Mansion 23" led tv

KJEG

neilwoods wrote: »

Out of curiosity, why do you keep saying Red Saunas Ltd (or any of it's trading names), we were under the impression it was the other way around that red saunas was trading name of Mansion Tv.

In my opinion, you are only making yourself look more uninformed and foolish. A limited company has to be registered with Companies House and submit accounts yearly but can use any trading name they choose.

I'll ask you again:


Do you have substantive evidence that I am in any way affiliated or indeed employed by the company Red Saunas Ltd (or any of it's trading names) or have any personal connection with the company or it's directors?

fwor

neilwoods wrote: »

Out of curiosity, why do you keep saying Red Saunas Ltd (or any of it's trading names), we were under the impression it was the other way around that red saunas was trading name of Mansion Tv.

Because he knows a little more about the status of each of the parts of the parent company than any ordinary customer would?

KJEG

fwor wrote: »

Because he knows a little more about the status of each of the parts of the parent company than any ordinary customer would?

Do you have substantive evidence that I am in any way affiliated or indeed employed by the company Red Saunas Ltd (or any of it's trading names) or have any personal connection with the company or its directors?

KJEG

Keep digging a hole for yourselves gentlemen!

fwor

KJEG wrote: »

Do you have substantive evidence that I am in any way affiliated or indeed employed by the company Red Saunas Ltd (or any of it's trading names) or have any personal connection with the company or its directors?

So you really are just going to repeat the same thing over and over again, even though I have already answered your question?

KJEG

I see that your derogatory remarks about me on the AVForum have been removed. Wonder why?

Seems like you may have some kind of "personal vendetta" against me?

KJEG

I think everyone must have eaten their "popcorn" by now.

Until we meet again.

fwor

In case your short term memory has failed you, here's my reply:

fwor wrote: »

I'll answer yours, though. No, I don't, and I've never said that I did.

All I've done to date is to look at your behaviour here and ask if it makes sense.

Here we have a supposedly independent, unconnected "customer" that chooses to write thousands (many thousands - your first few posts contained more than 3000) of words in support of a company that you say you have no affiliation with?

Is that evidence substantive? I confess I don't really care.

Seems you still don't want to answer my question about how you could take action for libel if you are not "a named or identifiable individual".

KJEG

fwor wrote: »

In case your short term memory has failed you, here's my reply:



Seems you still don't want to answer my question about how you could take action for libel if you are not "a named or identifiable individual".

My answer is to seek legal advice and not ask me...that should be obvious!

KJEG

Also not to be so full of "bravado" about your comments unless you are prepared to back them up with fact and not supposition.