Royal Mail Destroyed my Package

Naresh

custardy wrote: »

I never said I work for the Post Office
given you have decided answrs you dont like make me biased,then I will give you one you like

yes you can take RM/POC to court
T&Cs are worthless
You will win

This seems to be the only answer you will accept

Since your motives are in question, I would prefer unbiased corroboration of your statements, preferably with points of law that I can state when faced with an overwhelming Judge, in an unfamiliar courtroom, surrounded by people who are more comfortable in a legal environment, with every word being documented by the court stenographer.

I came to this forum looking for help (preferably legalise) to prepare for the David vs Goliath challenge that awaits me.

custardy

Naresh wrote: »

Since your motives are in question, I would prefer unbiased corroboration of your statements, preferably with points of law that I can state when faced with an overwhelming Judge, in an unfamiliar courtroom, surrounded by people who are more comfortable in a legal environment, with every word being documented by the court stenographer.

I came to this forum looking for help (preferably legalise) to prepare for the David vs Goliath challenge that awaits me.

Do you think the money is coming out of my pocket?
You so far have argued against every point you dont agree with.
You have been advised you can take RM to court.
Its small claims,not the high court.
points of law wont really come into it.
You disagree with the T&CS. you disagree with the set appeals procedures with RM/POSTRS
you have gone on about some sort of T&Cs you cant find but dont say what they should be
So it will be down to the court to decide if it gets that far

Slowhand

custardy wrote: »

yes
which is no secret on these boards, before you start querying that too

It's not obvious to everyone on MSE though, so wind yer neck in. How many members of Joe Public would claim to remember being in a 4-5 PO's on an exact date 4 months ago like you do? Not many if any. You are looking like a tube and to be honest not for the first time.

visidigi

Slowhand wrote: »

It's not obvious to everyone on MSE though, so wind yer neck in. How many members of Joe Public would claim to remember being in a 4-5 PO's on an exact date 4 months ago like you do? Not many if any. You are looking like a tube and to be honest not for the first time.

Whilst I haven't always seen eye to eye with Custardy on some of his posts you're not helping yourself here. Thats no way to speak to another member...

I regards to people knowing about his current/past affiliation with a Royal Mail role his signature, for quite some time, said he was, so unfortunately quite a few would.

Money-Saving-King

Slowhand wrote: »

It's not obvious to everyone on MSE though, so wind yer neck in.

I knew he worked for Royal Mail & joined here almost half a year after you!

Got to admit it was a bit funny watching you argue with someone working in the postal industry about how many Post Offices they claim to have been in on a certain day.

Slowhand

visidigi wrote: »

Whilst I haven't always seen eye to eye with Custardy on some of his posts you're not helping yourself here. Thats no way to speak to another member...

I regards to people knowing about his current/past affiliation with a Royal Mail role his signature, for quite some time, said he was, so unfortunately quite a few would.

Custardy is a fellow Scot and as such he'll know what I mean by tube. As for his sig. what it said in the past is totally irrelevant to anyone seeing it now for the first time. How many people in all honesty remember being in four or five PO's on the 14 of January and remembers seeing the notice in question in all of them?

visidigi

Slowhand wrote: »

Custardy is a fellow Scot and as such he'll know what I mean by tube. As for his sig. what it said in the past is totally irrelevant to anyone seeing it now for the first time. How many people in all honesty remember being in four or five PO's on the 14 of January and remembers seeing the notice in question in all of them?

Fellow Scot or not...I know what you meant by tube (from a Scot orientation) but you should also maybe look up the other such meanings of the word (try urbandictionary.com) :-o)

But in any case that doesn't justify speaking to someone that way.

The fact is you asked the classic question of 'oh you must work for X then' and the irony here is that he has/had...

I must admit, I LOL'd :rotfl:

Slowhand

visidigi wrote: »

Fellow Scot or not...I know what you meant by tube (from a Scot orientation) but you should also maybe look up the other such meanings of the word (try urbandictionary.com) :-o)

But in any case that doesn't justify speaking to someone that way.

The fact is you asked the classic question of 'oh you must work for X then' and the irony here is that he has/had...

I must admit, I LOL'd :rotfl:

Nice try...if you are going to try and rubbish me at least be accurate. I have never typed 'oh you must work for X then' on this or any other thread on MSE. You have now done so...irony? I asked the question so the OP could be informed of Custardy's 'interest'.

visidigi

Oh my talk about over reacting...if you insist though...

Slowhand wrote: »

Nice try...if you are going to try and rubbish me at least be accurate. I have never typed 'oh you must work for X then' on this or any other thread on MSE. You have now done so...irony? I asked the question so the OP could be informed of Custardy's 'interest'.

Slowhand wrote: »

Keep digging. Have you worked or do you work for The Royal Mail/Post Office?

from post here

I put the sentence in quotes to point out you were fundamentally asking the question that usually gets said by people when people defend the company being questioned...which you did...in any case, you seriously need to chill out.

peachyprice

Slowhand wrote: »

It's not obvious to everyone on MSE though

Maybe his avatar would give you a clue?


Just saying.