BuyMobilePhones.net (merged)

OneADay wrote: »

How the hell do you know how I treat what or not? Did I mention or talk of cashback deals when referring to VAT? What is your problem? Do you like talking to the mirror and try to get the last word?

Having been away on holiday and generally absent from the forum, it's obviously your turn to take the flak! Not to worry - back now to share the burden. :beer:

Your point about VAT was a good one, given the experience of the reduction to 15% producing a reduction in the line rental. We can hardly complain if the networks don't absorb the increase in January.

dark_angel_7 wrote: »

OneADay and daindian, thank you both for your swift replies. There were helpful. OneADay, the phone is not a clearance/refurbished phone so I am guessing that going for this option is probably the best choice now based on what you've said. daindian, what do you mean by 'because of a t-mobile change in their t&c's you are less likely to be put on the web and walk plus 3gb allowance'? Can you back that up with some more info. please?

Another question I forgot to ask was, if BMP did somehow go bust would that affect my phone and/ or contract?

hi there new t&c is this "You'll get internet on your phone Plus included if you join us on a pay monthly plan with an Android phone in a T-Mobile store, over the phone or via our website, t-mobile.co.uk."

before it never specified were it could be bought from so people could argue and change it but now with the new terms stating you will get web and walk plus (3gb fup)only if you buy it directly otheriwse you will only get the one booster the internet and not getting anything other booster free! also the reseller internet on t-mobile is capped at 1gb and speed is throttled!

mobilejunkie wrote: »

You're the one with problems. Your original post used TAT which is hardly condusive to anything and was talking about the dealers helping customers regarding the increase in (VAT). You have made it clear (repeatedly) that you have no need to READ the t&c in question, which are quite specific in this regard with this dealer but are irrelevant according to you. Perhaps that's because they totally contradict your theoretical "knowledge" which requires no actual research. You have given much misguided advice in the past so this is all very familiar, unfortunately. But now your sidekick is back (though he at least appears to have finally seen the light of day as far as another dealer is concerned) you don't have to fret too much about your inaccuracies and fundamental flaws.

Good to see that nothing has changed over a couple of weeks!
Thought I would like to summarise the start of this spat.

Oneaday wrote "TAT rise comes into affect, you could potentially be paying 2.5% extra on line rental and not getting that 2.5% cashback unless the dealers / mobile companies work out some way to protect the buyer." Obviously a typo with VAT but you wouldn't have made any of these in the past and wouldn't stoop so low as to pick on someone for a simple typo, would you? Of course not! Note - no mention of t&c in either of Oneaday's first 2 posts and a very accurate point about the VAT rise.

You then poke fun at Oneaday for any reference to dealers "The idea of the dealer "protecting" the buyer is funny, but I suppose in keeping."

But you feel quite at liberty to add - albeit with your tongue in your cheek "Of course, individual networks could choose to absorb the rise out of their own income - but, really - the dealers....!!!!! That is the same point or don't you see? And if you can make it, why not Oneaday?

Oneaday then responds with post #651 that again does not mention t&c but gives reasonable comment again on VAT that provokes you to call him a "complete armchair amateur" and bounce off on to t&c.

Now, as Oneaday was obviously not trying to pick a fight with his original post and made relevant points with his first two, just why do you need to be so aggressive? As I have said many times before, you seem to take a primary delight in putting other contributors down rather than concentrating on doing what you do best - helping MSE members.

Just what was factually wrong with posts #646 and #651 that started you being vitriolic to Oneaday? You write in previous posts that you don't care what others think. If that is the case, then why are you on here apart from giving you a platform for self promotion that may otherwise be missing from your life? In fact, I think you do care and enjoy giving advice and experience and, on balance, the forum is a better place for that. But you do spoil it with your rudeness to others.

Quentin wrote: »

Obvious point - !!!!!! has this "spat" got to do with you, and why do you need to resurrect it (just when we all hoped it had died its natural death) by summarising it and putting your own spin on it?

As suggested to you before, you have an ignore button for posters you don't want to read, why not just use it - or are you just trolling here?

!!!!!! has it to do with me? Well, let me quote from MJ's post above

But now your sidekick is back (though he at least appears to have finally seen the light of day as far as another dealer is concerned) you don't have to fret too much about your inaccuracies and fundamental flaws.

I don't particularly welcome being patronised any more than Oneaday and, since MJ chose to bring my name into his argument with Oneaday, then I felt free to come in.

Now, however, let me turn the tables. You were not involved in the spat, yet you chose to do precisely what you accused me of, but without even being mentioned in any of the spat posts or, using your criteria, being involved - although as it says, this is an open forum. And hoping it had died a death?? I replied within 12 hours of the previous post from MJ. Or has MJ the sole authority to have the last word?

Unless you can see any factual errors in my post, then you have no real cause to object and I am not the kettle to your pot!

I take your first point, but I did not comment directly on your spat then. Just simply observing that after returning from a break plus ça change.

mobilejunkie wrote: »

"though your knowledge and advice have improved now the penny has finally dropped on you know who)

That is presumably when I agree with you ??

So, can I ask calmly and politely, (1) what point did Oneaday make in his posts #646 and #651 that was so wrong and (b) what caused you to label him " a complete armchair amateur" which is not particularly pleasant for someone who was trying to help and whose help was, indeed, acknowledged by the person who received it?