Seller appears on doorstep...

skitler

SlowCooker wrote: »

Do you happen to know the OP? The way you have been defending her whatever she says is a bit weird honestly.

Yes, people vent on forums and it's fine, but do you remember the person who complained about an Amazon seller. That person was messed around for a month and received nothing. You laughed at their problem and said they were over-reacting.

So, why do some people's problems matter and others don't?

its already been reported on here that "fotw" is a employee of the op.;)

skitler

Slowhand wrote: »

Not to mention Arlandria606's follow-up comment saying:-

'I sincerely hope that, if any of you ever need an ambulance, there's a huge fleet of Tesco vans illegally parked and blocking them from getting to you.'

typical, doesnt surprise me from this op, it happen to me so I hope it happens to you.


I knew I was right all along, theres something about this op and this thread that didn't ring true, now the pieces are fitting,


what can I moan about today?? :rotfl:

Flyonthewall

SlowCooker wrote: »

Do you happen to know the OP? The way you have been defending her whatever she says is a bit weird honestly.

Yes, people vent on forums and it's fine, but do you remember the person who complained about an Amazon seller. That person was messed around for a month and received nothing. You laughed at their problem and said they were over-reacting.

So, why do some people's problems matter and others don't?

No, don't know them. I wasn't defending the driveway issue, I just get it's easy to get annoyed over little things and want to vent.

I didn't laugh at that at all. I said something along the lines of at least they got their money back. It's not like they lost anything. Yes, it was hassle, they shouldn't have had to wait a month, but they got the money back.

For Amazon case, I get why they'd be annoyed but it worked out in the end.

OP case with Tesco, I get why they'd be annoyed but luckily there was no emergency so again it was fine in the end.

I never said one mattered and the other didn't.

skitler

Flyonthewall wrote: »

. It's not like they lost anything.




OP case with Tesco, I get why they'd be annoyed but luckily there was no emergency so again it was fine in the end.
.

so would you be as annoyed as op if your drive was blocked, obviously temporirally.


nothing was lost with knocker bringing parcel, once the knocking was done, the Tesco post dose add fuel to the fire of the op loosing her temper while pointing out the sign.
the pregnancy is also not the issue as to why op said no in the e-mail, this reason has yet to be uncovered, and im sure will come to light in the fullness of time.

Flyonthewall

skitler wrote: »

so would you be as annoyed as op if your drive was blocked, obviously temporirally.

No. Unless I was about to go out and it didn't look like they'd be moving in time then I'd be a bit annoyed (although possibly more so at my neighbours who no dbout caused the person to park there in the first place). Wouldn't go online about it or anything.

nothing was lost with knocker bringing parcel, once the knocking was done, the Tesco post dose add fuel to the fire of the op loosing her temper while pointing out the sign.
the pregnancy is also not the issue as to why op said no in the e-mail, this reason has yet to be uncovered, and im sure will come to light in the fullness of time.

Yeah, that too worked out fine in the end which is good. I still understand why they were annoyed at the time, same as with the Tesco lorry and the Amazon thing mentioned above.

Most people don't get sellers randomly turning up on their doorstep so that's more of a forum topic - what do other think, what would you do next etc.

A lot of people have to wait for refunds or get people who park in stupid places. As annoying as they may be I personally wouldn't feel the need to start a topic on either especially when the lorry was there briefly and the other did get a refund.

I said it might explain it. It could be part of the reason, we don't know.

Flyonthewall

skitler wrote: »

its already been reported on here that "fotw" is a employee of the op.;)

*rolls eyes*

skitler wrote: »

well well well,
venting, Mmmm,;)
ranting, Mmmm,
she was supposed to be out when 1st incident occoured, I don't think op does go out. this time it was a official delivery and still a complaint. :rotfl:


some folk eh!!

She has an appointment at some point in the day. We don't know when.

The delivery wasn't to her though was it.

skitler

Flyonthewall wrote: »

the lorry
.

I think op has got to you,


over egging it a bit to call it a lorry, they are a large van.


no, no, the forthcoming "happy event" isn't the reason op gave a no, as you wouldn't withhold from one thread and openly flaunt it in another.
as op isn't now posting we may have to wait for a neighbour to put a foot wrong or other catastrophic event to ocour in her quiet leafy nook.

skitler

Flyonthewall wrote: »

She has an appointment at some point in the day. We don't know when.

The delivery wasn't to her though was it.

but as she was in there was no need for the venting and anger portrayed to knocker, and I think you must now admit that it is a possibility that the op did initiate the rebuttle with the knocker while sign pointing.:)


lets leave the Tesco/Ashley debate to there relevant threads.;)

Flyonthewall

skitler wrote: »

I think op has got to you,

over egging it a bit to call it a lorry, they are a large van.

Are you really starting a discussion on the size of a vehicle? Lorries vary in size and I didn't state any size. Small lorry, large van, who cares? Probably be roughly the same size either way. A small car parked across a driveway would be enough to block most people in.

no, no, the forthcoming "happy event" isn't the reason op gave a no, as you wouldn't withhold from one thread and openly flaunt it in another.
as op isn't now posting we may have to wait for a neighbour to put a foot wrong or other catastrophic event to ocour in her quiet leafy nook.

Maybe they don't expect to be followed with each new thread they make. Maybe they felt more reason to mention it on that thread? Or made a point of not saying on here just because of the silly reasons given and you trying to get more information out of them. I dunno.

I suppose if pregnant and wanting to rest they may not want to get up unless they really need to so even if there's more to it it could still be part of the reason.

I still don't care what their reason is though, makes no difference to me.

Fishing not good enough? Going on a hunt now too eh? Lying in wait for the next thread ready to pounce

Flyonthewall

skitler wrote: »

but as she was in there was no need for the venting and anger portrayed to knocker, and I think you must now admit that it is a possibility that the op did initiate the rebuttle with the knocker while sign pointing.:)


lets leave the Tesco/Ashley debate to there relevant threads.;)

She was annoyed at being ignored. The guy was angry. There's still no reason to assume it happened any other way than what the OP stated.

Besides anger online doesn't mean they act the same in person. People say many things online that they wouldn't ever say in person.

Ashley?