Car Sales - Fraud
Comments
-
Well done guys. I guess the "Newbie" alert wasn't enough to put you off having a dig at the OP for no real reason. Sure, his title wasn't up to your standard and, yes, there was a spelling mistake - so lets not bother giving him any useful advice but instead we can make a fool out of him.
I'll remember not to give you guys any advice in the future either. Oh, and you better not make any rookie spelling mistakes because I'll be all over that.
OP - I hope you stick around despite a couple of the "less than helpful" members. As others have mentioned, you have nothing to worry about regarding the listed address. As long as you have your receipt and the claim has been logged at that address, you should be okay.
If errors aren’t raised how can people learn?0 -
It's not fraud.
The title to this thread is "car sales-fraud"
The seller of the car took a deposit for a vehicle and stated that certain work would be carried out before the car was collected and paid for in full.
This work wasn't carried out and as it appears to be the case that the seller isn't refunding the deposit then I see it as a clear case of fraud.0 -
George_Michael wrote: »The title to this thread is "car sales-fraud"
The seller of the car took a deposit for a vehicle and stated that certain work would be carried out before the car was collected and paid for in full.
This work wasn't carried out and as it appears to be the case that the seller isn't refunding the deposit then I see it as a clear case of fraud.
First, the title is misleading. The OP is asking about an address, not the alleged fraud.
Second, it is not a "clear case" of fraud. There is a world of difference between a breach of contract, which this seems to be, and the crime of fraud. Even the BOC is not a "clear case",unless the OP has written evidence which he hasn't mentioned.0 -
AndyMc..... wrote: »Other than being the self appointed forum police, do you have anything useful to add?
I believe my post did address the OP and reiterated the useful advice he had already received. Not policing anything however the two posts in question were clearly not called for. The forum is here to help people, not ridicule them. If long standing members treat new members like that, those new members won't hang around for long.0 -
I believe my post did address the OP and reiterated the useful advice he had already received. Not policing anything however the two posts in question were clearly not called for. The forum is here to help people, not ridicule them. If long standing members treat new members like that, those new members won't hang around for long.
Can you point out which part of my post ridiculed the OP?
Luckily, in this case the OP has received helpful advice, but the chances of that happening are greatly increased if the thread title is descriptive of the actual problem.0 -
worried_jim wrote: »If errors aren't raised how can people learn?
Depends on how far you want to take it. Personally, I wouldn't bother raising errors if someone has just made a simple mistake or typo. As long as the meaning isn't lost (as was the case here).
For example, your statement should have a comma part way through in order for it to be grammatically correct. "If errors aren't raised, how can people learn?".
If we all start doing that, most posts on this forum would be to correct others mistakes.
The OP is a new member and I feel that we should be welcoming them to the forum, not driving them away.
Just my opinion.0 -
Can you point out which part of my post ridiculed the OP?
Luckily, in this case the OP has received helpful advice, but the chances of that happening are greatly increased if the thread title is descriptive of the actual problem.
"The only fraud appears to be in the misleading title"
So you genuinely think that the OP was acting fraudulently when he / she gave the thread it's title? It may not be 100% in line with the advice they were looking for, however, it's not inaccurate and certainly not fraudulent.0 -
"The only fraud appears to be in the misleading title"
So you genuinely think that the OP was acting fraudulently when he / she gave the thread it's title? It may not be 100% in line with the advice they were looking for, however, it's not inaccurate and certainly not fraudulent.
OK. My fault for not including a smiley to identify what I thought was obviously tongue-in-cheek.:doh:
I agree it's not fraudulent, but it's certainly inaccurate: the question is nothing to do with fraud.0 -
OK. My fault for not including a smiley to identify what I thought was obviously tongue-in-cheek.:doh:
You know something, a smiley would've completely changed the way I read your comment. I apologise for misinterpreting what you said. Initially, I thought it was sarcasm at the OP's expense which is why I reacted the way I did - a similar thing happened to me on my first post (along with the usual "You're a newbie therefore must be Dark Matter"). It almost put me off returning.
Both yourself and Jim are well established forum members and your comments within the forum are usually very helpful and well meaning. Thanks for clearing that up, I can enjoy the forum again! :beer:0 -
I believe my post did address the OP and reiterated the useful advice he had already received. Not policing anything however the two posts in question were clearly not called for. The forum is here to help people, not ridicule them. If long standing members treat new members like that, those new members won't hang around for long.
It’s not all about what you believe. Others have their beliefs too.
If you have an issue report anything you find that contradicts your beliefs and don't derail the thread.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards