Attempt to be silenced by a Main Dealer [Archive]

View Full Version : Attempt to be silenced by a Main Dealer

s60ben

Nov 29th, 2011, 16:57

Following a post I made the other day on this forum, I received an email from the VOC Forum Support Team.

They had forwarded me a message at the request of a member, who had taken umbrage with the post that I had made.

The "reported post" message is laid below:

Date: 27 November 2011 14:35

The following message was sent to you via the Volvo Owners Club Forum Contact Us form by Captain Volvo

--------------------------------

Please could you pass on my comments to member - s60ben

Ben,

Please could I ask you to consider removing the defamatory comments posted last night about me personally and my business.

Whilst you were kind enough to highlight an issue with a used car we had sold you were also aware there was certainly no intention to mislead and the customer was very happy with the solution.

Perhaps if you had gone about highlighting the concerns in a more acceptable and mature manner apart of which resulted in a member of the public complaining about your excessive and potentially dangerous driving leaving my site and travelling along Bolton Lane.

I have personally and professionally an excellent reputation which my customers see trust , integrity and honesty which are very much apart of my values.

I have been a Volvo Technician ,Volvo Sales consultant , Volvo Sales and General Manager , A true Volvo enthusiast and owner for 30 years.

I have now owned my own Volvo dealership for 4 years and will continue working with Volvo for further futue opportunities to represent this excellent brand

I understand having talked to a number of other Volvo enthusiasts that you too have a reputation

However currently I find your comments libellous

Please consider my request before I take the matter further

Regards

Clive

--------------------------------

Referring Page: ****removed****
IP Address: ****removed****
User Name: Captain Volvo
User ID: 31141
Email: ****removed****

Thats atrocious, and not only that, but this guy is the Dealer Principal of Clive Brook Volvo in Bradford.

He tells half a story, pretends he's asking nicely, but then shoves in the libel bit and the threat of him taking it further..

If you have a quick look at the posts he's made on this forum, it's very clear that the "honesty and integrity" he promotes so much, aren't so much of an issue when he's trying to mislead people into thinking he's just an ordinary member, and attempting to direct them to his business.

For example:

Try Clive Brook Volvo in Bradford . They are offering upto 20% discount to Volvo Owners Club Members on Parts and Labour and I know of 2 friends who were entitled too and took advantage of 20% discount off a New car under thier Loyalty programme.

Contact 01274 802999

www.clivebrook.co.uk

Oh really, 2 friends of the Dealer Principal, happened to be entitled to a Loyalty Scheme discount.....

And:

Wish they hadn't sold it !
Wish there was another one !
Glad I didn't say they were wrong with the price

I am told they have just got the last R ever made for the UK
Sadly I am not going to have chance to say it's too expensive as Clive Brook Volvo have already sold it !

You can find the rest of his posts...
I wonder how many PM's were sent...

I've duly replied to his message, effectively informing him that he can go poke himself where the sun don't shine, and that he can take the matter further should he wish.. Of course, I may also take matter further.

I should add, that I dealt with this Dealer Principal in a fully mature, acceptable and approachable manner, and also drove away perfectly safely from his dealership. (The road he accuses me <via his alleged customer> of speeding on, and dangerous driving on due to that speed, is the grand sum of 200 yards long, and you have no choice but to stop at the end.....) It just so happens my car makes a little more noise than your average v70.. And it also just so happened that he wanted something to have a go at me for when he called me 20 minutes later to have a further argument.

He states quite clearly that his customer is "very happy with the solution" - Well here's a big newsflash for you mate - He's FAR from happy.... And I think you may just find out why.

SonyVaio

Nov 29th, 2011, 17:58

Well words speak for themself when dealers feel they need to resort to this type scaremongering.

Think Clive should just get a life and put more effort into his customer service?

:star-wars-smiley-01

david philips

Nov 29th, 2011, 18:15

just goes to show the foolishness of the bradford twits if they had said nothing and just let it go the way all bad publicity does it probably would have been forgotten about. reason being the general public has a very short memory and even those on tvs rouge traders always find more customers to con but when they take up the fight wile knowing themselves in the wrong all they do is prove that they have been in this position before and show that they have no intention of changing.:stormy:

waylander

Nov 29th, 2011, 18:17

try parking opposite his main entrance with a huge placard stating your issues with the car... nothing libelous and on a oublic highway - might see a swift return to the 'negotiating table' ;)

scottishvolvo

Nov 29th, 2011, 18:24

The first thing that struck me about the letter was the atrocious spelling and grammar. Is it normal for a member of the public to enter a garage and report someones "excessive and potentially dangerous driving" ? I know I wouldn't!

caveman_returns

Nov 29th, 2011, 18:26

He sounds a bit of a knob, doing this sort of thing just gives him and the business bad publicity.

volvorocks

Nov 29th, 2011, 18:31

Youve got the same picture as me.

Ninja59

Nov 29th, 2011, 18:46

i dont want to be seen as the bad man here but is it not better a) to keep this a private matter b) to remove the comments rather than enraging the situation.

from a legal point though if they are fair comment expressing an opinion and not a fact, with public interest and are "fair" then go right ahead. As you might get a defence that way of fair comment.

Also i would like to point out it in the majority it is slander not libel online.

Although a thread like this i can seriously see enflaming the situation honestly...

weble

Nov 29th, 2011, 18:58

One thing anyone in customer relations should know,

If someone has a bad experience, they'll tell 10 people

If someone has a good experience, they'll tell one.

I dont know what went on between you two, or any other issues with anyone else. But a dealer/trader really does need to try and keep a good rep!

irishcarfan

Nov 29th, 2011, 18:59

I agree with Ninja59.

Lightfoot

Nov 29th, 2011, 19:36

This thread (and this one http://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?t=139631)have been brought to my attention as they directly and indirectly concern me and I want to put the record straight and maybe help Volvo and Volvo owners in the process.

I am a 72 year old pensioner, a retired Electronics Engineer (ex-RAF) and Industrial Photographer. Over the past thirty years I have owned a whole series of Volvo cars and am a member of VOC and the T5D5 Forums. I must stress straight away that other than putting fuel, oil and water in my cars I have ALWAYS relied on the Volvo Dealers and Technicians to look under the bonnet and do whatever is required. I have never got oil or grease under my fingernails. I do not run modified cars and joined the T5D5 Forum out of interest and if need be support my son who also runs a D5 but with a few more “bells and whistles” than my standard D5 SE (hence the large number of photos that were made available to T5D5 members taken at the Castle Combe track day earlier this year).

My cars over the years – 345GLE , 245DL , 745GLE , 745GLE , 745 GLT 2.3 16v, 855 2.5 10v GLT (used), V70 P2 2.4 n/a 140 SE (used), V50 1.8 SE (used) and the recently purchased (the one in question) – V70 P2.5 D5 SE (used). I have never had any problems and, in the case of the 855 and 745 series cars, each did 150k to 200k miles before change.

We changed our original 2000 2.4 n/a 140 P2 V70 SE earlier this year as it needed some work doing which we knew would cost (in both time and money) and decided to trade it in and down size to a V50 at the same time. My wife is seriously ill and we have occasion to use a wheelchair. Although we had checked beforehand, I found it difficult to get the wheelchair in and out of the V50 in day to day use and also that it took up so much space that there was no room for shopping etc. There were also other issues with the Ford – sorry!, Volvo V50, no power (by comparison to the V70), awful gearbox, road noise and accidentally crushing my wife’s hand when applying the appalling handbrake. So we only kept it for a few weeks.

Next problem find a used V70?!!

Simple I thought, just go to the Volvo Selekt website and search. Yes there is one up at Bradford that met the specification I was looking for, not too far away up the A1.

Clive Brook Ltd was the Dealership and they had a V70 P2.5 D5 SE manual (EUIII so no DPF) for sale under the Volvo Selekt banner so up we went. This was the exact model I wanted after much discussion with my son.

The car, on a 05 plate, was on the forecourt and at first viewing looked clean and tidy. So in we went to see the sales staff to see if I could get a deal including trading in the 07 plate V50. We had a drive of the V70 and then a discussion with the salesman. Having driven the car, albeit only locally, and looked around it again it was agreed that on purchase the wheels would be refurbished, a tow bar and electrics fitted for my small trailer, the handbrake required adjusting, a number of paintwork scratches around the car would be sorted and the number plate exchanged for my private plate from the V50. This was all agreed along, with 12 months Volvo Selekt Warranty including breakdown.
I understood that I could retain and return the V50 Road Tax to DVLA for refund as it was in the first month of 12 month tax. Unfortunately when I returned the tax disk to the DVLA I was informed that the available refund had already been claimed by the dealer and transferred to the new number plate of the V50, and the tax on the V70 was only until April 2012!

I also paid for a 3 year Car Insurance Gap policy. Right, deal done and it would take two weeks to sort out paperwork etc. As we left I asked about the car remote locking system as when we locked the car, the lights did NOT flash but did when the car was unlocked. The salesman disappeared into the workshop and came back with the reply that “it was a computer software problem and would be sorted out”.

We exchanged and collected the car three weeks later as they had made a mistake and I hadn’t signed some of the required DVLA papers.

We found the car parked on the forecourt up against another car so close that it was a tight squeeze to get into the drivers’ seat. The wheels appeared to have been refurbished and looked in order. The paintwork looked reasonable though when viewed from an angle the scratches were still visible but nothing to worry about on a five year old car. A new Volvo tow bar and electrics HAD been fitted and looked OK. One good thing that they did was to take me in the car to the local petrol station and put £25.00 of fuel in for us. The only thing that was immediately obvious was that when the car was unlocked and relocked the lights did not flash on locking so that one could not tell if the car was locked or not. I pointed this out to the salesman who again disappeared into the workshops and returned with the following statement “This model does not have flashing remote locking indications”. Now as I have explained I am no car mechanic and had no information on the car details to argue against so at the time had to accept both the sales and workshop staffs word.

On our way home down the M1 we had to make a semi emergency stop and suffered the most terrible vibration from the steering. As we were nearly home I took it to my local tyre company with whom I have had over 30 years of excellent service and asked them to check the wheels balance. This they did and all four required rebalancing. Then came the real shock, did I know there were different tyres on the rear and that three of the tyres were badly worn? The one good tyre on the front also had a bulge on the side wall and was totally illegal and dangerous. I therefore had no choice but to replace all four tyres, but photographed the one with the bulge before anything was touched. I then phoned the dealer and told them what had been found. They said that mixed tyres were not uncommon and that they had a record of the tyre depths of the car when sold and that the readings were all within Volvo Selekt specifications. They did agree to change the tyre with the bulge but offered no further help and no comment on the balance or vibration problem. We then drove all the way back up to Bradford to exchange the faulty tyre. This was loaded into the back of the car by the parts/workshop manager and we returned home. Another shock when next day I took the tyre down to the tyre company who promptly informed me that it was the wrong type of tyre. Although it was the right size it was a run flat tyre and couldn’t be used on my V70. Being a customer of long standing they exchanged the tyre for a new P6000 the same as the other tyres. So again, what was the dealership thinking of or was it a matter of getting us off the premises whatever?

The following week we embarked on a prearranged visit to the south of England all around the family for what may be the last time for my wife. Again travelling south down the M1 we hit traffic and had to make a fairly heavy braking manoeuvre. It was a good job that there was plenty of space around us as the car vibrated heavily and pulled sharply to the left. The remainder of our journey was done with a lot of care but by then the steering was also becoming very heavy.

In June this year I joined my son and other T5D5 members for the MRG sponsored track day at Castle Combe, whilst also visiting nearby relatives. This was followed by the workshop day at the MRG Chippenham workshops where they checked out my V50 (foc by the way). As we were now going to be staying with family in nearby Devizes I had already made arrangements with MRG to bring in the V70 for a general look over for peace of mind given their reputation and it was a very good job that I had.

I took the V70 into MRG on the Monday where it only took them an hour for Workshop Manager Simon Chui to bring me an A4 list of faults on the car:

One horn not working
Top engine mount split
PAS pump leaking badly
Front and rear disks and pads shot (pads non-Volvo)
Brake fluid failed test (high moisture content)
Car not always unlocking with remote and lights not flashing correctly
Oil filler cap seal leaking
Off side number plate light inoperative
Wiper blades worn.

It was also pointed out that the number plates had been put on out of square and the tow bar was crooked. This was corrected by MRG but they did show me the workmanship of the tow bar fitting which required a small section of plastic from the rear bumper to be removed to accommodate the new towbar. I don’t know who did it but a child could have done better. It looks as if it was done with a bread knife and is certainly not the work of a qualified technician of any sort. MRG also arranged for a bodywork paint expert to come in and look at the scratches and paintwork in general. He was able to repair some of the scratches but the car was up on one of the end ramps against the wall with the brakes being replaced when he came, so he couldn’t complete the job. I hope he will be in attendance again at next years’ MRG/T5D5 Track Day/Open Day. It was also pointed out that one of the paint problems that I had pointed out to the Bradford Dealers; a small gouge in the paint work on a door that went down to the metal which had been “sandpapered” in an attempt to disguise the scratch.

