Marks & Spencers - a Disgrace

JReacher1

I think this is all a coincidence.

There are two separate events.

1) the unfortunate incident you encountered at M&S

2) the bad review you received on Facebook several months later.

You've discovered the bad review is from a M&S employee and have decided that this proves it's a malicious review due to the incident and subsequent complaint.

I think the link it tenuous

mk01

I disagree and it's only been a couple of months but understand your view on it and as with most things, it's a possibility. I just don't think it's the case here.

JReacher1

mk01 wrote: »

I disagree and it's only been a couple of months but understand your view on it and as with most things, it's a possibility. I just don't think it's the case here.

You've got no way of proving the link between the two and frankly I would just let the bad review go and move on.

Continue the complaint about your wife's injury as that is proveable, but complaining that a bad review on your Facebook wall is a direct result of your original complaint is frankly a waste of time.

Bogalot

hollydays wrote: »

I've done the digging before I posted, unlike yourself.

Which you'll be happy to share with us, yes?

What kind of digging have you been doing hollydays? Unlike you I wouldn't be trying to track down the OP away from their posts on here. That's akin to the alleged "shameful" behaviour of the M&S employee.

mk01

JReacher1 wrote: »

You've got no way of proving the link between the two and frankly I would just let the bad review go and move on.

Continue the complaint about your wife's injury as that is proveable, but complaining that a bad review on your Facebook wall is a direct result of your original complaint is frankly a waste of time.

I wouldn't nexcessarily disagree with that. It's practically impossible to prove a link between the two, but I think internally they could. Clearly they wouldn't the relay this to me.

The main links I have are:

- he used to work in the store that the accident occurred in

- he has never been a customer of mine

- he works for the company in a Health and Safety capacity and covers this area

- he ignored all communication from me in regards to the review before I contacted M&S

I think it's pretty clear it's not a coincidence. More likely he's had a few beers one evening and made a stupid decision, or something akin to it BUT M&S haven't investigated and haven't even spoken to him.

hollydays

Bogalot wrote: »

Which you'll be happy to share with us, yes?

What kind of digging have you been doing hollydays? Unlike you I wouldn't be trying to track down the OP away from their posts on here. That's akin to the alleged "shameful" behaviour of the M&S employee.

You seem to be both asking a question and making an assumption.

I prefer to look at the m & s employee.
You prefer to try to make tenuous accusations.
Let's try to assist the op

JReacher1

mk01 wrote: »

I wouldn't nexcessarily disagree with that. It's practically impossible to prove a link between the two, but I think internally they could. Clearly they wouldn't the relay this to me.

The main links I have are:

- he used to work in the store that the accident occurred in

- he has never been a customer of mine

- he works for the company in a Health and Safety capacity and covers this area

- he ignored all communication from me in regards to the review before I contacted M&S

I think it's pretty clear it's not a coincidence. More likely he's had a few beers one evening and made a stupid decision, or something akin to it BUT M&S haven't investigated and haven't even spoken to him.

I don't know what business you run but it's difficult to prove he's never been a customer of yours even though you keep a customer database. He could be a family member or friend of someone in your database.


If I write a bad review of something I would also ignore his messages to me on Facebook. You could be crazy. It doesn't mean the review is fake.

As I say I think it's a coincidence

The-Truth

JReacher1 wrote: »

You've got no way of proving the link between the two and frankly I would just let the bad review go and move on.

Continue the complaint about your wife's injury as that is proveable, but complaining that a bad review on your Facebook wall is a direct result of your original complaint is frankly a waste of time.

What I would add at this point is can the op supply screenshots of what was said which include the usernames of the posters.

That would properly allow members of this forum to make their minds up. Right at this point though with the information so far provided it's hard to make out a proper conclusion of the events.

JReacher1

The-Truth wrote: »

What I would add at this point is can the op supply screenshots of what was said which include the usernames of the posters.

That would properly allow members of this forum to make their minds up. Right at this point though with the information so far provided it's hard to make out a proper conclusion of the events.

I doubt the OP cares what member states of this forum think....

I would also suspect if a screenshot of a private individuals Facebook post was put on this forum the MSE guys would delete it as they don't like people's personal information to be posted publically.

I'm also uncomfortable with trial by mob. If it is just a coincidence why should this person be named and shamed publically (and to his employer) when all he may be guilty of is posting a bad review of a service he received.

lincroft1710

hollydays wrote: »

Since when were all people rational ?

I never said they were! In fact I have met many, many irrational people.

I just suggested that the if the review was fake it was made by a rather irrational human being.