October 5, 2013 by gpmsc
error

[BazzaS]

BazzerS

 

You are scraping the barrel now. I am not known nor have I been refered to a psychiatrist / CPN / psychologist? Perhaps you could recommend me yours.

 

Why would me availing myself of the professional support of a psychologist be a bad thing or a weakness? as the tone of your post appears to suggest.

 

Some job roles / some employers might involve such support to avoid occupational health issues, rather than suggesting someone using such support has a problem.

 

MIND suggest that one in four people in the UK will be affected by mental health problems at some stage in their lifetime. Surely this burden could be reduced if it wasn't seen as a bad thing to seek support, or people had more insight....

 

My psychologist would likely not see you, nor likely be able to help you if they did, given they specialise in issues of transference and counter-transference in the work environment, and their help requires insight in their client, rather than trying to help ruminatives lacking in insight (who would require a rather different skill set)

 

"How many psychologists does it take to change a light bulb ..... "?

 

"Only one, but the lightbulb has to want to change"

 

your final word sums your whole conversation up. You can be as rude as you wish but please do not expect me to revert.

 

Gerry

 

You type that I shouldn't expect you to "revert" (and it isn't clear what you mean by that), but you certainly have responded, both overly defensively and "lashing back".

 

Clearly you feel I've been rude : but why? - My responses are only a "holding up a mirror" to your posts.

 

I still suggest you look at how resurrecting years olds threads and then reacting defensively, only wanting 'replies from lawyers', and viewing psychological support as an indicator of weakness makes you appear.

You claim not to be bothered by what people think, but your posts suggest otherwise ....

 

I suspect your friend may have more chance of getting their ban from Asda rescinded without your "help" if your taking up his case with Asda has proceeded along similar lines as your interactions here.

Edited October 6, 2013 by BazzaS

[porkyp1g]

The guy don't like ASDA then, they seem okay to me

[Liberty13]

"I still suggest you look at how resurrecting years olds threads and then reacting defensively, only wanting 'replies from lawyers', and viewing psychological support as an indicator of weakness makes you appear.

You claim not to be bothered by what people think, but your posts suggest otherwise ...."

 

This is gas lighting in action and it's why I try not to use certain forums anymore, I had hoped this place would be different.

[BazzaS]

"I still suggest you look at how resurrecting years olds threads and then reacting defensively, only wanting 'replies from lawyers', and viewing psychological support as an indicator of weakness makes you appear.

You claim not to be bothered by what people think, but your posts suggest otherwise ...."

 

This is gas lighting in action and it's why I try not to use certain forums anymore, I had hoped this place would be different.

 

I had to look up "gas lighting"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

 

So, which information I've provided are you suggesting is false?

 

resurrecting years olds threads ... He did

reacting defensively .... He did

only wanting 'replies from lawyers' ..... He didn't say this initially, but later added it

viewing psychological support as an indicator of weakness ... His response suggested this

 

You may not agree with my assessment, but I've not presented any false information .....

Edited October 10, 2013 by BazzaS

[Liberty13]

BazzaS,

 

To assume that someone needs psychological help based on the limited information you had would be seen as ignorant to any reasonable person. To suggest that anyone needs psychological help, particularly a stranger who you don't know, particularly one you're arguing with and lack real concern with for, the way you did is offensive. It would be a touchy subject even between friends or family and would need to be brought up tactfully. You then took use his natural offense as evidence of some kind of hang up.

 

Let me give you an example: a girl at work I dislike has put on a slight but noticeable amount of weight, emphasis on slight, one day I choose to ask her in front of everyone if she's pregnant. If this happened she would have every right to be offended and my motives would be clear to her and everyone else in the office who knew I don't really like her. If I then tried to make the argument that there's nothing wrong with pregnancy and therefore no need for her to be offended I would look even worse, you don't have to have an issue with pregnancy to be offended for someone suggesting you look pregnant.

 

You had no basis to bring up his mental health, even if for some reason you felt it was true you should have known it would offend and kept it to yourself - after all you didn't honestly think he'd be receptive to the advice of an unqualified stranger? I actually think the reverse is true, that you make a mockery of mental illness by bringing it unnecessarily into this argument. You have been critical of his behavior and obviously have a low opinion of him - is this just how you think all mentally ill people are? Petty? Irrational? Ruminative? Is there even a mental illness which primarily consists of these symptoms? Those sound like character traits.

 

Being mentally ill doesn't make someone unpleasant (many people can be nasty and unpleasant all by themselves)neither does simply having a mental illness mean someone can't be objective and will exhibit their symptoms in every situation. A depressed person can make valid negative conclusions about a situation which any other other non depressed would make without their depression being the driving factor. And mental illness isn't something anyone wants to have, try asking someone with it. It doesn't make someone weak but it is a weakness, like a physical impairment- if you can't get this then I don't know what else to tell you.

 

To answer the rest of your questions I would guess he reacted defensively because of how you came at him, your tone. As for the the lawyer thing, that isn't necessarily what he was saying - it was specific to you because I'm guessing he found your opinions unhelpful, rude and off topic. The bringing up the old thread issue well it just happens from time to time in forums for various reasons, sometimes people don't even realize it's old and will ask the OP a question- sometimes it's a good thing, newbies get to see something interesting they otherwise wouldn't have, if not it's easy to just ignore the thread. I don't have any major issues with Asda but for people who are having problems with them it is helpful to know that even escalating to the Chief Executive isn't straightforward.

