The Beavis case

TDA

beamerguy wrote: »

Why do these stupid PPC's keep referring to the Beavis case ?

The Supreme Court very clearly stated that £85 was reasonable, although everybody disagrees.

That's £85 not £86 or £100 or more.

Actually, at paragraph 100 of the judgment there is arguably a tacit endorsement of the BPA's maximum £100 limit.

pappa_golf

agreed , that why I keep suggesting on this and other similar threads that this needs bringing to "joe publics" attention and not repeated endlessly on here ever few weeks

beamerguy

TDA wrote: »

Actually, at paragraph 100 of the judgment there is arguably a tacit endorsement of the BPA's maximum £100 limit.

BPA ??? A totally useless organisation, feel sorry for the 3,500 they have let down

beamerguy

But coupon-mad, and this the first time I disagree with you, this site is a minefield of information, a lot of good stuff lost in the bowels of threads. You know what you are doing and I really do respect you for all your hard work and advice but please these are not terminally stupid people, they really do struggle on such a big site, not everyone is like you but they still need help against the PPC scammers, I can feel your frustration

HO87

pappa_golf wrote: »

agreed , that why I keep suggesting on this and other similar threads that this needs bringing to "joe publics" attention and not repeated endlessly on here ever few weeks

Unfortunately, Freddy, the sad truth is that "joe public" doesn't really care. There are far bigger things that he is concerned about, like keeping his job, making sure he can pay for his fortnight in Marbella or getting a new Smart TV. Droves of people really couldn't care less - unless it involves them - and are led by the nose by the likes of the Daily Fail and other elements of the mainstream media bullsh*t brigade.

Provided Strictly duly appears, Corrie is always broadcast and they are given occasional TOWIE updates "joe public" will remain wilfully ignorant of the entirely made-up skimdustry that seeks to empty their pockets.

Coupon-mad

(Text removed by MSE Forum Team) Google search a subject then read very old results and not look for the current position, if it involves something that might cost you money. Who would read a 3 year old online newspaper when one click finds you today's?

And to look things up on a phone only, while watching TV. Which is the impression a few newbies give, not many, but if that's all they can be bothered to do then good luck to them.

I have tried to cover it, as far as people reading old threads is concerned, by having 'Do NOT read old advice to ignore' and repeated 'DO NOT IGNORE' a second time in red in my signature as below, because my current sig shows even in my old postings. Beyond that, sorry, people just need to learn how to Google things properly and look first at the date of what they stop to read.

yotmon

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I went to the MSE threads about flight delay law. I read what Cityboy (the expert there) said and I read the relevant law, EC 261/2004, IIRC. Then, I asked a few questions on the forum, read some threads and another forum they recommended, sussed out the facts and claimed my money. I worked that out for myself. I was no expert but it wasn't that hard to do and to understand.

The MSE forums work best if posters are willing to get off their bums and read/do some stuff themselves, as lots will.

Hi Coupon Mad, that was exactly my point. You found info relating to your problem and was able to follow it up by finding the relevant law after gaining advice from the experts. I would rather 'get of my bum' and read things for myself, rather than keep coming back to be 'spoon-fed' by the 'regulars', who must get fed up answering what they see as the same old questions.

HO87

yotmon wrote: »

Hi Coupon Mad, that was exactly my point. You found info relating to your problem and was able to follow it up by finding the relevant law after gaining advice from the experts. I would rather 'get of my bum' and read things for myself, rather than keep coming back to be 'spoon-fed' by the 'regulars', who must get fed up answering what they see as the same old questions.

Exactly, the reason why the Newbies Thread was created. The same "joe public" who allow themselves to be spoon-fed by the Daily Fail (other newspapers are available), the weapon of mass distraction (TV) and presumably still contend that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny exist. However, challenge them about Santa and they'll fully accept they gave up their belief in him before they were 7 but seem unable to identify the manifest fairy tales peddled to them every day whether they be by politicians, big business of the meejah.

This is, like many other issues we face, simply about money and how business can separate us from it and it seems that morals have been lost along the way somewhere. There is no difference between us paying for an arbitrary infraction in an empty car park determined by a company whose only existence is to establish and enforce the arbitrary rules than us being obliged to pay for treading on the cracks in the pavement for all the real inconvenience and loss that is caused.

Oh hang on...

ManxRed

Except this isn't a thread where anyone has asked for advice. Its a discussion between forum regulars of the fallout of the Beavis Case.