While waiting I telephoned my son at 0931hrs to tell him of the MRG findings.

MRG were also checking with a very surprised Volvo Warranty Department who agreed that the horn and the PAS Pump could be replaced under the Warranty but queried that the Warranty was less than a month old??

The remainder of the required repairs were to be at my expense to which of course I had to agree to at the time and MRG then priced up the costs for these additional repairs.

I again telephoned my son at 1104hrs to advise him of the costing results and said that I would have to have them done to make the car roadworthy again. As I thought, his advice was to telephone Clive Brook immediately. This I did at 1122hrs and explained to the lady on the phone that I was at MRG with a seriously broken down car and asked to speak to the Sales Manager. She said that no-one was available as they were in a meeting. I said I would phone back in a short while. I again telephoned at 1135hrs and spoke to a gentleman to whom I explained again in full the problems and was told someone would telephone me back on one of my two mobiles. No return call was received and I again phoned Clive Brook Ltd at 1508hrs and was yet again told that no-one was available. I therefore requested that someone telephone me back before 1600hrs or I would have to have to take things further.

No return call was received by either me or MRG Volvo before I left to return to Devizes on the Monday evening. Some small parts were not available immediately from MRG but with the car now road worthy and safe to drive I was able to return to Devizes that same day with the knowledge that MRG had done a superb job and that the other repairs world be completed on the Wednesday. All the time I had been at MRG I, along with all the other customers, had been looked after by the constantly attentive showroom staff. I was even taken up to the boardroom so that I could make my phone calls in private and without disturbance.

I phoned my son again that evening to tell him that I had had no response from Clive Brook and he said he would speak to friends on the T5D5 Forum. Fortunately, one member (S60Ben as it turns out) was working locally to Bradford and kindly volunteered to take up our case with Clive Brook on Tuesday. Via a few phone calls, I gave permission for him to act on my behalf.

The following day (Tuesday) whilst we were out in the car with family members I received a phone call from Clive Brook himself. Following a conversation, he agreed that he would pay all the additional costs for the repairs to the car and settle the account directly with MRG. The following day the remaining repairs were completed and we had a totally safe, roadworthy and legal car. I have however, never received any apology from Clive Brook Ltd, only an email request to complete a survey of customer satisfaction which I naturally declined.

BUT and a very BIG BUT, why was this all not sorted before the car was marketed as a Volvo Selekt car?? Why does Volvo not check on the dealerships and used cars sold under the Volvo Selekt banner or was this one hidden away from any survey?

I was lucky and able to have it sorted out with the help; first of all from Simon Chui and his staff at MRG Chippenham, and then by members of the VOC and T5D5 Forums, without whom I may still have ended up very much out of pocket. Thank you Simon, MRG Chippenham, Robbie, Ben and the VOC & T5D5 Forums.

Lastly ask whether I was told lies by the selling dealership or not. Lies, Fibs, Untruths, call it what you will, and make what you will of the answers and treatment I received. As far as I am concerned I was not treated as a valued Volvo Customer, as I should have expected and the car was most certainly not checked, serviced and prepared to the standard one expects from a Volvo Dealership, let alone a Volvo Selekt vehicle.

Volvo should have a spot check system in place for the technicians and staff who are employed to act on their behalf. I understand that Volvo does audit it’s dealerships but are these unannounced spot checks or are the dealerships informed in advance allowing them to spruce themselves up for the day?

If the quality of service that I have received is widespread I fear for the future of Volvo in the UK.

To the Directors of Clive Brooks Ltd I would say that a closer monitoring of your managers and staff and what goes on at your dealership is certainly required. We need more MRG’s and their quality of Service with trained, knowledgeable, dedicated technicians and staff.

A lesson here for Volvo who I hope will read this and take heed. Also to those dealerships that may try under hand dealing and selling. Eventually you will always be found out....

volvorocks

Nov 29th, 2011, 20:04

Hi S60Ben with the same picture!

I fully understand a persons annoyance if indeed it is the case that they have purchased something that may be faulty.
I am not suggesting or implying that you acted in one manner or the other , nor have I read your initial post that gives rise to your latest problem.
However when raising an issue I find it always best to verbally state assertively to the seller that with which you may be unhappy, and then place such in writing to them and move on from there.

There is mention of libel in the letter you received, and although it may be doubtful as to whether a person would go so far as to launch an action due to cost and complexity it is however always a possibility.A defamatory comment is presumed to be false, unless the person making it can prove its truth and if they can then its not defamatory which is sort of opposite to what we know as “innocent until proven guilty”..!!

You write

“He tells half a story, pretends he's asking nicely, but then shoves in the libel bit and the threat of him taking it further..”

Which may be better if written

“I am of the opinion that he may only be telling half the story and pretending hes asking nicely, but then shoves in the libel bit and the threat of him taking it further..”

There is no law against having feelings and opinions

Just wishing to point out so you can have freedom of speech (fine line) without the possibility of any problems

Regards

docjd

Nov 29th, 2011, 20:08

This is going to get complicated!
You need to know your end game .
Seek a quick resolution where possible!
:thumbs_up:

volvorocks

Nov 29th, 2011, 20:14

Evening Lightfoot

Thank you for an interesting post. I empathise with you.:)

volvorocks

Nov 29th, 2011, 20:20

outnumbered

Nov 29th, 2011, 20:28

http://www.selektvolvocars.co.uk/selekt-programme-overview/.
interesting reading:thumbs_up:

volvorocks

Nov 29th, 2011, 20:28

Lots of people reading (this post)! Can only be good.:)

T5R+

Nov 29th, 2011, 20:29

I never get involved in this type of thing and am more of a lurker than poster.

Must be one of the lucky Clive Brook customers - have bought 2 cars from them in the past and whilst there were niggles, the service was great eg live too far to go back and a generous cheque was posted to me to rectify one of the issues.

Have met Clive and I believe him to be a gentleman. He is also a very slick sales person and will know that negative publicity is bad press - cannot imagine he will not endeavour to mutually resolve situation. Will not say more, as he may figure out who I am!

The OP will no doubt be upset/livid/? at the situation and I can appreciate his view.

Part of me would like to believe that both parties can resolve this matter without "internet dirty laundry".

PS I have nothing whatsoever to do with Volvo/Clive Brook and only speak of my dealings with the dealership.

volvorocks

Nov 29th, 2011, 20:35

http://www.selektvolvocars.co.uk/selekt-programme-overview/.
interesting reading:thumbs_up:

Does indeed read good and should set ones mind at rest with the thought of stress free motoring............HOWEVER.... clause d. under:-

d.The Volvo dealer, at his absolute discretion, is satisfied that the Volvo Selekt car is in the same condition as at the time of delivery to the customer"

.....with the definition of discretion being..................

"the power or right to decide or act according to one's own judgment"

One word - is it a large escape route - ?

Regards

t5_monkey

Nov 29th, 2011, 20:36

Ninja59

Nov 29th, 2011, 20:51

Hi Ninja59

Yes I agree with your thoughts although slander is the spoken word and libel the written.

Howsoever labelled they do of course come under the label "defamation"

Regards:)

yes i know that i actually study law (GDL) and have done IT law but online bulletin boards and forums are annomyly in the world of defamation...

http://www.out-law.com/page-9330

Bulletin board postings more likely slander than libel, says High Court

Defamation on internet bulletin boards is more like slander than libel, a High Court judge has ruled. Mr Justice Eady said that bulletin board discussions are characterised by "give and take" and should be considered in that context.07 Aug 2008
Topics

E-commerce and the internet
Freedom of information
Hosting and maintenance
Regulatory
TMT & Sourcing

In a multi-defendant lawsuit concerning posts on an investors' bulletin board, Mr Justice Eady said that comments on a board are not to be taken in the same context as those in, for example, a newspaper article.

He said that the casual, conversational nature of bulletin boards meant that defamatory comments were more like slander than libel. Slander relates generally to spoken comments and libel generally to written and published ones. In English law it is harder to win damages for slander than libel.

"[Bulletin board posts] are rather like contributions to a casual conversation (the analogy sometimes being drawn with people chatting in a bar) which people simply note before moving on; they are often uninhibited, casual and ill thought out," he said in his ruling. "Those who participate know this and expect a certain amount of repartee or 'give and take'."

"When considered in the context of defamation law, therefore, communications of this kind are much more akin to slanders (this cause of action being nowadays relatively rare) than to the usual, more permanent kind of communications found in libel actions," said the ruling. "People do not often take a 'thread' and go through it as a whole like a newspaper article. They tend to read the remarks, make their own contributions if they feel inclined, and think no more about it."

Nigel Smith runs a shareholder action group and his behaviour prompted comments on investor discussion bulleting boards run by ADVFN Ltd. Smith sued ADVFN and 37 individuals over comments claiming defamation.

Mr Justice Eady said that Smith had persistently pursued cases which were without merit and issued a civil restraint order against him, barring him from starting further actions. He later conceded that he could not do that, though, because he had stopped lawyers arguing about a civil restraint order in the course of the trial.

He did, though, order the continuation of a general stay on those cases which had already been begun.

The posters on the bulletin boards had criticised Smith for what they saw as heavy-handed behaviour and the issuing of threats of legal action by Smith when criticised. One said that he supported "those who were being threatened and bullied by … Mr Smith", and called Smith a bulletin board bully.

Another said: "I do not believe any of [another poster's] posts have been defamatory and Nigel Smith has behaved in an appalling manner. NS has discredited himself by his own actions".

Mr Justice Eady said that these comments were likely to be protected as fair comment, which means that they cannot count as defamation as long as they are posted without malice and represent the poster's honest views.

"I referred to common themes in the postings, such as that of 'bullying' other users and making 'threatening demands' for money. That is classic fair comment territory and, in the light of the modern authorities, it is inconceivable that a jury would find any of those who expressed such a view 'malicious' – let alone all of them," he said. "Opinions may be expressed in exaggerated and strident terms; the only requirement is that they be honestly held. It is fanciful to suppose that any of these people did not believe what they were saying. Even if they reached their conclusions in haste, or on incomplete information, or irrationally, the defence would still avail them."

In a case last year a number of posters on a football discussion website received similar protection. Club Sheffield Wednesday and some of its directors took a bulletin board to court to force it to reveal the identity of posters, but Richard Parkes QC, sitting as a deputy High Court judge, said that the identities should not be revealed.

"I do not think it would be right to make an order for the disclosure of the identities of users who have posted messages which are barely defamatory or little more than abusive or likely to be understood as jokes," he wrote. "That, it seems to me, would be disproportionate and unjustifiably intrusive."

Parkes ruled in the case that the expected right to privacy of the posters, who had posted using pseudonyms, outweighed the right of the directors and club to protect their reputation when the remarks in question were trivial.

Parkes was representing ADVFN in the current case.

Mr Justice Eady stressed that his ruling applied to the case before him, and that publishing via new technologies could lead to successful claims.

"I would not suggest for a moment that blogging cannot ever form the basis of a legitimate libel claim," he said. "I am focusing only on these particular circumstances."

In English law, a victim of libel can win damages even if he has not suffered financial loss as a result of the statement. A person who has been slandered must prove that actual damage has been suffered. Scots law, which does not distinguish libel from slander, requires proof of harm but not necessarily financial loss. In a defamation action under Scots law, there is a defence if the statement was made in the heat of an argument. The defence does not exist in English law.

Editor's note, 08/08/2008: Our original headline for this story was 'Internet chat more likely slander than libel, says High Court'. As a reader pointed out, real-time internet chat is a different type of platform from a bulletin board. So we've changed our headline for clarity.

Following the logic of Mr Justice Eady's reasoning, it seems highly likely to us that had the defamatory comments been made in an internet chatroom or by Instant Messenger, they would also be treated as slander, not libel.

assuming you understand the significane of using Outlaw/Pinsent Masons online resource...

volvorocks

Nov 29th, 2011, 21:09

t5_monkey

Nov 29th, 2011, 21:11

Interesting read :)

Ninja59

Nov 29th, 2011, 21:23

Ninja 59

Thank you for posting the long reference the content of which is noted. Very interesting if I may say.

Being a law student means if you keep studying and eventually pass your exams you may become a practising lawyer which is indeed a well paid profession and in being a recognised and qualified lawyer you will over the years gain much experience so I say keep studying and go for it.

BTW I was actually in agreement with your thoughts on the position although slander is indeed the spoken word and libel is indeed the written.

Regards

Its quite an odd ball field tbh the courts will never truely keep up tbh...although it is naturally a field of obvious interest when you consider the rest of my post.... it has with it various technical problems right upto the latest EU decision regarding human rights and the possibility it might be illegal to block certain web pages (which would invalidate the recent newzbin (sp) case with BT having to block the website (and the others that were looking to be blocked)...

the question instantly here really is a forum a "form" of bulletin board...overall general easyness when someone puts a defamation claim general in is for the person or moderators to remove the post/thread etc. for safety. And if anyone saw my post on here in the past few months in regards to the potential changes to defamation it would make the world online much more challenging.

