Utilities warehouse

1carminestocky

jimexbox wrote: »

You are not causing me distress. I prefer to keep any discussion on the right side of friendly, whatever opinion you may hold. Using a baseless serious allegation to try and further your argument is not exactly being friendly.

Agreed. It could of course have been nipped in the bud by simply answering my question in the affirmative but, of course, I won't ask it again.

Cardew

1carminestocky wrote: »

Wow, when did I state the prospero store magazine/card was the bedrock of the UW deal? .

Cardew must have dreamt that

I thought I was on your ignore list?(again) Not aware that anyone quoted my post;)

Your touch is slipping.

Just become a distributor Carmine and stop all this nonsense of a challenge! You know you want to - and you will be very very good at that 'profession' - you have lots of friends to advise!

By the way did anything come of your formal complaint to UW and Which about the fudged survey - or didn't you make it? Wouldn't be bluster by any chance!

Your defence of your future source of income is fast making you a laughing stock!

Dragging up information in a pathetic attempt to discredit any opposition - what a naughty man to ring 0845 numbers at work! Unbelievable!

The champion of the UW reps - just a little sad don't you think!

P.S.

Don't worry about this hurting Carmine's feelings - remember he doesn't read my posts - allegedly!

jimexbox

1carminestocky wrote: »

Agreed. It could of course have been nipped in the bud by simply answering my question in the affirmative but, of course, I won't ask it again.

You can ask any question you like. Its the assumptions to a question that I chose not answer that I find offensive. I never discuss my employment or details of my employment on the internet, period. Small amount of innocuous information can be collected on you over a period of time, which can and does lead to conflicts of interest with an employer.

1carminestocky

jimexbox wrote: »

You can ask any question you like. Its the assumptions to a question that I chose not answer that I find offensive. I never discuss my employment or details of my employment on the internet, period. Small amount of innocuous information can be collected on you over a period of time, which can and does lead to conflicts of interest with an employer.

Whilst I don't particularly wish to continue this, I do think you protesteth too much. For instance, we have already been informed by you of how much your employer pays your next of kin if you leave this mortal coil (£210,000?). And no-one specifically asked you anything about that, this info was freely and without prompting offered by you in response to the £10,000 accidental death part of my challenge (that STILL remains unchallenged, I see :rolleyes:). And I wasn't asking for details of your employment apart from whether you are allowed to make personal calls at company expense or not. I'm sure some people are. Answering that one is hardly going to reveal anything about you or your employer..is it? I've no idea where or who you work for so would have accepted an answer in the affirmative without question.

Cardew

1carminestocky wrote: »

I've no idea where or who you work for so would have accepted an answer in the affirmative without question.

There you are jimexbox! what could be fairer than that!

Provided you were prepared to answer Carmine's questions, he would have withdrawn the accusation of defrauding your employer.

I suggest that you PM him your full details plus employer's phone number so he can confirm to his satisfaction that you are telling the truth.

Whilst you are in confessional mode, have ever been unfaithful to your partner? or coveted a neighbour's possesion? These matters are vitally important;)

jimexbox

1carminestocky wrote: »

Whilst I don't particularly wish to continue this, I do think you protesteth too much. For instance, we have already been informed by you of how much your employer pays your next of kin if you leave this mortal coil (£210,000?). And no-one specifically asked you anything about that, this info was freely and without prompting offered by you in response to the £10,000 accidental death part of my challenge (that STILL remains unchallenged, I see :rolleyes:). And I wasn't asking for details of your employment apart from whether you are allowed to make personal calls at company expense or not. I'm sure some people are. Answering that one is hardly going to reveal anything about you or your employer..is it? I've no idea where or who you work for so would have accepted an answer in the affirmative without question.

Yes, but I didn't reveal that figure under a accusation of fraud. Threats or accusations do not make me more likely to reveal personal details. I chose to specify the figure in response to a post, the key word is I chose.

I told you I can and do use my work phone to make personal calls. You could of accepted that as read as Im sure many employees are allowed to make occasional personal call from work, but you decided to accuse me of fraud in your very next reply. Why? I have no idea, maybe to try and 'get one over' on me. If you had politely asked me if this was allowed I would of told you, but you chose the path you did, which was totally uncalled for.

jimexbox

Cardew wrote: »

Whilst you are in confessional mode, have ever been unfaithful to your partner? or coveted a neighbour's possesion? These matters are vitally important;)

No affairs to report, honest.:j

1carminestocky

jimexbox wrote: »

Yes, but I didn't reveal that figure under a accusation of fraud. Threats or accusations do not make me more likely to reveal personal details. I chose to specify the figure in response to a post, the key word is I chose.

I told you I can and do use my work phone to make personal calls. You could of accepted that as read as Im sure many employees are allowed to make occasional personal call from work, but you decided to accuse me of fraud in your very next reply. Why? I have no idea, maybe to try and 'get one over' on me. If you had politely asked me if this was allowed I would of told you, but you chose the path you did, which was totally uncalled for.

No idea why you couldn't have just stated that at first, TBH. Very puzzling. If someone accused me of potential fraud I would take great delight in putting them right. You have excellent employers....almost unique, I would suggest. Just so I can get this right, are you saying that in order to beat my deal you need to make personal calls from work? What about people who don't have such philanthropic employers?

SwanJon

Carmine, you've admitted you are aware of saynoto0870,so the whole 0870 issue isn't a moneysaving one, it's a time saving one.
Again, it seems a very thin thread to hang the whole thing on.
TBH, if you call these numbers as frequently as you state, it puts you at the extreme, not the norm, so to spend so much time (and screen space) on your 'challenge' - especially on the gas & electricity forum - doesn't help anyone (apart from maybe UW from the exposure).

Mike_by_the_Sea

1carminestocky wrote: »

No idea why you couldn't have just stated that at first, TBH. Very puzzling. If someone accused me of potential fraud I would take great delight in putting them right. You have excellent employers....almost unique, I would suggest. Just so I can get this right, are you saying that in order to beat my deal you need to make personal calls from work? What about people who don't have such philanthropic employers?

Blimey carmine

You must have got out of bed the wrong side today (yesterday). For heavens sake just leave jimexbox alone ( you will end up like Q if you keep taking the extract from posts that you fancy and then act like a saintly Rottweiler).

Mike