Sent Item To Wrong Address
- Thread starter Hyper
- Start date
- Status
Soldato
Forum whip round for SCC costs anyone?
It would seriously be the icing on this thread.
It would seriously be the icing on this thread.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 11,116
bigjohn said:
Now listen here youth, I think I speak for everyone here, when I say it doesnt matter how it turned up, it could have turned up in a dogs bottom with no other details, FACT IS, you KNOW ITS NOT YOURS !
Every decent human being when they get something thats not theres will either try to sort it out or if come to a wits end will hand it to the police or something.
So stop being finicky, be a man, accept your in the wrong, send it back or to the intended address and im sure hyper will pay you for your troubles (im talking a tenner or something, not ridiculous amounts before you get any ideas)
Please its now boardering on stupid, everyone who has followed the story, can see quite obviously what has happened, why are you trying to delude yourself ? Possibly because your a very poor man........financailly ? Probably not, morally yes, or likey very young, and very silly.
Now someone close this thread, Hyper phone the police dude this individual has no intention of doing the right thing.
blitz2163 said:
If this is the case - why did caller 1 advise that it didn't, i've heard it for myself and i would take caller 1s word for it over all others as he would know best about what was wasn't included in the parcel including mr green as everyone is reffering to him as, also there was no rts sticker on the item.
explicit - from your previous posts I fully understand your response and this is the response I was expecting - but i'm sure based on previous responses that you are aware this cannot go any further, and am sure mr g is already also aware of this. you'd be suprised that the person who sent the link isn't who you think it is - if my assumptions are correct that is.
Combat squirrel said:
ever heard of taking ownership for your mistakes and learning from them - this is a manly thing to do, do you not agree? - from what i can see mr g checked where he stood and made a descision based on this, he has since offered an amount which has been accepted that left him out of pocket, if you take into account the calls and mails he recieved i feel they were lucky to get this. I feel the offer the parties agreed on is fair especially when the same card with water coolers (toxic) go for 90 pouinds on ebay, if you disagree with this then i think you may have some growing up todo yourself
p.s. sorry to be pedantic but are you really 25 if so you are actually younger than me youth!.
Can't believe it's got this far really.
Bigjohn, you just need to accept that you made a mistake, I (and certainly most others) don't believe you for half a second that you genuinely thought you could just sell it and that would be that.
Do you really want this to go all the way to SCC? Because if you don't pay up, it will. And then the law will make you pay up, plus fees.
Bigjohn, you just need to accept that you made a mistake, I (and certainly most others) don't believe you for half a second that you genuinely thought you could just sell it and that would be that.
Do you really want this to go all the way to SCC? Because if you don't pay up, it will. And then the law will make you pay up, plus fees.
Combat squirrel said:
I'd be very interested to see what the Police would do about this, if anything at all. There is no obvious crime. I doubt they could even do Mr G for 'theft by finding' at this stage (there is no obvious intent). I think making this a criminal case is going way OTT, however, I do feel that MrG should do the right thing and return the card or the rest of the money. Sort it out now MrG, before it gets out of hand and ends up in court.
A third party, who will judicate over the SCC case will not take kindly when they hear that an adult has duped a minor out of £60. This will definitely have a bearing on the case. The law is the law, but dont underestimate the 'human emotional factor' that could be involved in the decision. If Hyper's father stipulates to the judge that the video card was given to his child as a present, but his son wanted to upgrade the card using proceeds of the sale of the card and wages he earnt doing his paper round, it could look bad for MrG.
End this now and pay the kid MrG, you know it makes sense.
Associate
Explicit, you're a good man. Taking your time out to help the OP and offering good, solid, reliable, professional advice is just the icing on the cake.
You're a good role model for us all.
(and giving me a good read at that)
You're a good role model for us all.
(and giving me a good read at that)
Tute said:
how am i envolved in this? - I am merely stating the facts I am aware of, however yes it would be interesting if it did go to scc - as we could all get a clear conclusion, however from what i am aware of the matter is resolved - had both parties not made contact it could have ended up in scc.
I am just interested in finding out as much as possible about this.
sunama said:
if this is the case in my pov he shouldn't have asked for 60 pounds, i think had the request circumstances been approached in a different way (by that i mean polite and professional, as opposed to aggressive) mr g would have just given the person the cash, thats the guy i know anyway - I was always brought up if you ask nicely you normally get what you're after.
these forums are a bit addictive aren't they, better than watching titanic at least!!!!
p.s. mr g works for a bank call center as such 100% of calls are recorded - especially in the insurance area - as i'm sure explicit will confirm - this is an FSA regulation. - and also good from a cost cutting perspective.
- Status