Jump to content

Recommended Posts

In that case why would you inform a public forum read by local people about "what could have been an innocent mistake"?


Sorry Sue to keep banging on about this, it's really not not personal, and it's very clear that your post was well intentioned, but it just worries me that something of this nature can be aired in such a public way. People who work directly with the public are so vulnerable to accusations which they are usually unaware of and unable to defend.


Maybe I feel so strongly about it becauase I am from a working class background, I still have friends and family who work in shops and can identify more with the shop workers than with you. Again, sorry. I guess we will never agree on this one.


I am dipping out of this one now. Adios.

BlueOne Wrote:

> Maybe I feel so strongly about it becauase I am

> from a working class background, I still have

> friends and family who work in shops and can

> identify more with the shop workers than with you.

> Again, sorry. I guess we will never agree on this

> one.


xxxxxx


Excuse me ?!?!?!


How do you know what my background is?


I have also worked in shops!


:-S

BlueOne Wrote:

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

> In that case why would you inform a public forum

> read by local people about "what could have been

> an innocent mistake"?

>

>xxxxxx


Because a) It might not have been an innocent mistake and b) If it was, then the person who made such a basic mistake as not giving somebody their cashback could well make that basic mistake with another customer.


I therefore thought it worth sharing.


For God's sake - I haven't identified the assistant in any way whatsoever, I haven't got a vendetta against Somerfield's, I am not suggesting everybody who works in a shop is a thieving working class dreg of society, I am merely suggesting that people be more careful than usual when getting cashback just in case they don't get given it, as that happened to me recently.


Why didn't all these people come out and say similar things on the other very long thread on this forum where Somerfields was a leading player??


Edited to say I use the term working class because another poster did.

BlueOne Wrote:

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

> In that case why would you inform a public forum

> read by local people about "what could have been

> an innocent mistake"?

>


Because whether it was an innocent mistake or not, Sue didn't get her cashback. Therefore she's warning people to make sure they get the cashback they've asked for. Anything you infer beyond this is your problem, not Sue's.


: P

I really do not see the problem with Sue's post, she simply gave a warning about something that may or may not have been a genuine mistake. She was very clear that that it may have been a genuine mistake.


I cant believe the grief she has had from certain people!

I'm largely on Sue's side on the wider point - but I think it's disingenuous to not "get" why people think the post was not accusatory rather than simple warning


The title alone - "Somerfield again..." suggests an implicit previous conviction and that they haven't learned a lesson which just isn't the case.


That so many people who have been cloned were also in Somerfield implies nothing more than lots of people go to a high profile supermarket. They have not been confirmed as the source of anything (although I take on board what Sue says re: her bank's comments)


Starting a new thread also suggests an event of some magnitude more than adding to previous threads...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Actually I don't think so. What caused the problem was the ban on councils using the revenues from sales to build more houses. Had councils been able to reinvest in more housing then we would have had a boom in building. And councils would have been relieved, through the sales, of the cost of maintaining old housing stock. Thatcher believed that council tenants didn't vote Conservative, and home owners did. Which may have been, at the time a correct assumption. But it was the ban on councils building more from the sales revenues which was the real killer here. Not the sales themselves. 
    • I agree with Jenjenjen. Guarantees are provided for works and services actually carried out; they are not an insurance policy for leaks anywhere else on the roof. Assuming that the rendering at the chimney stopped the leak that you asked the roofer to repair, then the guarantee will cover that rendering work. Indeed, if at some time in the future it leaked again at that exact same spot but by another cause, that would not be covered. Failure of rendering around a chimney is pretty common so, if re-rendering did resolve that leak, there is no particular reason to link it to the holes in the felt elsewhere across the roof. 
    • Hey, I am on the first floor and I am directly impacted if roof leaks. We got a roofing company to do repair work which was supposed to be guaranteed. However, when it started leaking again, we were informed that the guarantee is just for a new roof and not repair work. Each time the company that did the repair work came out again over the next few years, we had to pay additional amounts. The roof continues to leak, so I have just organised another company to fix the roof instead, as the guarantee doesn't mean anything. 
    • Fernando came and sorted out our very overgrown garden.  He is a very friendly chap, works meticulously and charges very fair prices.   We’ve been using his Services for many years now and will continue to do so.    Here are his contact details if you have any gardening questions: Fernando - 07946 757938       
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...