Saying that defamation is the most expensive form of litigation out of any field and the reason there is so few cases because it naturally requires a jury unlike any other form of civil claim...hence why it instantly is a high court jobby...the values involved easily go buy the threashold of 50K...

Already have one degree but in IT but studyed some law at a lower level ;) and am at one of the well recognized large law schools if i mentioned (CoL) those in the know and all that ;) already moving onto the LPC just looking for TC's i have so little time sometimes its mad! just enough time to go for a random drive for a few miles see the new GF and wash the motor ha!

i thought you were and i do not deny any of the information you have said as the general principle is what you have stated...

s60ben

Nov 29th, 2011, 21:32

Clive should have just resolved this.

Accusing someone of dangerous driving is entirely a separate issue to his displeasure at your account of events.

Tying the two together is silly and puts him in a very poor light. If he felt your driving was dangerous he should have informed the police immediately.

The worst thing about this, is Clive's reply.

They did resolve the initial problem of the large bill at the other dealers, but it was bloody hard work.. and I don't appreciate the manner in which I was spoken to, or lied to.

As for the "dangerous driving" that's a recent invention, as when he bought it up during the conversation it was speeding...

You are correct about the police bit, It would have been an easy one to track me down... LOL

As for all the "legal advice", thanks guys, but in all honesty, its not a threat that bothers me, i can quite happily prove my case without breaking a sweat.

Not only that, it detracts from the very important points at hand.

I may summarise them later.

volvorocks

Nov 29th, 2011, 21:48

Already have one degree but in IT but studyed some law at a lower level ;) and am at one of the well recognized large law schools if i mentioned (CoL) those in the know and all that ;) already moving onto the LPC just looking for TC's i have so little time sometimes its mad! just enough time to go for a random drive for a few miles see the new GF and wash the motor ha!

i thought you were and i do not deny any of the information you have said as the general principle is what you have stated...

Hi Ninja59

Yes indeed I was in agreement with your suggestions in your original post so was a tad suprised to read what I felt was a slightly defensive response on your part..:)

Whichever way its interpreted "defamation" or any tortious actions are notoriously complex and costly to pursue

I am aware of Mr Eady and his "rulings" and whilst not in much of a position to do anything about it (nor having any wish to do so...LOL) I tend to disagree in part with his opinion, which is after all what it is!!

I can see the point though that internet forums or mediums otherwise similar in nature are sort of 2 way "discussions" so he has deemed them "chat" so therefore potentially slander oppose libel.Notwithstanding, posting in a forum is STILL technically typing which has to be read so is therefore written so is therefore libel.!!!!!....I am sure there will be a challenge to slander v libel sometime..!!

Anyway a valid point worth making whether one is to talk, write, chat in forums, papers, in person or otherwise - is that it is always wise and prudent to think first....!!!!!....and if they have not and it has been published in an internet forum then to re-publish "mutatis mutandis"....;):);):);)

Regards:)

irishcarfan

Nov 30th, 2011, 01:43

Superb post by Lightfoot

Re-reading through all of this, I can't believe these guys are main dealers?

I know BMW are very strict on their dealers and we lost 2 well-established dealers where I live. Perhaps it's time that Volvo takes a closer look. Having said that, we've lost 3 or 4 main Volvo dealers out here over the last few years, but that's for a different reason...

munsterbigfeet

Nov 30th, 2011, 06:42

It's funny, I have worked in main dealers, and now run my own small garage on the South coast.. Within main dealers (especially Mazda) the rules on warranty/used car prep are simple... keep cost down... BUT, all tyres 3mm or more, bulges are a no-no etc etc...wonky plates and mangled bumper cut outs do nothing for advertising the staff competency! I would be embarassed rectifying such simple 'school boy' errors..puts the 'spanner men' in a bad light.
I repair and MOT cars for a guy who rents the forecourt, he has sold used cars for 30 years, people come back time and again with friends and family to replace/buy another car, he preps the cars well enough for them to a) look 'right' and b) feel like you have spent your money wisely. If a man can prep his cars in a double garage (and recovering from a quadruple heart op) and they still look fresh, why can't a main dealer/specialist??? Makes me shudder what their MOT practices are like if it was freshly MOT'd before handover... tyre bulge and numberplate lamp out are a failure, PAS leak be an advisory.....

Sorry to hear of your woes, hopefully you have a car that drives and looks as it should now.

Lightfoot

Nov 30th, 2011, 08:31

Thanks everyone for the replies and other comments, especially Ben. One thing that I didn't stress in my post was that the sales staff who sold me the car KNEW - it had been explained at the time, that my wife is terminally ill and that I needed a good reliable car to get her to hospitals and hospices where she is receiving treatment. So they sold me the car in that condition without any thought or care. I know the salesman concerned was new to Clive Brook and that this car was his first sale for them, but he had come from another Volvo Main Dealer. Also the management at Clive Brook must have known the condition of the car, so was it used as a test for their new salesman???

That was something else that Munsterbigfeet reminds me. The car had an MOT Certificate but it was six months old, so the car had not been MOT'd by the Dealer. They must have known it would fail.

s60ben

Nov 30th, 2011, 10:10

Thanks Lightfoot ;)

The issues that currently and going forward that will affect Lightfoot, are the fact that the car does not qualify for the Selekt Scheme, it was advertised as a Selekt car (I have a copy of the advertisement).

This makes quite a large impact on the Warranty Cover provided, the "Selekt" warranty, covers everything, and has very few exclusions.

The "normal" warranty, doesn't cover everything, far from it.

Personally, if I were Mr. Brook I would do a number of things, in this precise order.

1. Apologise profusely in writing, for the issues at hand.
2. Resolve the warranty issue directly with Volvo Warranty (shouldn't be hard, they are local after all...) , and ensure it is upgraded, or put it clearly in writing that Clive Brook Volvo will back up the "standard" warranty to the same level of the "Selekt" warranty at any other Volvo dealership.
3. Sort out the tax disc situation...
4. Send Mr. Lightfoots wife a big fat bunch of flowers, and send Mr. Lightfoot a crate of beer.

I'd personally see that as being the end of the matter, and I suspect Mr. Lightfoot would do as well, and Clive can get a PR result out of a very poor situation.

Everybody has problems or things that go wrong from time to time, it's how you resolve those problems that makes you stand out from the crowd. It's really not hard.

That's why I was very polite, and attempted to assist (in reality) Clive Brook to make their customer happy.

FWIW - I didn't bring up Lightfoot's wife's illness in the dealers (I wasn't aware that they knew already anyway) , and haven't mentioned it publicly so far out of respect.

Problems with the car, are the absolute last thing that they should be having to worry about given the circumstances.

As such, I didn't post my reply to Clive's email on the forum (as it discussed the illness) - however, as Lightfoot has made that public, there's no reason to not post my reply for the avoidance of any doubt.

Clive,

I have considered your request to remove the post that I made about you personally and your business.

There are quite a number of factual errors, omissions and allegations that you made in your email however, which I must respond to.

I initially came into your dealership following a request from a good friend of mine, who had been asked by his father to do what he could do to help, as he was having difficulties in getting the level of service, response and respect from your staff that he rightly expected.

I politely sat down as instructed, and waited for you whilst browsing your sales documentation. When you appeared you initially presented yourself as being approachable and seemed to be helpful, however that initial impression was soon corrected.

After I had politely explained the basics of the issue, you then went off to consult your staff and when you arrived back at the table your attitude had entirely changed.

You stated that your staff had indeed been in contact with your customer, and then tried to play games by asking me to explain to you what the differences were between a Selekt car/Warranty and a non Selekt car, when I explained that I had the outlying basics, and that you would clearly have a much better understanding of the finer details, you denied knowing anything whatsoever about Volvo Selekt warranties - Which was quite frankly laughable.

You also informed me that your entire stock of some 29 Selekt cars had just been audited the day before, and only 2 had bought comment, and on very minor items. I'm however, well aware that said Volvo audits do not mean your entire stock was personally inspected, but that a very small selection of vehicles are selected for inspection.

You then stated that you couldn't understand what I was doing in your dealership, that you had indeed been in contact with your customer, that it was nothing to do with me, and that you weren't going to speak to me any further and that I could leave. At that point you got up from the table, and walked off.

I found that entirely disrespectful, downright rude and not befitting your position within your company as you were walking away and I followed to leave, I pointed out that as you were refusing to deal with the matter, then I would take it up with the Volvo Car UK Directors.

You then almost spat at me "You can't threaten me!". Given your venom, lack of respect and rudeness, I then responded "Yes, I just did", so you then repeated your earlier comment by shouting it at me, and I then responded "No, you are wrong, I can, and I just did, Goodbye".

I then exited your dealership, and called my friend - I gave him a quick run down, and he confirmed that there had in fact been no contact - I then re-entered your dealership, and saw that you were stood near your service desk, I walked over and waited whilst you finished your conversation, then informed you that I had your customer's son on the telephone, and that there had indeed been no contact.

After I left your dealership, having been told to leave, been shouted at and told that you were not discussing the matter with myself any further, you then saw it fit to call me again within an hour.

In that phone call, you told me that you'd been in touch with your customer, and the other Volvo dealer, and that it was now being dealt with in a manner that he was happy with, you then proceeded to attempt to lambast me, told me that I was "Playing Games", and eventually when you were pulled up on the matter as I caught you out in a lie, had to admit that you knew all about the Selekt Car and Warranties situations, but told me differently as you didn't want to or felt the need to discuss it with me, you then informed me of your comments about my driving, to which I told you quite clearly the situation, and that I didn't exceed the speed limit, nor had driven in a dangerous manner, your attitude throughout the call was so atrocious that I actually terminated the telephone conversation with yourself as it was clear that the entire purpose of the call was so you could try and form an argument with myself .

We now come to the quite farcical allegations you have made with regards to my driving. As you are well aware, your dealership sits on Canal Road, and is within a very busy 40mph speed limit, with quite poor and restrictive sight lines from your exit. I fully admit to pulling out into Canal Road from the stopped position at the exit of your dealership quite quickly to enable me to pull into a gap safely without inconveniencing or causing danger to other traffic. I then traveled some 42 yards to the entrance of Bolton Lane, and proceeded to turn left up Bolton Lane, which is nigh on a 45deg turn and something to be done carefully and slowly given the vehicle I drive has an infamous turning circle (facelift V70R on 18" Wheels).

I then accelerated up Bolton Lane, which is a grand total of some 200 yards (and yes I have measured it) . I will be the first to admit that my vehicle is much louder than your average almost silent V70 (having been fitted with a performance exhaust) , and that my acceleration was brisk, sensible and perfectly reasonable, but at no time was the speed limit of 30mph exceeded, you are also quite aware that at the other end of Bolton Lane you have no option but to stop. Not only that, but given the braking distance from 30mph is 25yards, and that at 30mph, you travel approximately 15 yards per second, in total that gives me 175yards of road and around 10 seconds (at 30mph, and considerably less distance and time at any higher speeds) in which you claim I managed to exceed the speed limit and drive dangerously due to that speed, to the point where a customer came in to complain.

In summary, your claims as to my speeding and dangerous driving, are quite frankly farcical, and any other sensible reasonable person would draw the same conclusion, even without the benefit of the maths lesson - unless of course he had an axe to grind and felt the urge to make up a story for his own ends and I challenge you to be forthcoming with undeniable proof / evidence of your claims relating to the speed of my vehicle.

I'm also very aware, from the beginning you attempted to bluff me, play it dumb, and that it didn't go as you intended, and went very wrong. I'm also aware that you stated you wished to contact me to see if we could start again, and put aside our differences.

Given your attitude displayed to me on the day, I call into question your honesty and integrity given that you lied to me on a number of occasions, and were caught out doing so - which you clearly did not like being called on.

Quite interestingly, with regard to your integrity, I note your username on the VOC forum, and also note that you have not made your position very clear, in fact it is fairly clear (Now knowing your username, and that you own the dealership) that you have attempted to promote/protect your business, but whilst posting as a user, not the owner - and many could have been mislead on a number of occasions from your posts that you have made.

I also have personally and both professionally an excellent reputation, based upon my excellent and award winning service and support to my customers, let alone fellow Volvo owners - hence why your customer felt the urge to ask his Son to assist, and he asked me to pop in and find out what was going on, as he is aware that I am local, and is also aware that I have resolved other seemingly unsolvable problems perfectly amicably with other Volvo dealers.

I have myself been a true Volvo enthusiast for a number of years, well over 10 years which I admit is less years than yourself, but then that's unsurprising as I've been on this earth for much less time. The big difference quite frankly is that my enthusiasm doesn't need to pay my bills, nor my salary.

