Sky/NOW TV blatantly breaching our statutory rights

Kirilov71

That should be "post comments against those criticising Sky and their products."

Forwandert

I don't work for sky either and posted, if SKY want to employ me to explain to someone spending days trying to get a box replaced when the boxes are litteraly for £0 cost when bought with the 3month/6month packages that will save the OP even more money they can do by all means. I've got 3 in the attic not even taken out of the packaging.

JReacher1

Sky do actually employ people to monitor the internet for all mentions of Sky and their services. I don't however believe that they would post on forums anonymously about how great they are as a company.

For one thing if they did it would leak to the press when one of these people moved jobs.

Alice_Walker

Kirilov71 wrote: »

It isn't a conspiracy theory or off topic. I'm just stating a simple fact, which I did at the start also. So, to repeat...Sky employs people to monitor consumer rights/moneysaving sites and to post comments criticising Sky and their products. That statement is fact.

And who are you accusing of being employed by Sky? Why are you unwilling to name the people you are alleging to be posting under false pretences?

shaun_from_Africa

Kirilov71 wrote: »

It isn't a conspiracy theory or off topic. I'm just stating a simple fact, which I did at the start also. So, to repeat...Sky employs people to monitor consumer rights/moneysaving sites and to post comments criticising Sky and their products. That statement is fact.

If it is a fact then you shouldn't have any problem providing proof of it then because until you do so, it is simply your opinion.

unholyangel

Kirilov71 wrote: »

Having gone through this whole thread a very obvious pattern emerges. First of all 'warrenrichards' has put forward a well argued case that his consumer rights are being infringed by Sky and posted it on a consumer rights website. Despite that, the vast majority of respondents are totally opposed to his viewpoint and strive to deny that he has those rights. There is very little actual discussion here, and very few respondents show anything resembling a mutual interest in defending consumer rights against Sky. Bit odd on a consumer rights website, no?
So, I think this is a good point to remind everyone that Sky specifically employ people to prowl money saving/consumer rights websites such as this, to argue against criticisms made by anyone about Sky or any of their products. It's ridiculous, but sadly true.

Yes and us posters on the consumer rights board realise that while consumer rights exist, in OP's specific circumstances, the possible damages are either nil or negligible. It is a consumer rights board as you yourself said, not a consumer wants board.

OP could not force a repair or replacement in these circumstances so would be reliant on refund - which can be reduced to take into account usage you have had. So they'd be entitled to the value of a 13 month old box. And given new boxes seem to be available for £0 extra, its not exactly looking good for OP now is it?

[Deleted User]

unholyangel wrote: »

they'd be entitled to the value of a 13 month old box. And given new boxes seem to be available for £0 extra, its not exactly looking good for OP now is it?

Not looking good for "Kirilov71" and his conspiracy theory either. I'll concede that he has extended this month old thread by several posts, though!

Kirilov71

Not looking good for "Kirilov71" and his conspiracy theory either.

Indeed. I maintain though Sky employees monitor & leave posts on this site. I know this simply because Sky employees have confirmed it to me. And neither I, nor anyone else will identify them as the whole point is that they can post anonymously. On the subject of whose case is or is not looking good, I still think 'warrenrichards' provided the most cogent argument here. And yes, that bit is just my opinion. Adios.

[Deleted User]

Kirilov71 wrote: »

I maintain though Sky employees monitor & leave posts on this site.

...and in their spare time they post hundreds of other responses about unrelated topics simply to protect their identities as Sky shills?

Kirilov71 wrote: »

I know this simply because Sky employees have confirmed it to me.

These employees, they are not cleaners at the old BSB headquarters by any chance?

Zandoni

OP, I'm not really sure how Now TV works, are you paying monthly for a service?

If you are I'd suggest you just phone and cancel your subscription telling them that your box has stopped working, they may give you a new one to keep you as a customer.