Utility Warehouse (Telecom Plus) Discussion

vinnyph

Whatever people do to try to undermine UW and Distributors it still keeps growing.

UW Distributor

1carminestocky

Vinny, I'm of the opinion this thread is good for UW (it's where I got interested in becoming a customer and, ultimately, shareholder). They are not well known at all compared to the Big 6 so a thread like this is not only great entertainment for the audience (look at the thread views, people DO like to read this thread!) but also gets UWs name out there. And, unlike the offerings from the Big 6, this deal really does need explaining fully before people can make a proper decision as to whether it's for them or not.

PS The shares are currently going mad, I really hope Quentin doesn't b*gger off now. In fact, this company has really taken off in the last 3 years, a time period in which Quentin has been doing his damndest to denigrate them. He must feel like King Canute, but kudos for his staying power in the face of constant disappointment...

janninew

jimexbox wrote: »

You keep dodging the central issue. What posts do you believe are libellous? You have already indicated that your employment status gives you degree of expertise in civil law, so what post can be construed as being libellous? Oxford dictionary states that libel is....

"the publication of a false statement that is damaging to a person’s reputation"

So where are these libellous comments?

Frankly your credibility is in question if you make serious allegations then refuse to back up your claims with evidence. Are you really here to help, or to intimidate?

I await a detailed response outlining libellous posts.....

Can I ask again why you accept and thank JJ for his claims regarding UW, but do not ask to see evidence? Is it purely because he only has negative things to say about UW, so they must be true?

He has made accusations and we've seen no evidence to back them up.

keggs

Here's an idea Vinnyph

Let Quentin post a link to every training video that we use. That way, people can make up their own minds just as we allow people to make up their own minds when talking to them face to face.

Any videos links posted which are not open to public viewing will of course be a breach of copyright something as a writer I am very well aware of and any breach will be dealt with severely.

Perhaps some kind person could inform the police that MSE is allowing the publication of 'private copyrighted material' on this site.

Now where will the reputation be of Martin Lewis.

He could thank Quentin personally for his 'altruistic' whistle blowing.

I have a picture in my mind right now of a happy smiling Martin Lewis.

Come on Quentin what are you waiting for. Let's have it all out in the open. It will either be a positive experience for UW or a negative one. But one things for sure, if someone does call the police I wouldn't like to be in your shoes.

jimexbox

Vinny, do you read any post that you believe holds a contrary opinion to yourself?

Nobody is questioning the veracity of products tested by Which magazine. What I and others have pointed out is that any poll which relies on a person registering their preference is open to abuse. The methodology is poor as no external weighting is used to gain a representative sample. Can you understand this basic concept of how Mori and Gallup conduct their own research?

jimexbox

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

We moved on from that some time ago. Try to keep up. I didn't make any allegations.

I've not moved as you have singularly failed to answer my question. You clearly believe that some posts could be construed as being libellous. Otherwise why post that some are?

So I say, what posts do you consider libellous and please give me your legal opinion as to why?

jimexbox

janninew wrote: »

Can I ask again why you accept and thank JJ for his claims regarding UW, but do not ask to see evidence? Is it purely because he only has negative things to say about UW, so they must be true?

He has made accusations and we've seen no evidence to back them up.

I must of missed the bit where I accepted his post, whatever that means.

Could you help me by pointing me to some libellous posts? We seem to be having trouble finding any.

Quentin

keggs wrote: »

Now where will the reputation be of Martin Lewis.

The reps forum is very anti Martin Lewis, and may have an agenda over this.

They are unhappy with the advice he gave to people regarding locking into fixed contracts, and are also unhappy the uw doesn't feature in his best buy articles.

They post schoolboy abusive comments aimed at Martin Lewis.

eg: "The guy's a creep."

jimexbox

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

I don't, because it's not up to me is it? I don't work for either of the companies mentioned.

Eh?

Why come on this site making aspersions that folk are libelling various companies, then refuse to back your claims with evidence?

Cardew

uptomyeyeballs wrote: »

As i've said, my day job means I have a great understanding of the libel laws in this country. There are many here taking great risks, both on this board and other boards. I've tried to make some aware of the risks they take, but they take no notice. Not my problem.

Anyone, who professes to have any knowledge of the law, who can argue that the post below constitutes libel, has no credibility.

And of course these salesmen are encouraged to do their selling to what uw calls their "warm" list. ie. Their friends and relations.

On average each rep has just 9 customers. So how many of the respondees if not actually a rep themselves were closely associated or related to a uw rep?

You wrote:

So there you go again, insinuating collusion and conspiracy on several levels. Can you prove what you allege to be fact? If you can't, then you leave yourself open to reprisal if any company chooses to do so and picks up on what has been written as potentially detrimental to it's reputation.

Do you feel lobbying is a criminal offence?

Gordon Brown and his cohorts have spent all week in an attempt to get us to vote for them at the next election.

Yet another poster trying to impress with his legal knowledge - and failing miserably.