You did indeed settle the bill from the other dealer, and your customer was understandably happy about that, given it was over £700 from memory, but that was in my opinion, nothing that you should be applauded for, as quite clearly - it shouldn't have even gotten to that stage of your customer having to worry about it, given that he was under the impression he'd bought a Selekt Car.

It shouldn't make any difference, and you were not to know at the time, as befitting the mature and responsible manner in which I dealt with yourself, I didn't bring it up at the time, I didn't feel that it should make any difference to your actions - but your customer who was having all of the problems with the vehicle, was taking his terminally ill wife to visit family members and friends, very probably for the last time, and spent a number of those very precious days, sat in a Volvo dealer waiting for someone at your dealership to deal with the matter, which in the end, was all resolved within a couple of hours of my visit, so I can personally sit quite comfortably, I wonder if your seat is so comfortable.

With regards to your point that you find my comments libelous, I should inform you that my post was very clear, very concise, and comments were made upon my own personal experiences of yourself, your service and your dealership .

I should also add that I can prove my claims and comments, that they were not malicious but quite factual, and I also state quite clearly that given my personal experience, that those comments were fair, and quite reasonable.

I also find your claims and exaggerations made in your email below sent to the various members of the Volvo Forum Team, to be unprovable, wholly malicious, and defamatory, and if they have been repeated to those "Number of other Volvo enthusiasts" you claimed to have spoken to, I will also find that defamatory.

I have considered your "request", please feel free to "Take the matter further".

Regards

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 11:14

outnumbered

Nov 30th, 2011, 13:27

its really a sad state of affairs that this has come to a public bashing for the said dealer when it should have been resolved in house.i applaud people who have the balls to take these dealers on as long as its constructive and the facts are correct there are far too many people taken for a ride in the hope that they will not question the dealer / garage for work done / not done, you only have to look on the forum and there are quite a few members who are now starting to ask questions. thank you for posting it Ben and bringing this to our attention. lets hope that the garage in question has learned from this . i wish you Lightfoot and your family all the best
mike

rikcougar

Nov 30th, 2011, 13:34

As above, this should be kept private, posting on a public forum is asking for trouble and will not help the situation

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 13:45

As above, this should be kept private, posting on a public forum is asking for trouble and will not help the situation

I do agree with what you say.

However some people feel happier to post their experiences of poor service or sub standard products and the information does help others to make a reasoned decision as to where one shops.Going public about ones experience can in certain circumstance have a positive effect and thus a positive outcome for the complainant.

I myself wouldnt post all complaints communications or issues as I doubt there would be a forum large enough :)

Regards

JamesV70R

Nov 30th, 2011, 14:11

CTCNetwork

Nov 30th, 2011, 15:23

Hi,
Youve got the same picture as me.
No! You've got the same Avatar as Ben.

Des. . . ;)

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 15:29

Hi,

No! You've got the same Avatar as Ben.

Des. . . ;)

Good one!!..:lol:

Must agree he got there before me..!!

Ninja59

Nov 30th, 2011, 16:53

I don't agree that this should have been kept private.

Dealerships should be prepared to have people talking about them, be it in a good light, or in a bad light. Obviously, they take the praise with no questions, but if someone has a bad experience ... it should also be highlighted.

The dealership shouldn't have let things get to the stage where the OP feels they NEED to post their bad experiences onto one of the forums.

I would also like to see "Captain Volvo" marked as a Trader, as he clearly can't keep his "business" and "non-business" mind seperate on these forums.

but there is no real need to air effectively what are legal problems in such open public as if my understanding is correct this area of the forum is open to joe bloggs for viewing purposes with no sign up?

I would not disagree with airing of the way in which a person was treated in a dealership, i also happen to know for a fact that this is far from the first instance i have seen this year regarding dealerships using a sledge hammer to crack a nut if anything this is easily the 6th or 7 th one in about 4 or 5 months for me...

Also in addition if my understanding is correct the OP was only going in aid of the other forum member with authority to talk about the matters in person considering the appalling service the person involved had received.

From another stand point effectively we have only heard one side of the argument that of the OP's, now i also believe that frankly a trader "alterior motives" which i consider fair should be labelled or signed up as a trader. Unfortunately like so many forums that i know this goes on so much its ridicoulous one of my other well frequented forums that i use has to a degree the same problems.

s60ben

Nov 30th, 2011, 18:00

outnumbered

Nov 30th, 2011, 18:05

yes i do remember the site closing down.

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 18:38

With all due respect to Ninja59 and a couple of others, This isn't a legal advice forum, nor a post asking for legal advice, nor does it require long winded posts about the legalities either which way or - I'm sure you can find a legal discussion forum.

Not only that, but having the odd two or three members bitching about it being made public, who have only been members on the forums for less than a year or two years is mildly amusing, and at the same time, mildly irritating.

As it stands, none of those bitching/complaining about it being posted, are aware of the previous attitude taken to problems (by keeping it quiet, hushing things up, closing/deleting threads) and the huge problems it caused for other volvo owners who were getting diddled, ripped off and well and truly done for absolutely thousands of pounds, for years and years.

Take for example, the following thread:
http://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?p=291941

and the post from Bob Issac...

http://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showpost.php?p=291887&postcount=73

.

Hi s60ben ( with whom I share the same avatar) :)

Yes, it may not be a legal advice forum nor is it a joke forum nor a forum about childrens toys depression or Jesus yet people post and obtain enjoyment awareness and information from reading and / or contributing to such threads. All members in here are just that, members and anything expressed is but suggestion. (or at least I take it that way)

My own personal opinion is if its fair and reasonable , agreeable with moderators/ owners and within acceptable guidelines then it goes.

Length of membership is irrelevant.

People may have different opinions as to whether you should or should not post your own personal grievance. That is all it is, opinion, not advice. No-one in here is acting in a professional capacity. Some agree some disagree with certain viewpoints. That’s life.

I myself applaud you in some respects for making your grievances public as it is good information for others to read and also creates awareness. Posting your grievance with a particular seller/ dealer can indeed be productive for you also, as a positive result may be obtained. On the other hand making certain things public can indeed jeopardise all or any case you may have with any seller/ dealer , lead to further issues , and maybe not have the outcome that you may wish.

As an example, and one reason I myself may have suggested it would be wise to think about what you publish (whether it be slander or libel..lol…..thanks Ninja59) is that irrespective of who is or isn’t right issues can balloon in an uncontrollable way and extremely quickly, and I for one would wish for you to achieve resolution to your satisfaction, hence my suggestions. I am and was thinking of you and looking for possibilities that didn’t add “petrol to the fire” and damage your chance of resolve. You never know what the other party will or will not do.

Problem is in lots of cases emotions run wild on both sides and can sometimes override or mask the facts thus potentially leading to a less than satisfactory result for all concerned.

The dealer thinks he is correct. You think you are correct. Without having both persons stating their case in front of an impartial person a reasonable conclusion is difficult to achieve for the casual observer. I understand that sellers wish to have good praise all over the internet yet not bad. Notwithstanding should I, if I were a seller consider that false accusations were being made against me publicly I would strenuously defend them. Why?

I would wish to protect my interest. I have the ability to do it. I also have the wherewithal to do it.

Please be aware Ben that people are more than likely on your side and probably actually support you with the problems you are having, although maybe not necessarily the method. It would be wise to notice this.

Regards :)

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 18:43

yes i do remember the site closing down.

Which site?

outnumbered

Nov 30th, 2011, 18:44

Which site?
this site or should i say this forum.
mike

Ninja59

Nov 30th, 2011, 18:48

Hi s60ben ( with whom I share the same avatar) :)

Yes, it may not be a legal advice forum nor is it a joke forum nor a forum about childrens toys depression or Jesus yet people post and obtain enjoyment awareness and information from reading and / or contributing to such threads. All members in here are just that, members and anything expressed is but suggestion. (or at least I take it that way)

My own personal opinion is if its fair and reasonable , agreeable with moderators/ owners and within acceptable guidelines then it goes.

Length of membership is irrelevant.

People may have different opinions as to whether you should or should not post your own personal grievance. That is all it is, opinion, not advice. No-one in here is acting in a professional capacity. Some agree some disagree with certain viewpoints. That’s life.

I myself applaud you in some respects for making your grievances public as it is good information for others to read and also creates awareness. Posting your grievance with a particular seller/ dealer can indeed be productive for you also, as a positive result may be obtained. On the other hand making certain things public can indeed jeopardise all or any case you may have with any seller/ dealer , lead to further issues , and maybe not have the outcome that you may wish.

As an example, and one reason I myself may have suggested it would be wise to think about what you publish (whether it be slander or libel..lol…..thanks Ninja59) is that irrespective of who is or isn’t right issues can balloon in an uncontrollable way and extremely quickly, and I for one would wish for you to achieve resolution to your satisfaction, hence my suggestions. I am and was thinking of you and looking for possibilities that didn’t add “petrol to the fire” and damage your chance of resolve. You never know what the other party will or will not do.

Problem is in lots of cases emotions run wild on both sides and can sometimes override or mask the facts thus potentially leading to a less than satisfactory result for all concerned.

The dealer thinks he is correct. You think you are correct. Without having both persons stating their case in front of an impartial person a reasonable conclusion is difficult to achieve for the casual observer. I understand that sellers wish to have good praise all over the internet yet not bad. Notwithstanding should I, if I were a seller consider that false accusations were being made against me publicly I would strenuously defend them. Why?

I would wish to protect my interest. I have the ability to do it. I also have the wherewithal to do it.

Please be aware Ben that people are more than likely on your side and probably actually support you with the problems you are having, although maybe not necessarily the method. It would be wise to notice this.

Regards :)

you basically have summed up what i was thinking of replying with...I also dont appreciate to a degree being singled out...end of the day we are still discussing the issue...

I only take a small amount of annoyance to the comment is in regards to time of membership why do people insist on bringing this up...new members are usually so fearful of expressing their views, when they do this occurs...it should make no difference what so ever.

dew1911

Nov 30th, 2011, 18:54

Come on, let's all just have a hug and get along :D

acshortt5

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:06

I only take a small amount of annoyance to the comment is in regards to time of membership why do people insist on bringing this up...new members are usually so fearful of expressing their views, when they do this occurs...it should make no difference what so ever.

With regard to this aspect s60ben is, I believe, purely referring to the fact that new members are not aware of the issues the forum, and indeed the club as a whole, went through some time ago.

The issues being connected to problems being aired about a certain trader.

I for one welcome posts about bad experiences with traders where evidence is available to back up the claims. I fail to see the difference between
A) Posting a thread on a public internet forum describing events or
B) Seeing the same events shown on BBC Watchdog/rogue traders (for example).
It allows people to have the full facts to go in fully informed and on their guard.

As has been mentioned before slander (or libel, whichever word you choose) is only slander/libel if untrue. It appears to me that s60ben can easily substantiate his claims to be true. Therefore I cannot see how there can be a claim made by the other party nor why we are having a deep discussion about libel/slander. Perhaps now we can drop that part of the discussion and focus on the main matter of the thread?

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:06

you basically have summed up what i was thinking of replying with...I also dont appreciate to a degree being singled out...end of the day we are still discussing the issue...

I only take a small amount of annoyance to the comment is in regards to time of membership why do people insist on bringing this up...new members are usually so fearful of expressing their views, when they do this occurs...it should make no difference what so ever.

Hi Ninja59

Thanks for that. Great minds think alike eh?

Yes its not too great to be singled out but to be honest Ive learnt to separate emotions when necessary, although it can be a challenge at times as after all we are all human.

A read that may interest you can be found by following this link (http://www.negotiationinsight.com/wisdom/apr-2009). In fact its so good in some respects I would like to say I wrote it myself!!

And remember when you represent your future clients the under mentioned certainly applies…

A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer.

Regards :)

Ninja59

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:09

Come on, let's all just have a hug and get along :D

i dont want to hug you :p i know you to well.

Ninja59

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:11

dew1911

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:14

i dont want to hug you :p i know you to well.

That's not what you were saying the other day Sweetie :p

Ninja59

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:16

Hi Ninja59

Thanks for that. Great minds think alike eh?

Yes its not too great to be singled out but to be honest Ive learnt to separate emotions when necessary, although it can be a challenge at times as after all we are all human.

A read that may interest you can be found by following this link (http://www.negotiationinsight.com/wisdom/apr-2009). In fact its so good in some respects I would like to say I wrote it myself!!

And remember when you represent your future clients the under mentioned certainly applies…

A jury consists of twelve persons chosen to decide who has the better lawyer.

Regards :)

Must Be! ha

i do when im learning the law and practising it's applications, but here is a social setting so slightly reduced :)

interesting read even if from the americans quite clearly so that might shoot your argument regarding taking credit for it ha!

too true in some circumstances...

rikcougar

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:19

Whether or not new members are aware of "previous" is surely somewhat irrelevant.

Without meeting either party it is always just two sides to a story as is this.

