Why has the thread "finding if a company is real" been pulled?

lucylucky

toffe wrote: »

you might aswell ban linking to other news articles about scamming companies too, thats just another form of information which is in the public domain already.

Hell, what are MSE saying? that we can discuss rougue businesses as long as we don't post anything that might expose who they actually are?

Tell me, are you suppossed to be helping the consumer or the scammer with this rule MSE?

A malicious person can come on and post and call any company all the names under the sun, I assume the rules are there to protect the site.
Even if you feel they are a bit heavy handed.

fermi

I'm not going to comment on whether that particular rule is right or wrong, but it is currently a rule. Posting such info breaks it.

May or may not be why it was removed. Just a guess from me.

However, you should probably bear in mind that the MSE team will not normally post a public explanation for why posts/threads are removed.

MSE_Martin wrote: »

Decisions are not explained deliberately. Often threads are deleted without explanation. This is based on legal advice. If we start 'accusing' people of things, eg spamming, being racist, being abusive, being wrong etc then we are open to legal challenge and therefore we are advised to delete without blame - often things are deleted simply because we dont have the resources to manage it properly.

However, you might possibly get an explanation if you email them.

From the Forum Help lightbox....

POSTING HELP : If you want to ask why a word can’t be typed, your signatures been changed, or a post has been deleted see the forum rules if you don’t find the answer you can ask [EMAIL="forumhelp@moneysavingexpert.com"]forumhelp@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL] though due to volumes we can’t guarantee replies.

toffe

lucylucky wrote: »

Martin's site Martin's rules.
If you don't like it play nicely elsewhere.

i have to say, and the MSE team wont like this so if you notice my account is banned soon you'll know why......

.....but i think martin doesn't really care about consumer rights issues anywhere near as much as he cares about making over one million pound a year (the figue the last available accounts for his company showed as profit before martin went to an unlimited comapny so that he doesn't have to post annual account on companies house)

that might also explain the overly cautious approach of this site too, you see being an unlimited company rather than a limited company is something practically no one does because as the wording suggests limited companies are limited in their liability if they are sued meaning directors personal assets can't be touched.

With the rare "unlimited company" which martin is, it has the bonus to him that he can keep how much he makes a secret from the public but his limited liability status is removed, meaning if this site gets sued it's martins money, martin's house, all of martins personal assets on the line.

omen666

lucylucky wrote: »

A malicious person can come on and post and call any company all the names under the sun, I assume the rules are there to protect the site.
Even if you feel they are a bit heavy handed.

The fact that their repsresentative came onto our thread and people said they had issues and gave a invoice number shows this was not malicious but I understand what you are saying

lucylucky

toffe wrote: »

i have to say, and the MSE team wont like this so if you notice my account is banned soon you'll know why......

.....but i think martin doesn't really care about consumer rights issues anywhere near as much as he cares about making over one million pound a year (the figue the last available accounts for his company showed as profit before martin went to an unlimited comapny so that he doesn't have to post annual account on companies house)

that might also explain the overly cautious approach of this site too, you see being an unlimited company rather than a limited company is something practically no one does because as the wording suggests limited companies are limited in their liability if they are sued meaning directors personal assets can't be touched.

With the rare "unlimited company" which martin is, it has the bonus to him that he can keep how much he makes a secret from the public but his limited liability status is removed, meaning if this site gets sued it's martins money, martin's house, all of martins personal assets on the line.

I doubt that anyone would deny he makes a shed-load of money and he isn't in this game for altruistic reasons, but if anyone wants to be on the forum they have to abide by the rules.

toffe

lucylucky wrote: »

I doubt that anyone would deny he makes a shed-load of money and he isn't in this game for altruistic reasons, but if anyone wants to be on the forum they have to abide by the rules.

granted. And i don't begrudge him making money from his site as he only makes money from refering people to "the best deals" he devotes alot a time to the site and it is what he does for a living.

I don't get why he wants to hide how much he makes though and i feel this desire to hide his profit has lead to an exposure to loss for him personally which in turn is, possibly, conflicting with what he is supposed to be about, which is fighting unfair treatment to consumers by large companies.

If one of those large companies sued him he could lose everything. It's causing problems if he is to be taken seriously as a consumer champion and not just a "get rich quick" tv personality who wants to make as much money as he can off the back of a failed, though valiant, attempt to take on the big banks.

Shelldean

Right It was my thread that got pulled.
I've been away for a while and with no computer access.

I WAS scammed by the company as were others. I came on here asking for help to establish if the company was indeed real. In doing so others posted that they do had been scammed by the same company.

I am in the process of trying to recoup my losses via the charge back on my credit card.
I wanted to direct the card company to that thread to show I was not alone in being scammed by these con artists.
It also had other information on the thread that I wanted to use in my case to the card compnay.

SO many thanks to whoever pulled the thread. I now have no help in getting my comsumer revenge.

Shelldean

seems they're still duping people
http://forums.thedigitalfix.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=594586

I was searching for the threads I'd been linked to previously and found this one, which isn;t the one I was searching for.

Sandoval

toffe wrote: »

i have to say, and the MSE team wont like this so if you notice my account is banned soon you'll know why......

.....but i think martin doesn't really care about consumer rights issues anywhere near as much as he cares about making over one million pound a year (the figue the last available accounts for his company showed as profit before martin went to an unlimited comapny so that he doesn't have to post annual account on companies house)

that might also explain the overly cautious approach of this site too, you see being an unlimited company rather than a limited company is something practically no one does because as the wording suggests limited companies are limited in their liability if they are sued meaning directors personal assets can't be touched.

With the rare "unlimited company" which martin is, it has the bonus to him that he can keep how much he makes a secret from the public but his limited liability status is removed, meaning if this site gets sued it's martins money, martin's house, all of martins personal assets on the line.

Ohhhh Daddy's gonna be p*ssed with you when he gets home!!