Htc m8 6 weeks old
07 June 2015, 08:44 PM
#132
Although you have been unfortunate to have bought something that was fecked, it was bought in the understanding it was fecked. You say fud offered you a refund but you refused as he didn't add return postage to the refund? Yet in your own words you say if paypal refunds you that you will have to pay return postage.
See I do read things
but what this thread does remind me of is
See I do read things
but what this thread does remind me of is
07 June 2015, 08:49 PM
#133
Although you have been unfortunate to have bought something that was fecked, it was bought in the understanding it was fecked. You say fud offered you a refund but you refused as he didn't add return postage to the refund? Yet in your own words you say if paypal refunds you that you will have to pay return postage.
See I do read things but what this thread does remind me of is
See I do read things
but what this thread does remind me of is Again, another wrong, Fud refused return postage and outgoing postage, as my evidence shows.So going through PayPal as he wanted secured my outgoing postage at least.
So no, you havent read the thread properly, so that picture is a fantastic one to portray yourself right now.
You are looking a little trollish now Steve, misquoting facts in an attempt to belittle again. Shame you feel you have to do that, seems to be a SN trait on this thread from you old timers.
Last edited by Trinity; 07 June 2015 at 08:54 PM.
07 June 2015, 09:09 PM
#134
I'm not trying to belittle you or troll the tread and if its seen that way delete all my posts,
What I see is someone who bought a faulted phone, phone was worse than expected. A refund was offered but it didn't include return postage! you refuse refund as you want the extra £1,55 recorded delivery to post something broken back? You rant Fuds a ****? Paypal dispute.
I think I have summarised this whole thread up
the only thing that was missing is
What I see is someone who bought a faulted phone, phone was worse than expected. A refund was offered but it didn't include return postage! you refuse refund as you want the extra £1,55 recorded delivery to post something broken back? You rant Fuds a ****? Paypal dispute.
I think I have summarised this whole thread up
the only thing that was missing is
Last edited by stevebt; 07 June 2015 at 09:11 PM.
07 June 2015, 09:16 PM
#135
I'm not trying to belittle you or troll the tread and if its seen that way delete all my posts,
What I see is someone who bought a faulted phone, phone was worse than expected. A refund was offered but it didn't include return postage! you refuse refund as you want the extra £1,55 recorded delivery to post something broken back? You rant Fuds a ****? Paypal dispute.
I think I have summarised this whole thread up the only thing that was missing is
]
What I see is someone who bought a faulted phone, phone was worse than expected. A refund was offered but it didn't include return postage! you refuse refund as you want the extra £1,55 recorded delivery to post something broken back? You rant Fuds a ****? Paypal dispute.
I think I have summarised this whole thread up
the only thing that was missing is ]
A refund was offered MINUS the postal costs of the original sending the mispresented phone to me, and wanted me to cover the cost of the return as well. So in essence a loss of around £15 to me, for someone wrongly advertising an item.
If it was offered that he would cover the initial posting, and i cover the return, I probably would of gone with that, but he didnt, told me he couldnt be bothered and to go to PAyPAl.
Fud is in the wrong, there is no argument to that.
I never ranted at all.
So please, READ the above again, and then again, and the rest of the thread so it sinks in. And pop your photo on your fridge, self portrait.
Cant keep explaining it to you, so ill just cut and paste this post again, when you dont get it next time
07 June 2015, 09:31 PM
#137
Excellent, thanks for clearing that up and making yourself look like a muppet. Well done, LMAO. Hopefully there are better men out there than you, because god help us if there wasn't.
07 June 2015, 09:52 PM
#141
So so strange, that the case is very back and white, that an item was misrepresented and missold and the seller has not been very good about it at all, yet many like yourself have spent their time trying to disprove the facts.Thats the thing about facts, they are what they are, facts.
I mean, seriously, if this was not my case, I would have far better things to do on a Sunday night.
Goodnight Steve , sleep well
07 June 2015, 10:00 PM
#142
End of the day, the phone wasn't incorrectly listed as such, apart from wrong box and a chunk out of side.
Was listed as having a crack, but turned out to be a bigger crack than you anticipated without actually seeking further
07 June 2015, 10:12 PM
#143
It was incorrectly listed and mis-sold. Photos where provided by the seller, that did not show the damage, therefore this would denote, along with 100% bang on comment, that the crack was truly 'tiny'. This was then re-asked in PMs about it and was assured it was 'tiny', tiny - not meaning half the phone.
and lets not remove the chunk out the side, and the wrong box and manual. All extra reasons why it was mis-sold. It could be mis-sold for these reasons alone. So we will go with that if you want, removing the tiny crack out of the equation.
Again, not entirely sure what you feel you are getting out of this thread anymore, facts are facts, and lies and lies , all are proved.
So have a good night will you, maybe spend some time on a hobby or with the family, much better use of time I would feel when the case isnt yours and your input isnt really making any form of new headway revisiting old information that has been proved as inaccuruate. Kinda like a judge retrying a case over and over again with the same evidence, waste of his and everyone elses time
Good night Busta
Last edited by Trinity; 07 June 2015 at 10:15 PM.
07 June 2015, 10:49 PM
#148
I am aware airing in the public domain will entail trolls like Steve, however he has proved to be thicker than two short planks, so I am avoiding them from now, cant reason with the thick. Bless him he does try though. From the days when Subaru drivers where grocks with pitbulls, but times have changed now.
No, I was saying goodnight, its a courteous thing to do. thats the difference between you and I I guess, I enjoy common decency in my life.
If another SN member had been ripped off and it had been proved like it has with this case, then I would be supporting them, not attempting to prove them wrong.
as I said, goodnight Busta, sweet dreams.
07 June 2015, 11:58 PM
#150
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: England
Posts: 611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow 5 pages and still on going, Trinity I see you are a man of evidence so could you prove to us that you did not damage the item further in an attempt to get back what you paid,
As we are all aware on forums there is various tactics people are trying these days, some say they ain't even received goods and paypal refund them leaving seller at a loss.
So can you prove you didn't damage the phone??
As all were going on is ur word saying the phone arrived damaged, there is no evidence oops
As we are all aware on forums there is various tactics people are trying these days, some say they ain't even received goods and paypal refund them leaving seller at a loss.
So can you prove you didn't damage the phone??
As all were going on is ur word saying the phone arrived damaged, there is no evidence oops