I never judge anyone unless I have met them personally

XC60MY12

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:21

That's not what you were saying the other day Sweetie :p

Get a room.

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:23

With regard to this aspect s60ben is, I believe, purely referring to the fact that new members are not aware of the issues the forum, and indeed the club as a whole, went through some time ago.

The issues being connected to griviences being aired about a certain trader.

I for one welcome posts about bad experiences with traders where evidence is available to back up the claims. I fail to see the difference between
A) Posting a thread on a public internet forum describing events or
B) Seeing the same events shown on BBC Watchdog/rogue traders (for example).
It allows people to have the full facts to go in fully informed and on their guard.

As has been mentioned before slander (or libel, whichever word you choose) is only slander/libel if untrue. It appears to me that s60ben can easily substantiate his claims to be true. Therefore I cannot see how there can be a claim made by the other party nor why we are having a deep discussion about libel/slander. Perhaps now we can drop that part of the discussion and focus on the main matter of the thread?

Hi Acshortt5

I tend to agree with your point re- the news etc although posting on a forum can be one sided although nonetheless interesting and good for awareness.

Not sure though how either party can substantiate "the claims" as surely the claims in question are referring not only to faulty product but also to alleged "defamation" which appears to have given rise to this thread in the first place hence my (and others) suggestion that it is never wise to post whilst emotionally charged or even indeed at all in some cases. There is however probably no disputing ben/lightfoot has a faulty car that should have been dealt with in an efficient manner by the dealer.I support this train of thought.

The post appears to be about faulty product (which has validity) and alleged defamation which may or may not.

I think I must blame you here Ninja59 for "correcting" me on my definition of slander/ libel ( its light hearted BTW Ninja:)..LOL

All the best:)

acshortt5

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:28

Whether or not new members are aware of "previous" is surely somewhat irrelevant.

I personally contributed towards calling for the EGM of the Volvo Owners Club so I am well aware of what the "previous" was. There are similarities to this case and the "previous" but hopefully the club and forum team have learnt from the mistakes made in the past. I would not call what went on irrelevant.

Afterall we all learn from our mistakes.

I would not expect new members to know about what went on but I for one would find it rude if they disregarded it once informed about it.

XC60MY12

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:29

This thread could be a bit tedious for those not directly involved. It is clear, however that there are those who find it interesting. For the remainder it is an easy matter to skip the boring bits, I know I do :)

I see no problem in making things public, this is a public forum after all and, provided the forum rules are adhered to, anything goes in my view. I certainly praise my dealer in this forum and he can expect equal publicity if his service is poor.

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:30

Afterall we all learn from our mistakes.

I would not expect new members to know about what went on but I for one would find it rude if they disregarded it once informed about it.

I am interested if you can point me in the right direction?

Regards

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:35

This thread could be a bit tedious for those not directly involved. :)

It is serving its purpose though and certainly "drawing in the punters"

Regards

ps XC60Fan - if you want to be bored about issues with Volvo cars pop round to mine for a few days....just choose a model to discuss !..( of car, Volvo car that is)..lol

acshortt5

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:35

Hi Acshortt5

I tend to agree with your point re- the news etc although posting on a forum can be one sided although nonetheless interesting and good for awareness.

Not sure though how either party can substantiate "the claims" as surely the claims in question are referring not only to faulty product but also to alleged "defamation" which appears to have given rise to this thread in the first place hence my (and others) suggestion that it is never wise to post whilst emotionally charged or even indeed at all in some cases. There is however probably no disputing ben/lightfoot has a faulty car that should have been dealt with in an efficient manner by the dealer.I support this train of thought.

The post appears to be about faulty product (which has validity) and alleged defamation which may or may not.

I think I must blame you here Ninja59 for "correcting" me on my definition of slander/ libel ( its light hearted BTW Ninja:)..LOL

All the best:)

I take your point that posting on a forum can be one sided, where the other party is not aware of what is being posted.

I do not believe that is the case in this instance. The other party is a member of the forum, is aware of the thread and is able to reply on it. Although it is debateable I feel that the other parties lack of reply speaks volumes - however I would welcome their side of the story.

acshortt5

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:37

I am interested if you can point me in the right direction?

Regards

See post 39 by s60ben. It contains the relevant links etc.

The VOC wasted considerable funds employing a solicitor who did nothing but waste several members time and achieved nothing. The forum was closed for a considerable period and the forum was eventually reopened and reorganised due to a spurious claim.

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:41

I take your point that posting on a forum can be one sided, where the other party is not aware of what is being posted.

I do not believe that is the case in this instance. The other party is a member of the forum, is aware of the thread and is able to reply on it. Although it is debateable I feel that the other parties lack of reply speaks volumes - however I would welcome their side of the story.

I fully fully ( twice) agree and would certainly welcome the dealer in question to make comment.

Thing is we all know forums can become "heated" and with due respect would it be professional for a dealer to comment and become involved in protracted public correspondence?

As this thread is public, remember it can be viewed by non members

Regards

outnumbered

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:50

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:50

Come on, let's all just have a hug and get along :D

Are you a Tory - a Cameronite..??..hug a hoody..?? :liebe028:

acshortt5

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:51

I fully fully ( twice) agree and would certainly welcome the dealer in question to make comment.

Thing is we all know forums can become "heated" and with due respect would it be professional for a dealer to comment and become involved in protracted public correspondence?

As this thread is public, remember it can be viewed by non members

Regards

Fair enough but I would expect an honest dealer to either hold their hands up and say they got it wrong and explain themselves or to defend themselves, even if it was just a single post to say that "the matter is in hand and a statement will be made in future".

With regard to the question over professionalism would you agree a dealer, acting professionally, would sign up to a forum and encourage people to his dealership without declaring that he is the dealer principal?

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 19:57

this debate has opened up old wounds and if you read into the links that Ben has posted and look outside the box and did your homework then you wouldn't be asking for direction, in the past threads where locked,threads had vanished,and a lot of wrist slapping by the then mods, also a point to note if you posted the VADIS word you where shot at dawn, whilst i appreciate that there are members with certain qualifications and seem to be taking the thread off at a tangent i i do take on board what you say but your post about LAWERS is not topic related :)..
mike

I read a lot although not everything placed in front of me on the net..lol

Dont all threads go off on a tangent sometimes?...all adds to the diversity?

I wasnt wishing to discuss the difference between slander and libel, just wishing to point out defamation as the big picture or what could be deemed defamation is never a good route to go down when simply all the OP originally wanted was remedy for faulty product.

A simple resolve would be rescission and then both parties could move on.

Regards

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 20:07

With regard to the question over professionalism would you agree a dealer, acting professionally, would sign up to a forum and encourage people to his dealership without declaring that he is the dealer principal?

Certainly not.

I noticed this a while back due to how this member posts had been written.
........and thought...mmmm.....these posts sounds a bit "advertisingish" and not natural. Checked the profile and noticed "dealer". Considered posting to the tune although thought maybe people would think I was sh1t stirring so declined.

I for one find that one cannot win in this forum (or others) whatever they post - you are "persecuted" for pointing things out - you are "persecuted" for not pointing things out - you are "persecuted" for getting involved - you are "persecuted" for not getting involved...you are "persucuted" for having an opinion you are "persecuted" for trying to help when it is misconstrued...it just goes on.....

What does one do????

acshortt5

Nov 30th, 2011, 20:14

What does one do????

In my case I find the combination of top quality noise cancelling headphones, cd player, Led Zeppelin cd's, a liberal volume of jack daniels & coke on ice and a comfy armchair helps but each to their own.

There is more to life than the internet, even if it is just listening to music and drinking - it beats the hell out of arguing the night away with some keyboard warrior (not implying anyone on here is a keyboard warrior BTW).

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 20:21

In my case I find the combination of top quality noise cancelling headphones, cd player, Led Zeppelin cd's, a liberal volume of jack daniels & coke on ice and a comfy armchair helps but each to their own.

I agree although would replace Led Zep for something more along the lines of The Carpenters or Chris De Burgh.

Ive spent most of my life arguing - I used to get paid for it...now I dont...lol

Call it internet arguing pro-bono...:teacher: :lol:

s60ben

Nov 30th, 2011, 20:28

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 20:28

9 members 6 guests...

XC60MY12

Nov 30th, 2011, 20:31

ps XC60Fan - if you want to be bored about issues with Volvo cars pop round to mine for a few days....just choose a model to discuss !..( of car, Volvo car that is)..lol

Now that's an offer I can refuse :pea_no6qp: but thanks anyway.

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 20:37

Mr. Volvorocks.

It would appear that you are under the impression that I have a problem with a car from Clive Brooks.

I went into there, on behalf of Littlefoot..

PS. You aren't being persecuted - just informed politely, that your legal discussions give very little to the overall discussion other than diverting it from it's original purpose.

Maybe I should Ask the Forum Team to tidy the thread up.... :p

You/Lightfoot...sort of same thing.I want you to be happy and sorted

I just wished for you to get it sorted on your or his behalf thats all.I myself have had very similar experience on a personal level to that which you describe.I have always had a satisfactory conclusion. (or at least most of the time)

Yes request tidying of thread if its Ok .I have no probs with that.

I take little or no offence to anyone that makes any comment about my opinion so long as it is not violent or threatening/abusive.

You btw whilst I may not fully agree with your methods :) have been fine.

This thread actually as it stands has quite a lot of people bookmarking/reading it.

edit. And as I have been informed a few minutes ago the forum was shut down for similar issues/posts/public grievance at great expense previously and this should at all cost be avoided

All the best Ben

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 20:40

Now that's an offer I can refuse :pea_no6qp: but thanks anyway.

I'll give you a bon-bon?

s60ben

Nov 30th, 2011, 20:59

edit. And as I have been informed a few minutes ago the forum was shut down for similar issues/posts/public grievance at great expense previously and this should at all cost be avoided

All the best Ben

Thats not quite the full story, there were other things afoot too - and trust me, it won't happen again ;)

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 21:06

Thats not quite the full story, there were other things afoot too - and trust me, it won't happen again ;)

Hi Ben

I am not aware of the full facts (regarding the forum closing down) so cannot comment

All the best

outnumbered

Nov 30th, 2011, 21:17

I'll give you a bon-bon?
haven't had them for a few years all that white powder.:thumbs_up:

TheJoyOfSix

Nov 30th, 2011, 21:38

Thats not quite the full story, there were other things afoot too - and trust me, it won't happen again ;)

Indeed not, not on my watch anyway!

I think I'll leave the thread alone regarding tidying because the sidetrack has finished and everyone is getting along nicely so thus far it doesn't need editing down. It's also handy (although irrelevant to the thread) to have definitions of libel and slander so it does serve some sort of purpose.

As for 'captain volvo', well, I should really ban him for abuse of the Trader rules, but that wouldn't allow him the right to reply which we should really allow him on the basis of fairness. We'll have a discussion on this ( the Team that is, not you 'orrible lot!) but I would envisage that he'll just get a conversion to Trader status, not a ban. This is a lucky escape for him, but we should have spotted him earlier and/or he should have been reported - either way it's too late now.

I'm happy that Ben has complied with Forum rules and that he has the necessary evidence to support his claim so this thread will stand.

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 22:28

I think I'll leave the thread alone regarding tidying because the sidetrack has finished and everyone is getting along nicely so thus far it doesn't need editing down. It's also handy (although irrelevant to the thread) to have definitions of libel and slander so it does serve some sort of purpose.

As for 'captain volvo', well, I should really ban him for abuse of the Trader rules, but that wouldn't allow him the right to reply which we should really allow him on the basis of fairness. We'll have a discussion on this ( the Team that is, not you 'orrible lot!) but I would envisage that he'll just get a conversion to Trader status, not a ban. This is a lucky escape for him, but we should have spotted him earlier and/or he should have been reported - either way it's too late now.

I'm happy that Ben has complied with Forum rules and that he has the necessary evidence to support his claim so this thread will stand.

ay you calling me part of an 'orrible lot..?..!!

Yep definitions are irrelevant!..lol

For what its worth and I am but just another irrelevant one of many fish in a large ocean I would allow "him" access in order to reply.Think thats fair and then "he" cannot say he was denied a viewpoint in order to substantiate "his" case

On spotting I do point things out although not a lot happens:confused:

Regards

volvorocks

Nov 30th, 2011, 22:30

haven't had them for a few years all that white powder.:thumbs_up:

Yellow pink and brown too......!!

s60ben

Dec 2nd, 2011, 01:38

foggyjames

Dec 2nd, 2011, 02:46

Get a room you two! ;)

cheers

James

s60ben

Dec 2nd, 2011, 05:23

Get a room you two! ;)

cheers

James

Erm, yer a fine one to talk! so did the sheep keep you warm in wellish wales? ;)

LOL

c_lee

Dec 3rd, 2011, 00:46

Putting this precise case out of focus for the moment and for the duration of my post these are my thoughts.
IE: I'm not referring to THIS case, but a fictitious one.

