purchase made but now reduced

malchish

George_Michael wrote: »

Which has been done time and time again, yet the poster in question refuses to believe what is posted (more often than not it is direct cut and pastes from the SOGA).

Other times it is not a case of proving proof to the contrary as this can't always be done, instead, simply asking someone to confirm what they posted may be the only way to proceed.

Suppose I was to claim that I once took a retailer to court because their sales assistant was rude to me and I was awarded £5,000 compensation, and I then went on to advise other people to do the same.
Would you honestly believe this to be true? and if you didn't, how could you possibly disprove my claim?

If someone was advising people to risk their money in what I thought was a foolhardy venture, I would certainly expect that person to provide more than the writings of a totally anonymous poster.

Nonsense. If you disagree but do not have any evidence that the info is incorrect, your disagreement is unreasonable. Before disagreeing, get yourself some grounds for your opinion - evidence. Having different opinion on no grounds is a laughable position.

malchish

wealdroam wrote: »

Yes... done that.

There are sixty four posts that mention "furniture village", and that's just on the Consumer Rights board.

As requested, please provide a link, or links to the pertinent posts. Thanks.

Ah... just read this thread.

This can't be the one you mean because no sum is mentioned, but it is interesting that even in 2010 you were refusing to substantiate your wild claims. I refer to post#9 onwards... in particular posts #18 and #19.

If you do not need to spend 5 min, to research for the thread, I won't spend my 5 min to send you the link. You do not need it, you have not lost anything - Well,so just to feed you? I won't bother.

wealdroam

malchish wrote: »

If you do not need to spend 5 min, to research for the thread, I won't spend my 5 min to send you the link. You do not need it, you have not lost anything - Well,so just to feed you? I won't bother.

Ok, that's fine.

I, and others, will just have to continue to make assumptions on the truthfulness, or otherwise, of your posts, won't we?
Not an ideal situation, but what else can we do?

Can I just mention in passing that not once have I ever seen a link in any of your posts.
What conclusion can be drawn from that?

George_Michael

malchish wrote: »

Nonsense. If you disagree but do not have any evidence that the info is incorrect, your disagreement is unreasonable. Before disagreeing, get yourself some grounds for your opinion - evidence. Having different opinion on no grounds is a laughable position.

I couldn't agree more.
Take this thread for example:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4137949
You stated on numerous occasions that private telephone conversations could be recorded and used in court without the knowledge and consent on everyone who was recorded.

I stated that this was incorrect, and provided verifiable links to both the OFTEL and government websites, both of which clearly agreed with what I stated.

You still disputed this, and what did you provide for "evidence" of your claims?

I am right, not wrong, and I have plenty of proof - a lot of cases have been won or settled ONLY because of this evidence. "Judges allowed"??? you think it is not up to the judge to decide what evidence to view? He-he, then you do not seem to know much...

You have "plenty of proof", so why not follow your own advice at the top of this post, and show this proof?

DCFC79

Show the proof malchish, where's the proof malchish.

Guardsman

This is proof of what I said earlier... While people are arguing over something that's clearly not going to go away those seeking answers to their current concerns are put on the back burner

DCFC79

Guardsman wrote: »

This is proof of what I said earlier... While people are arguing over something that's clearly not going to go away those seeking answers to their current concerns are put on the back burner

Wasn't the OP given answer earlier on in the thread ?

Guardsman

If the OP has been given the answer then should we not move on to the next question ?

cajef

Guardsman wrote: »

If the OP has been given the answer then should we not move on to the next question ?

So when someone posts misinformation and claims to be an expert on consumer rights, and even accuses a qualified lawyer of not knowing the law as in post #20 of this thread you think people should just move on.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4119425

He has been asked numerous times to qualify his statements yet refuses to do so and accuses anyone that questions him of trolling.

Maybe as he is such an expert he should tell us his qualifications.

Guardsman

Just accept that he wont and move on. If he gives the wrong advice on another thread then put him right.

To me this has gone far beyond proving he is wrong it's now become a obsession to prove that you are right.