 

That's all I have to say, I have no interest in pointless e-beefing, all my questions are rhetorical. Tbh I feel like this comes under trolling and it makes for a better forum when the users responsible for it are banned.

[BazzaS]

BazzaS,

 

To assume that someone needs psychological help based on the limited information you had would be seen as ignorant to any reasonable person. To suggest that anyone needs psychological help, particularly a stranger who you don't know, particularly one you're arguing with and lack real concern with for, the way you did is offensive. It would be a touchy subject even between friends or family and would need to be brought up tactfully. You then took use his natural offense as evidence of some kind of hang up.

 

Let me give you an example: a girl at work I dislike has put on a slight but noticeable amount of weight, emphasis on slight, one day I choose to ask her in front of everyone if she's pregnant. If this happened she would have every right to be offended and my motives would be clear to her and everyone else in the office who knew I don't really like her. If I then tried to make the argument that there's nothing wrong with pregnancy and therefore no need for her to be offended I would look even worse, you don't have to have an issue with pregnancy to be offended for someone suggesting you look pregnant.

 

You had no basis to bring up his mental health, even if for some reason you felt it was true you should have known it would offend and kept it to yourself - after all you didn't honestly think he'd be receptive to the advice of an unqualified stranger? I actually think the reverse is true, that you make a mockery of mental illness by bringing it unnecessarily into this argument. You have been critical of his behavior and obviously have a low opinion of him - is this just how you think all mentally ill people are? Petty? Irrational? Ruminative? Is there even a mental illness which primarily consists of these symptoms? Those sound like character traits.

 

Being mentally ill doesn't make someone unpleasant (many people can be nasty and unpleasant all by themselves)neither does simply having a mental illness mean someone can't be objective and will exhibit their symptoms in every situation. A depressed person can make valid negative conclusions about a situation which any other other non depressed would make without their depression being the driving factor. And mental illness isn't something anyone wants to have, try asking someone with it. It doesn't make someone weak but it is a weakness, like a physical impairment- if you can't get this then I don't know what else to tell you.

 

To answer the rest of your questions I would guess he reacted defensively because of how you came at him, your tone. As for the the lawyer thing, that isn't necessarily what he was saying - it was specific to you because I'm guessing he found your opinions unhelpful, rude and off topic. The bringing up the old thread issue well it just happens from time to time in forums for various reasons, sometimes people don't even realize it's old and will ask the OP a question- sometimes it's a good thing, newbies get to see something interesting they otherwise wouldn't have, if not it's easy to just ignore the thread. I don't have any major issues with Asda but for people who are having problems with them it is helpful to know that even escalating to the Chief Executive isn't straightforward.

 

That's all I have to say, I have no interest in pointless e-beefing, all my questions are rhetorical. Tbh I feel like this comes under trolling and it makes for a better forum when the users responsible for it are banned.

 

There is a "report post " button if you feel my post(s) need reporting / you feel I should be banned.

 

He said " if I want counsel I'll ask a judge" : that suggests it isn't just me that he was applying his 'judiciary only' standard to.

 

I used his "look for years old posts and then feel that was reasonable behaviour" as "evidence of hang up" with Asda, because that's what it looks like to me.

 

Evidence of "unqualified stranger" : fair to assume I'm a stranger to him, but on what basis do you assume I'm unqualified?.

 

Ruminative is indeed a character trait, not a psychiatric diagnosis. Some of the points I've made that you've glossed over are that

A) seeing a psychologist isn't a bad thing

B) seeing a psychologist doesn't mean you are mentally ill

 

I'll add:

Being ruminative is a character trait : it would only become an issue were it affecting someone's quality of life (for example if they found themselves persuing a supermarket "Around the Internet" for 'revenge' and that started to affect their day to day activities).

 

I'll also add : as for "no one with it wants it, ask anyone with it" it is a great leap for you to assume I don't "understand " mental illness, or that I'm not affected by mental illness myself.

With one in 4 people affected themselves by mental illness at some stage in their life how of you know I'm not in the 1 in 4?

That I'm not (or haven't been in the past ) affected by it either myself directly or by its effect on a family nember?

 

There is some sort of implication by you that mental illness is a homogenous being : that you understand it in all its forms and I don't.

With the fact that I've never said that poster was mentally ill (ruminative who see's a psychologist doesn't equal mentally ill, for example) : I think that's a leap too far.

 

Be it mental illness or "character trait" : the presence of that part of us isn't a problem on its own. If we "understand" it and its impact on us and those around us it is less likely to be an issue than those where insight into it is lacking.

 

Hopefully that (and what follows) makes my position clearer :

I'm not saying that poster was mentally ill, but that he looked to me like he had a fixation on Asda.

 

Having said that : time for me to cease replying on this thread before I have someone suggesting I'm dwelling here too much!

Edited October 11, 2013 by BazzaS

[citizenB]

I am closing this thread.

 

 

The original poster asked if any member of the forum could give him the head office address of the supermarket in question.

 

 

 

gpmc, the Original poster asked the question nearly 2 years ago !! I am sure what ever issues he had have well been resolved. !!