If I had made a high value purchase ( lets say a caravan as an example ) and received such after sales service that motivated me to publicly announce my grievance on a forum then I would be more than happy to do that and consider it a service to others that might be inclined to use the same dealer.

Providing ONLY that I had well documented and indisputable evidence and that evidence was FACT.

If I had that evidence I would make it known, but I would be very careful.

If the caravan dealer were not to provide a 'defence' on that forum relating to their alleged actions I would see that, almost, as them having no defence to provide.

I would expect other forum users would probably see it in the same light and as such, would think it a matter of urgency, that a response was provided, even if only a basic response, assuming reasonable time had passed.

On these things we judge a trader, and on that fictitious caravan forum, the message is spreading quickly.

Forums are quite powerful media and it is not that long ago that a UK solicitors practice went into receivership and the solicitor into bankruptcy as a result of forum posts regarding well documented underhand practices there.

Despite that solicitors legal expertise ( in question ) and threats there was no way for him to stop the avalanche.

I think, that fictitious caravan dealer, would do well to take note of that and give me satisfaction regarding the caravan I ( fictitiously ) bought.

Colin

volvorocks

Dec 3rd, 2011, 00:57

Hi Lee

And that Solicitor would be very cross, Lee ..eh?..wouldnt he???..wink wink!!

c_lee

Dec 3rd, 2011, 01:45

Hi Lee

And that Solicitor would be very cross, Lee ..eh?..wouldnt he???..wink wink!!

Ah, Crossley , now I get it. Took me a time.

Colin

s60ben

Dec 13th, 2011, 20:42

The silence speaks absolute volumes......

sneakypenguin

Feb 5th, 2012, 14:59

I note captain volvo hasn't tried to argue his side yet....

Marty Dolomite

Feb 5th, 2012, 17:30

XC60MY12

Feb 5th, 2012, 18:30

How can you skip the boring bits without first reading it to know its boring?

Yawn :)

RobbieH

Feb 14th, 2012, 21:21

The silence speaks absolute volumes......

I note captain volvo hasn't tried to argue his side yet....

Not a peep from them at all :thumbs_down:

And to cap things the steering rack is now u/s :lightning: Nasty grinding sound and vibration (enough to cause the whole dash to vibrate) when turning at low speed when the car starts from cold.

Thankfully though, Volvo UK are standing by the warranty so a new rack is to be fitted by John Darke Volvo of Lincoln in a couple of weeks time :thumbs_up:.

One less thing for my Dad to worry about at the moment but unfortunately its too late for flowers to my Mum :broken_heart:

s60ben

Feb 29th, 2012, 07:15

Not a peep from them at all :thumbs_down:

And to cap things the steering rack is now u/s :lightning: Nasty grinding sound and vibration (enough to cause the whole dash to vibrate) when turning at low speed when the car starts from cold.

Thankfully though, Volvo UK are standing by the warranty so a new rack is to be fitted by John Darke Volvo of Lincoln in a couple of weeks time :thumbs_up:.

One less thing for my Dad to worry about at the moment but unfortunately its too late for flowers to my Mum :broken_heart:

Not a peep from them either in my direction.

I initially proposed the following

Personally, if I were Mr. Brook I would do a number of things, in this precise order.
1. Apologise profusely in writing, for the issues at hand.
2. Resolve the warranty issue directly with Volvo Warranty (shouldn't be hard, they are local after all...) , and ensure it is upgraded, or put it clearly in writing that Clive Brook Volvo will back up the "standard" warranty to the same level of the "Selekt" warranty at any other Volvo dealership.
3. Sort out the tax disc situation...
4. Send Mr. Lightfoots wife a big fat bunch of flowers, and send Mr. Lightfoot a crate of beer.

Disgustingly, Clive Brook Volvo (http://www.clivebrook.co.uk/) or Bradford Volvo (http://www.clivebrook.co.uk/) have done absolutely nothing .

billmckinstry

Feb 29th, 2012, 10:27

One less thing for my Dad to worry about at the moment but unfortunately its too late for flowers to my Mum :broken_heart:

Condolences to You, Your Father and your family:broken_heart:

s60ben

Mar 16th, 2012, 02:03

It would appear Clive Brook can't be ar$ed to have done anything about this further, however, they are quite quick and actively attempting to remove potentially negative reviews on review sites that are pointing people to this topic....

So - Here's a bump.

Furthermore - It's very interesting that the member "Captain Volvo" has now gone from the forum, as have their posts... No mention of that by the moderation team though!

tt82

Mar 16th, 2012, 07:26

Perhaps he's been banned.

pagan8c

Mar 18th, 2012, 10:38

I have really found this very interesting and as I am in the market for a v60 I know where I won't be going.It is amazing how different dealers can be.I went into my local dealer and the salesman was quite offhand because I told him I would not be ready to change till beginning of May.So i went to Marshalls at Grantham and the salesman there could not do enough for me even though I told him the same.I think it will be the latter gets my business.

foggyjames

Mar 20th, 2012, 01:10

Ben - Now I'm back on a PC (after best part of a week away with just an iPhone), I've had a little look into this.

Captain Volvo *is* still registered, now as a trader. When you looked, it's possible he was temporarily banned while we were ascertaining whether he wanted to be turned into a trader or perma-banned (which were the two options available). I don't know what procedure was followed there, and I'm too lazy to find out :) ...but he's a trader now.

Officially, he now only has one post now. The rest...
This message has been deleted by cumbrianmale. Reason: advertising/self promotion

Such as...
Try Clive Brook Volvo in Bradford . They have 5 Actives for delivery early January and appear go that little bit extra get your business

Contact 01274 802999

"They"? Sorry Clive, no, that should be "We"...y'know...the word you use when you are talking about your own business ;) Again, "appear"...should be "we try". Nothing wrong with representing your business on here, but pretending to be a punter is clearly a serious error of judgement. Not the first one, by the sound of things.

We could have tried to edit them...or we could have just left them in place...but it looks like an effort was made to do the best thing by just getting rid of the garbage. If there's a collective feeling that the wrong call was made (given that he's now registered as a trader), I think we could review that. The posts are still there - just "soft deleted" / hidden.

FWIW, Pagan, I have also found John Darke of Lincoln's sales team to be disinterested to the point of being bloody rude. In my case, I was looking to buy a used car, but because I didn't want to buy the car they had in stock (£3k over-priced, and with significant paint damage, despite being only 4-5 years old, and supposedly a "Selekt" car), they wouldn't let me do any more than take it around the block. I didn't even bother doing that, as they were clearly wasting my time, whilst thinking I was wasting theirs.

In the end I used my noodle to buy a similar car which was in better condition for well under a third of the price. In a nutshell, I concluded that they saw me as a brainless, walking chequebook, so I went elsewhere. Service can be a bit clueless...once claimed Volvo never made an S70, and have never heard of several very common problems with modern Volvos. Their parts guys are helpful and friendly, though.

cheers

James

banksy66

Mar 20th, 2012, 11:20

John Darke Volvo in Lincoln has recently been taken over by Stoneacre, as has John Morris Volvo in Grimsby

pagan8c

Mar 26th, 2012, 01:48

They may have been taken over but the salesman is the same.So it wasn't just me who thought they seemed less than interested unless its a new or overpriced used.Like you I have now bought a nice S60 D5 on an 11 plate at a very good price so In a way they did me a favour putting me off or I may have paid too much for wrong car.

Jod T5

Mar 26th, 2012, 09:44

Well done Ben....

I don't suppose you have a relative down south to help some of the southern softies with their dealer issues...!!

It takes a lot to confront someone on a face to face basis, call their bluff ensuring you are also abiding by certain (legal) constraints etc...As many are well aware it is far easier to "confront" from behind a computer screen...so Ben, well done....

All the best

Jod

PS...and on the name and shame debate...Nail them up...!!

RobbieH

Mar 27th, 2012, 17:44

It would appear Clive Brook can't be ar$ed to have done anything about this further

Still sod all from Clive Brook.

But I have literally just picked up an email from MRG

just heard the sad news regarding your mum, sincere condolences from all of us here.
Needless to say if there is anything car wise that we can do for you or your dad to ease the stress then just call.

Do I need to add any more about the treatment we have had from Clive Brook apart from he needs to look to MRG as an example for the future.

s60ben

Mar 30th, 2012, 08:12

"They"? Sorry Clive, no, that should be "We"...y'know...the word you use when you are talking about your own business ;) Again, "appear"...should be "we try". Nothing wrong with representing your business on here, but pretending to be a punter is clearly a serious error of judgement. Not the first one, by the sound of things.

It's not just a "serious error of judgement" - It's actually a criminal offence.

It used to be covered under "The Business Advertisements (Disclosure) Order 1977" however that has now been repealed, and is now covered under "Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008".

Misrepresenting oneself by hiding the fact you are a trader, is covered under "Commercial practices which are in all circumstances considered unfair" - and is thus illegal under Schedule 1 of the CPUTR.

Falsely claiming or creating the impression that the trader is not acting for purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession, or falsely representing oneself as a consumer.

Let alone under the general catch all of:

The following practices are banned if they unfairly affect a consumer's buying decision:-

Misleading Actions
Misleading Omissions
Pressure Selling (including aggressive selling)

You know, like advertising a car as Selekt... but it's not..... Or posing as a consumer, when you are a trader...

Not looking too good Clive is it?..... We know you are reading this by the way ;)

volvorocks

Mar 30th, 2012, 09:13

It's not just a "serious error of judgement" - It's actually a criminal offence.

It used to be covered under "The Business Advertisements (Disclosure) Order 1977" however that has now been repealed, and is now covered under "Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008".

Misrepresenting oneself by hiding the fact you are a trader, is covered under "Commercial practices which are in all circumstances considered unfair" - and is thus illegal under Schedule 1 of the CPUTR.

Hi Ben

I am not taking any sides as I understand the frustration one suffers when a seller may be seen to be fobbing off a buyer when they have genuine issues, and setting aside forum rules about trading and traders but reference your points above…...

It is doubtful whether the above act would apply in this instance due to how one could interpret the capacity in which Capt Volvo was acting in this forum. Naughty perhaps, error of judgement perhaps, illegal - doubtful. He was simply "pointing" people towards a business in which he may have an interest. Some may suggest his actions were naive, and that he may have been better being upfront and open.

True, yes, it is an offence to pretend be a private individual when one is indeed a trader, although this would more so apply, as we are on the topic of cars, say if someone was pretending to be a private seller as oppose a trader when it comes to the actual selling of cars or some other product. If he had been selling cars from his business, say in this forum, saying he was the private owner, when in fact the sales were in connection with a business, then yes it would apply.

Some may suggest he was just being a naughty silly naïve person ??

Just opinion,and opinion will vary from person to person.

All the best, hope you get things sorted :)

LJD

Mar 30th, 2012, 10:49

wow...

Having used forums for many years I have noticed many suffer from "trade" pretending to be Happy customers . Some forums seem to have a total ban on certain companies been "complained about" . One been a well known watch forum

And many forums including the Pistonheads seem to accept payment from companies to have multiple user accounts to "big up their trade etc"

Its all ££££££££££££

Jod T5

Mar 31st, 2012, 00:05

It is doubtful whether the above act would apply in this instance due to how one could interpret the capacity in which Capt Volvo was acting in this forum.

Oh really...

Originally Posted by Captain Volvo http://www.volvoforums.org.uk/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?p=588664#post588664)
Try Clive Brook Volvo in Bradford . They are offering upto 20% discount to Volvo Owners Club Members on Parts and Labour and I know of 2 friends who were entitled too and took advantage of 20% discount off a New car under thier Loyalty programme.

Contact 01274 802999

www.clivebrook.co.uk (http://www.clivebrook.co.uk/)

Seems fairly nailed on to me..Captain Volvo knows of two people who went to Clive Brook Volvo and got a 20% discount... He insinuates they are a garage of good repute offering this deal under thier (sp) loyalty programme...

But he would do...He is the guvnour...

In contravention of CPUTR, Schedule 1, item 22:

Falsely claiming or creating the impression that the trader is not acting for purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession, or falsely representing oneself as a consumer.Whatever the media this is a false statement...Are you suggesting that as this is a forum based statement it is to be taken any less seriously than another media announcement?...

True, yes, it is an offence to pretend be a private individual when one is indeed a trader, although this would more so apply, as we are on the topic of cars, say if someone was pretending to be a private seller as oppose a trader when it comes to the actual selling of cars or some other product. If he had been selling cars from his business, say in this forum, saying he was the private owner, when in fact the sales were in connection with a business, then yes it would apply.

Cant see the point here;
He is promoting his own business while disguising the fact that it is his business by pretending or inferring by the use of the phrase:

Originally Posted by Captain Volvo http://www.volvoforums.org.uk/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?p=588664#post588664) I know of 2 friends who were entitled too and took advantage of 20% discount off a New car under thier Loyalty programme.

Contact 01274 802999

www.clivebrook.co.uk (http://www.clivebrook.co.uk/)

that it is not his business...

The use of the word "thier", tho spelled wrong insinuates, neigh, downright divorces his connection other than in a customer relationship from the subject, being Clive Brook Volvo...By stating about his "two friends" he is further distancing himself from legal association from the company..This is a contravention of both forum rules and legal legislation...

Whilst i accept you may be playing "devils advocate" or maybe after a free service, you are wrong. The perception 99% of forum members would get is that Captain Volvo is recommending Clive Brook Volvo as a punter, which is not true....

Some may suggest he was just being a naughty silly naïve person ??

Indeed some may but i dont...

Jod

volvorocks

Mar 31st, 2012, 00:26

Oh really...

Seems fairly nailed on to me..Captain Volvo knows of two people who went to Clive Brook Volvo and got a 20% discount... He insinuates they are a garage of good repute offering this deal under thier (sp) loyalty programme...

But he would do...He is the guvnour...

In contravention of CPUTR, Schedule 1, item 22:

Whatever the media this is a false statement...Are you suggesting that as this is a forum based statement it is to be taken any less seriously than another media announcement?...

Cant see the point here;
He is promoting his own business while disguising the fact that it is his business by pretending or inferring by the use of the phrase:

that it is not his business...

The use of the word "thier", tho spelled wrong insinuates, neigh, downright divorces his connection other than in a customer relationship from the subject, being Clive Brook Volvo...By stating about his "two friends" he is further distancing himself from legal association from the company..This is a contravention of both forum rules and legal legislation...

Whilst i accept you may be playing "devils advocate" or maybe after a free service, you are wrong. The perception 99% of forum members would get is that Captain Volvo is recommending Clive Brook Volvo as a punter, which is not true....

Indeed some may but i dont...

Jod

As I said Jod, just my thoughts.

I have not suggested I disagree with the bit in bold, although whether it is legally wrong or morally wrong is another matter.

Only upon obtaining Counsels Opinion on their interpretation and application would there be any clarity.

Regards :)

rexer12

Mar 31st, 2012, 02:46

Also i would like to point out it in the majority it is slander not libel

well actually slander is the spoken word and libel is written

Slander and libel are both types of defamation, which refers to statements that damage another person's reputation. While there are similarities, each focuses on different types of defamation strategy. The primary difference between slander and libel is that libel is the written or otherwise printed public defamation of a person or entity, while slander is the spoken defamation of a person or entity. Slander can also include bodily gestures while libel can include published photographs

Yosser

Mar 31st, 2012, 08:18

Only upon obtaining Counsels Opinion on their interpretation and application would there be any clarity.

Disagree.

I have wasted a not inconsiderable amount of money in the past on 'expert' legal advice, including engaging a QC for his opinion.

The specialist lawyer was wrong. The QC was wrong. I was right and that was vindicated in the Court of Session (highest civil court in Scotland).

The moral? - lawyers, QC's etc are just people and they can only give you an opinion. Your own opinion, if suitably informed and reasoned, is just as valuable if not more so.

Jod T5

Mar 31st, 2012, 08:47

As I said Jod, just my thoughts.

I have not suggested I disagree with the bit in bold, although whether it is legally wrong or morally wrong is another matter.

To pass yourself as a punter to promote your business on the sly, must be at the very least morally wrong...?

No?...

Jod

volvorocks

Mar 31st, 2012, 10:57

As I said Jod, just my thoughts.

I have not suggested I disagree with the bit in bold, although whether it is legally wrong or morally wrong is another matter.

Regards :)

To pass yourself as a punter to promote your business on the sly, must be at the very least morally wrong...?

No?...

Jod

Hi Jod

Yes.Correct.That is what I am actually saying with my statement.

-whether it is legally wrong or whether it is morally wrong is what can be debated/argued - is it legally wrong?...or is it morally wrong? is the question. I think it is morally wrong oppose legally wrong, although as I say again, just my thoughts:)

Interesting how you interpreted/perceived my sentence in a different way to what I actually meant.Thats what I am saying...........its all in the interpretation.....and that brings me on to Yossers comment below...

Disagree.

I have wasted a not inconsiderable amount of money in the past on 'expert' legal advice, including engaging a QC for his opinion.

The specialist lawyer was wrong. The QC was wrong. I was right and that was vindicated in the Court of Session (highest civil court in Scotland).

The moral? - lawyers, QC's etc are just people and they can only give you an opinion. Your own opinion, if suitably informed and reasoned, is just as valuable if not more so.

Hi Yosser

I fully agree with you. Lawyers ,Barristers and Judges can be wrong and often are! I can be wrong and often am! Others can be wrong and often are!

Like yourself I have disagreed with 'qualified' legal professionals in the past,and I have been eventually deemed 'correct'. It is after all, and as you say, simply their opinion and how one interprets something.Thats why the law is an ass and litigation is always protracted and costly.The law is meant to be written in a way so as not to be mis-interpreted...yet the law fails miserably in lots of instances!!

I am just trying to be fair and see things from both sides based on the small amount of information available.For the record, to re-iterate and to make clear,I am actually in support of the person that bought the car and had the issues, and do not believe that the manner in which the dealer has acted has been conducive to good customer relations.Neither are these actions in the interest of his business long term due to the ongoing attendant negative publicity.Whether the dealer is right or wrong it may sometimes be better to bite the bullitt so to speak and concede/compromise in order to reach a resolution. Reflection is neccessary.

Regards:)

volvorocks

Mar 31st, 2012, 11:06

well actually slander is the spoken word and libel is written

Slander and libel are both types of defamation, which refers to statements that damage another person's reputation. While there are similarities, each focuses on different types of defamation strategy. The primary difference between slander and libel is that libel is the written or otherwise printed public defamation of a person or entity, while slander is the spoken defamation of a person or entity. Slander can also include bodily gestures while libel can include published photographs

Hi Rexer

In essence you are correct as I originally suggested,although so is Ninja regards whats what.

However in certain instances diferent rules are applied depending where the 'slander' or 'libel' occurs.

An internet forum can be considered 'chat' and therefore whatever is 'written' can be classed as the spoken word and therefore slander.

Regards

Jod T5

Mar 31st, 2012, 11:17

An internet forum can be considered 'chat' and therefore whatever is 'written' can be classed as the spoken word and therefore slander.

Regards

I would be interested in your opinion as to the difference between what Clive Brook has done on this forum and, say this report on a post on twitter....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-17515992

Jod

volvorocks

Mar 31st, 2012, 11:35

I would be interested in your opinion as to the difference between what Clive Brook has done on this forum and, say this report on a post on twitter....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-17515992

Jod

I am not sure of what you are asking, what is the connection? How are the two linked?

What that guy did on Twitter was apparantly racism, a well known offence?

Regards

Jod T5

Mar 31st, 2012, 11:37

I am not sure of what you are asking, what is the connection? How are the two linked?

What that guy did on Twitter was apparantly racism, a well known offence?

Regards

They are linked by written text...One on twitter and one on a motoring forum...Is either text different because one is on twitter and one on a forum?..

Jod

volvorocks

Mar 31st, 2012, 11:48

They are linked by written text...One on twitter and one on a motoring forum...Is either text different because one is on twitter and one on a forum?..

Jod

Hi Jod

Yes both written in text, one on a forum, one on twitter. So both may be classed as slander or libel (depending on which Judge is ruling on the day..lol)

I see what you are getting at, in so far as you are suggesting/alleging the dealer has 'broken a law' based on what he said/wrote and the person on twitter has 'broken a law' based on what he said/wrote. Am I correct with assuming this is what you are asking?

If so my thoughts would be that the Twitter incident is more clear cut and defined and the law is clearer, whereas with the dealer/forum incident it is less so, and more open to interpretation

Every case has its own merits and is different.

For example calling someone say a moron is not nice although not illegal, whereas making remarks about race or disability or others items on the 'long list' is.

I think the difference is not where you write, its what you write

Regards

Jod T5

Apr 1st, 2012, 00:50

I see what you are getting at, in so far as you are suggesting/alleging the dealer has 'broken a law' based on what he said/wrote and the person on twitter has 'broken a law' based on what he said/wrote. Am I correct with assuming this is what you are asking?

You are indeed correct...This is my modus-opurandi...

I respect the fact that you are doubtful that Clive Brook intended to breach the code as previously stated..

I disagree because Mr Brook posted the following:

Originally Posted by Captain Volvo http://www.volvoforums.org.uk/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?p=588664#post588664)
Try Clive Brook Volvo in Bradford . They are offering upto 20% discount to Volvo Owners Club Members on Parts and Labour and I know of 2 friends who were entitled too and took advantage of 20% discount off a New car under thier Loyalty programme.

Contact 01274 802999

www.clivebrook.co.uk (http://www.clivebrook.co.uk/)
Why do i think this?...

Because Mr Brook posted this after he registered and ignored the registration request to notify himself as a trader...He then promoted his own business as if he was a customer, indeed stating two of his friend had favourable experiences..This has a serious smell of intent to me, in that Mr Brook intentinally ignored forum rules as he thought they would not apply to him..

OFT911 includes CPR in its remit and whatever way you look at it Mr Brook has breached serious guidelines...(if in doubt google unfair commercial practices)...

See Misleading actions (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2008/9780110811574/regulation/5) 5 2b

I must say, i would left this thread alone save for the comment on s60ben' driving...This has nothing to do with the fact that his garage had supplied a sub standard service, indeed it almost felt like he was trying to get Ben to drop his "action" in return for Mr Brook dropping whatever action he may take against Bens driving, the consequenses of which i expect Ben was really worried about, especially with all that evidence...

Mr Brook, google my name, you will find my address, my phone number and all my personal details...You have given a bad service and been exposed as a bad trader, not just because of your lack of attention to detail but more importantly your lack of humility and ability to deal with what is in essence a very simple remedial case...The more traders like you who are not exposed for the bullies you are the worse the reputation for your business will become...

As someone once said to me "grow a pair" and be the man you portray yourself as....

Jod
jod.jod@talk21.com

volvorocks

Apr 1st, 2012, 23:46

You are indeed correct...This is my modus-opurandi...

I respect the fact that you are doubtful that Clive Brook intended to breach the code as previously stated..

I disagree because Mr Brook posted the following:
Why do i think this?...

Because Mr Brook posted this after he registered and ignored the registration request to notify himself as a trader...He then promoted his own business as if he was a customer, indeed stating two of his friend had favourable experiences..This has a serious smell of intent to me, in that Mr Brook intentinally ignored forum rules as he thought they would not apply to him..

OFT911 includes CPR in its remit and whatever way you look at it Mr Brook has breached serious guidelines...(if in doubt google unfair commercial practices)...

See Misleading actions (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2008/9780110811574/regulation/5) 5 2b

I must say, i would left this thread alone save for the comment on s60ben' driving...This has nothing to do with the fact that his garage had supplied a sub standard service, indeed it almost felt like he was trying to get Ben to drop his "action" in return for Mr Brook dropping whatever action he may take against Bens driving, the consequenses of which i expect Ben was really worried about, especially with all that evidence...

Mr Brook, google my name, you will find my address, my phone number and all my personal details...You have given a bad service and been exposed as a bad trader, not just because of your lack of attention to detail but more importantly your lack of humility and ability to deal with what is in essence a very simple remedial case...The more traders like you who are not exposed for the bullies you are the worse the reputation for your business will become...

As someone once said to me "grow a pair" and be the man you portray yourself as....

Jod
jod.jod@talk21.com

Hi Jod

Explaining interpretation verbally is far easier than in writing!!....so hoping you do not think I am looking to argue..!...:)

The laws mentioned et al are specifically directed at people who actually trade ie carry on in the course of business whilst pretending to be a private individual, ie do something tangible ie sell a product/service ie the contract of sale actually takes place whilst the purchaser is under the impression, prior to, during and after, that he may be buying from a private individual, so if the dealer sold cars , say on this forum pretending to be a private individual when he wasn’t then that is wrong. This is my interpretation of misleading for the purpose of 'The Act'.

However the dealer in this instance may have directed people so to speak,to a business he may own, and when a potential purchaser gets to that business it is clear that it is a business and that all or any sale,at that actual moment in time is a sale via a business. Whilst it could be suggested 'coercing' people like this is misleading and also 'naughty' ( which I am of the opinion and thought that it is), I do not believe it is misleading for the purpose of 'The Act'.

BTW , all I am trying to do here is explain an interpretation of 'The Act' and in no way shape nor form am I condoning the action of any dealer that does what appears to have been done.

I would think that any court action would fail reference said Act. This is though, just my thoughts and opinion as a forum member, and as I say I may be wrong.

Looking at the whole escapade from a 'normal' point of view, all I can say is I think its a shambles and could have and should have been sorted by the dealer. I do not agree at all with the way things have panned out, and I do not agree with a dealer directing people 'on the quiet' to what may be a business they may own. It would have been much better to be open and up front about what and who the person was from a moral point. Better to be honest and straight with customers. Furthermore ,and as you suggest, and is also correct, there are rules on this forum which should be abided by and respected at all times. Clearly this was not the case in this instance.

I am a bit of a stickler when it comes to things being fair and reasonable, and I myself personally, from time to time, have had issues similar as described, so I do know from a personal point of view how frustrating it is. My blood boils when sellers do not listen to buyers and think they can walk rough shod over them, due to the fact they consider themselves too big, or too wealthy to be taken on.When I have complained in the past, I am so laid back that sellers have taken me to be a 'wet fish' as I actually say very little to the point of being virtually mute!! Must say I tend to say little although do a lot!

One good thing to remember though is ,if you are right, and you can prove that you are right, (both morally and legally) I would suggest taking further action with the minimum of notice. Don’t say - just do..!!

Can I also just ask Jod, as I havent re-read the whole thread, having read it ages ago, are you having the issues, or is it Ben. Or is both of you,or are you related etc?

Anyway as you say whilst you have breath you have hope!

All the best :)

Blue EDIT:The doubt relates to whether the person/dealer has actually broken the law mentioned as oppose their 'intention' to break any law.

Jod T5

Apr 2nd, 2012, 10:21

Can I also just ask Jod, as I havent re-read the whole thread, having read it ages ago, are you having the issues, or is it Ben. Or is both of you,or are you related etc?

Lmao @ related...Ben and i have had several crossed words, possibly down to me being a little "sheltered", (can we leave it at that please Ben) however more recently i have to admit his "big gob" is doing good things to help his fellow man...

I have no personal gripe other than what i have outlined before...

Ben was approached by the son of the owner of then car and im certain if Ben feels the matter needs to go further (OFT etc) then he is quite capable of handing this without any assistance i can assure you...

Thanks for your input above, i think until there is any further new developments the thread is pretty much done...

All the best

Jod

volvorocks

Apr 2nd, 2012, 15:15

Lmao @ related...Ben and i have had several crossed words, possibly down to me being a little "sheltered", (can we leave it at that please Ben) however more recently i have to admit his "big gob" is doing good things to help his fellow man...

I have no personal gripe other than what i have outlined before...

Ben was approached by the son of the owner of then car and im certain if Ben feels the matter needs to go further (OFT etc) then he is quite capable of handing this without any assistance i can assure you...

Thanks for your input above, i think until there is any further new developments the thread is pretty much done...

All the best

Jod

Ooooops! Sorry!!..lol...anyway family members sometimes argue more than friends!!!!

True

Regards

XC60MY12

Apr 2nd, 2012, 16:27

Ooooops! Sorry!!..lol...anyway family members sometimes argue more than friends!!!!

True

Regards

No they don't.

outnumbered

Apr 2nd, 2012, 19:49

Ooooops! Sorry!!..lol...anyway family members sometimes argue more than friends!!!!

True

Regards
not in my book,then again i only have myself to fall out with:thumbs_up:

s60ben

Apr 3rd, 2012, 08:54

Lmao @ related...Ben and i have had several crossed words, possibly down to me being a little "sheltered", (can we leave it at that please Ben) however more recently i have to admit his "big gob" is doing good things to help his fellow man...

LMFAO - Ok we'll leave it at that.....

We may disagree <lots at times> - but it doesn't mean I dislike you :lol:

PS - How is your "Rod of Iron"TM? :p <Sorry couldn't resist... it's been too long ;) >

Thanks for your input above, i think until there is any further new developments the thread is pretty much done...

Pretty much - but trust me, it'll be regularly updated with the lack of responses every so often ;) Wouldn't want Google to miss it too much :lol:

PS Volvorocks - I disagree - but this ain't the place for indepth legalese ;)

Lets just say, I've just dealt with the CPS on a matter regarding the principle of "Autrefois Convict" - Their opinion was that it applied, mine was that it didn't - and I was quite prepared to request a summons on the charge from the magistrates personally.... In the end, they ended up agreeing with my position and argument - as did the Crown Court Judge ;) - The CPS now have a new trick up their sleeve ;)

Of course, they started off with the disbelief that the "common man" could know anything about it - or that their highly paid legal teams could be wrong...

Mr Brooks is more than welcome to bring it on :lol:

volvorocks

Apr 3rd, 2012, 09:28

PS Volvorocks - I disagree - but this ain't the place for indepth legalese ;)

No, but it keeps your thread in the running ;)

Lets just say, I've just dealt with the CPS on a matter regarding the principle of "Autrefois Convict" - Their opinion was that it applied, mine was that it didn't ...... In the end, they ended up agreeing with my position and argument - as did the Crown Court Judge ;)

Of course, they started off with the disbelief that the "common man" could know anything about it - or that their highly paid legal teams could be wrong...

I wont ask for any more information ..lol

The higher the pay - the larger the mistakes...!!

Whats annoying about Lawyers is their inability to consider or accept if they are ever wrong!

Regards

Jod T5

Apr 6th, 2012, 20:41

LMFAO - Ok we'll leave it at that.....

Thanks Ben, no need to open old wounds...:)

LMFAO - Ok we'll leave it at that.....

We may disagree <lots at times> - but it doesn't mean I dislike you

Ok, lots of times....I confess to haveing a begrudging respect for you...:star-wars-smiley-02

PS - How is your "Rod of Iron"TM? :p <Sorry couldn't resist... it's been too long ;) >

He He...I did laugh here...;)

Ah, the rod of iron....

Its in the safe box with scfam...labled do not open, stored in the shed under lock and key....

Jod

Kinky

Apr 7th, 2012, 17:30

And many forums including the Pistonheads seem to accept payment from companies to have multiple user accounts to "big up their trade etc"

Perhaps you should get your facts right before making claims which are incorrect.

Jod T5

Apr 7th, 2012, 17:40

Perhaps you should get your facts right before making claims which are incorrect.

What part is incorrect, Piston heads or "many forums"....

Either, none neither or all....

Jod

Jod T5

Apr 7th, 2012, 17:49

..........

Kinky

Apr 7th, 2012, 18:25

Just the PistonHeads bit. Can't say nor speak for any others; bar one or 2 other smaller sites, where the situation is the same :)

Not to say it does not go on, as I'm sure it knowingly does elsewhere.

tt82

Apr 7th, 2012, 18:31

Can't say I've frequented Piston heads but I think there wouldn't be much issue with a trader having a business account as well as a personal account, providing the association was made clear.

For what Clive Brook did, to promote his business by pretending to be an ordinay member of the public with no connection to the business was decietfull.

Jod T5

Apr 7th, 2012, 19:38

Just the PistonHeads bit. Can't say nor speak for any others; bar one or 2 other smaller sites, where the situation is the same :)
I can...

Not to say it does not go on, as I'm sure it knowingly does elsewhere.
Ok..
I can guarantee you one trader from VPCUK had multi accounts to promote his business..
Indeed there were people on freebies to promote the business...

Jod

sunnyvic

Apr 7th, 2012, 21:33

As a person from the southern area i object to what i class as a rude remark ie Southern Softies because in my younger days i was probably harder than you so please keep the remarks to yourself..re sunnyvic VOC Disabled register

Jod T5

Apr 7th, 2012, 21:57

As a person from the southern area i object to what i class as a rude remark ie Southern Softies

I think you misunderstood the context of the phrase...

I must say that i consider your comment:

because in my younger days i was probably harder than you so please keep the remarks to yourself..
as a threat and not befitting of a VOC official....

Listen, if you want to dig me out then by all means do it by PM, or start your own thread, dont resort to making silly snide OT remarks on other peoples threads, that are far more important than your petty vendettas. You only make yourself look childish and stupid...

Jod

Marty Dolomite

Apr 8th, 2012, 03:05

^^^^^^^^^

Here we go again, yet another thread turned into a bitching match that has nothing what so ever to do with the original topic.

Just how can 'because in my younger days i was probably harder than you' be taken as a threat?

(P.s Im a Southerner)

JimG

Apr 8th, 2012, 09:49

^^^^^^^^^

Here we go again, yet another thread turned into a bitching match that has nothing what so ever to do with the original topic.

Agreed. Lets keep this thread ON TOPIC.

jonnyv

Apr 8th, 2012, 12:08

Referring to the traders not being registered s traders....ala Pistonheads, I got thrown off after moaning about an offer that came through from Cardiff Audi to try an RS6, in the post. Whoopee, I thought. Rang up, a snooty sales manager answered, asked was I interested in buying. Now, he didn't know my financial situation one way or t'other so said try then maybe buy! He replied, don't have one here and only interested in buyers and put phone down. Great customer service.
So, on PH I related this and got slagged left, right and centre. I pointed out, don't send an invite to someone unless they have the intention of letting you try one. For me, it would have been brilliant.
Anyway, upshot was all these guys coming up to have a shot about me not being honest with the guy, and in their comments confirming that they were traders! Not registered as one at all, so lets not pretend it doesn't happen on PH! IT DOES! And there are many!

Kinky

Apr 8th, 2012, 15:07

Jod T5

Apr 8th, 2012, 21:45

Please don't me get me wrong.

I'm not saying it does not happen. What I am saying is that it does not knowingly happen, and that PH does NOT accept payment for any such thing, under any circumstance.

I assume that you reported said poster at the time; as appropriate action would have been taken.

Anyway, as already suggested, perhaps we should leave the thread go back on topic :thumbs_up:

Hi Kinky...
I will leave the OT BS behind but i think you deserve a reply....

Please don't me get me wrong.

No chance mate, everyone should have a chance of opinion but dont expect it not to be critiqued or commented on if necessary....

I'm not saying it does not happen. What I am saying is that it does not knowingly happen, and that PH does NOT accept payment for any such thing, under any circumstance.

Are you stating this from a position of authority within Piston Heads or is this your own opinion based on your experience of Piston Heads...?

Anyway, as already suggested, perhaps we should leave the thread go back on topic :thumbs_up:

My own opinion is that i think this is a interesting diversification of the thread and is relevant to the OT...
Jod

durchy

Apr 21st, 2012, 10:03

Looking to buy Volvo from Hatfields in Bury Manchester. Has anyone experience of this dealer and what service levels are like?

961

Apr 21st, 2012, 10:23

Looking to buy Volvo from Hatfields in Bury Manchester. Has anyone experience of this dealer and what service levels are like?

I'd start a new thread

LJD

Apr 21st, 2012, 10:30

Please don't me get me wrong.

I'm not saying it does not happen. What I am saying is that it does not knowingly happen, and that PH does NOT accept payment for any such thing, under any circumstance.

I assume that you reported said poster at the time; as appropriate action would have been taken.

Anyway, as already suggested, perhaps we should leave the thread go back on topic :thumbs_up:

I would not trust Pistonheads at all. There is a lot of money changing hands in that group

"Ghost" writers been allowed to have multiple accounts to "big up " their companies and products etc . And been able to enforce "negative comments" made by other members.

Forums like P/H and scoobynet etc , use to be great places , then the greed of the ££ came into effect.

If you have been banned from these forums, chances where you told the truth and they did not like it.

jonnyv

Apr 21st, 2012, 10:43

Exactly LJD!

LJD

Apr 21st, 2012, 10:53

I have been banned from Pistonheads 3 times !

First after they would get snotty about people asking about Replica watches etc

Yet..... allowing many many adverts for Fake watches . See $$$ counts !

Then for pointing out how RACIST a forum it can be. make no mistake, its a "white mans forum"

It is a huge forum with serious money behind it .And one with a huge Forum "mafia" all running around sucking up to the moderators and site owners etc

scr8pdo

Apr 21st, 2012, 11:13

I dont bother with Pistonheads forum anymore, not about the trading threads just the general chat threads, because every time I asked a question or started a thread I got shot down in flames, its seemed like a really bitchy place to go, so I dont bother no more.

I once asked a civilised question, in fact a scientific question about red diesel, just the mention of it and I was made to feel like a master criminal fed a load of total bull, it seemed that the members were immature, un educated (although total know-it-alls) I had several threads deleted etc so I dont venture in that forum no more, bunch of kids in my eyes measureing each others exhaust bore sizes !

PS: Just for the record, iam a Southener living up North, I get ribbed all the time, but its water off a ducks to me, I dont mind a bit of banter its the bitchiness that gets me at times, the sour stuff etc

sunnyvic

Apr 21st, 2012, 18:50

Thats the problem matey us southeners we cant all be perfect can we..regards sunnyvic

GMad

Apr 21st, 2012, 21:28

Keyboard warriors, don't ya just love em.
Personally I'd pop around there and pi55 through his letterbox:thumbs_up:

Jod T5

Apr 21st, 2012, 22:35

I'd start a new thread

Wise words,...

I mean we have have heard enough of "Clive Brook Volvo in Bradford" bullying older drivers to buy cars that claim to have had checks they have not have...

Clive Brook Volvo in Bradford

Jod