Your rants here.

dhope

mudcow007 wrote:

Bought software 2 weeks ago because we have been audited by the "BSA" an was told we need to purchase a license for Adobe Acrobat Pro

so found one on ebuyer which stated "full" license so bought it

send the license over to the BSA who after a few days threw it back to say "it doesn't recognise the license" so i send it back etc etc

just noticed on the package of the disk is a sticker covering something, so i peal it off an it states "Only to be bundled with Microsoft Office for Mac Home and Business - 1 user"

to me this is an OEM license an not full retail as stated on ebuyers website

spoke to the returns department who have said its outside the returns time (1 day out) so im stuck with software i cant register/ use grrrr

2 weeks ago?

Distance selling says 30 days surely.

mudcow007

notsoblue wrote:

Wait, what? The BSA actually exists? I thought it was just a fictional boogey man meant to scare little sys admins?

alive and kicking :(and currently up my bottom an wont leave me alone

bails87

mudcow007 wrote:

spoke to the returns department who have said its outside the returns time (1 day out) so im stuck with software i cant register/ use grrrr

Bollokks. This isn't something that's 'the wrong size' or that you've decided you don't like.

It isn't what you paid for, it was mis-sold. They must refund your money.

mudcow007

bails87 wrote:

mudcow007 wrote:

spoke to the returns department who have said its outside the returns time (1 day out) so im stuck with software i cant register/ use grrrr

Bollokks. This isn't something that's 'the wrong size' or that you've decided you don't like.

It isn't what you paid for, it was mis-sold. They must refund your money.

i will try ringing them again, on the advice of the BSA i spoke to trading standards who basically said nothing they can do as its "business to business"

today started pretty good too

kelsen

mudcow007 wrote:

Bought software 2 weeks ago because we have been audited by the "BSA" an was told we need to purchase a license for Adobe Acrobat Pro

so found one on ebuyer which stated "full" license so bought it

send the license over to the BSA who after a few days threw it back to say "it doesn't recognise the license" so i send it back etc etc

just noticed on the package of the disk is a sticker covering something, so i peal it off an it states "Only to be bundled with Microsoft Office for Mac Home and Business - 1 user"

to me this is an OEM license an not full retail as stated on ebuyers website

spoke to the returns department who have said its outside the returns time (1 day out) so im stuck with software i cant register/ use grrrr

Is this not a case of the product being mis-sold in which case it's "not fit for purpose" under the Sale of Goods act?

Torvid

just noticed on the package of the disk is a sticker covering something, so i peal it off an it states "Only to be bundled with Microsoft Office for Mac Home and Business - 1 user"

I take it you didn't buy it with Office in that case there are whole issues surely arround them selling it on as a single product one i would even send a note to micro$ofts CSD about. Basically the're making money doing something they shouldn't

mudcow007

just got off the phone to Ebuyer

they said i should have contacted Ebuyer within 2 days of receiving the item, to let them know there was an issue.

i explained that it takes days for Adobe to respond so have only now been able to come back Ebuyer after Adobe said the license isnt suitable

and thats it. i asked to speak to a manager etc an was told (after a long wait) "the supervisor will speak to you but will only tell you what im saying"

bails87

That's shocking.
http://www.oft.gov.uk/business-advice/t ... aexplained

Customers do have a legal right to a refund, repair or replacement if an item they purchased

-does not match the description
-is not of satisfactory quality
-is not fit for purpose.

Each of these circumstances would mean that the item does not conform to contract and therefore it can be described as faulty. The next section of this guide, Your responsibilities as a retailer, provides a full explanation.

If you point out a fault to a customer and they are able to inspect that fault before they make a purchase, their purchase means they have accepted the fault and they cannot claim their legal right (outlined above) in relation to that particular fault.

Customers' rights last for six years

The law says that a customer can approach you with a claim about an item they purchased from you for up to six years from the date of sale (five years after discovery of the problem in Scotland).

This does not mean that everything you sell has to last six years from the date of purchase! It is the time limit for the customer to make a claim about an item. During this period, you are legally required to deal with a customer who claims that their item does not conform to contract (is faulty) and you must decide what would be the reasonable amount of time to expect the goods to last. A customer cannot hold you responsible for fair wear and tear.

The six-year period is not the same as a guarantee, but it does mean that even where the guarantee or warranty supplied with the product has ended, your customer may still have legal rights.

Complying with the law

You cannot remove a customer's legal rights, for example by displaying a notice saying 'we do not give refunds under any circumstances' or 'credit notes only in the case of faulty items'.

It is also against the law to mislead consumers about their legal rights - this could lead to a criminal prosecution under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

So if they were selling to a 'consumer' rather than a business (although, your business is the consumer isn't it? It's not like you're buying something and selling it on) they would owe you a redund on the grounds that they sold you something then delivered something different. Also, their '2 days to make a claim' cannot over-ride the 6 year claim period that is set in law.

If you were buying it for personal use it would be set in stone, I just don't know how the rules change for B2B sales.

mudcow007

i looks like im stuck with dodgy software me thinks

im going to boycott ebuyer from now on aswell i think ive probably spent about £6000 there over the past few years aswell......

bails87

Did you pay by credit card? They'll have payment protection?

Otherwise, send the boys round for a chat!

velocestrapture

mudcow007 wrote:

just noticed on the package of the disk is a sticker covering something, so i peal it off an it states "Only to be bundled with Microsoft Office for Mac Home and Business - 1 user"

to me this is an OEM license an not full retail as stated on ebuyers website

spoke to the returns department who have said its outside the returns time (1 day out) so im stuck with software i cant register/ use grrrr

If the licence you received was not as advertised then it doesn't matter whether you bought it for personal use or business, it is a simple matter of breach of contract and they should provide you with the correct licence. The limitation period for breach of contract is six years so saying you have only 2 days to complain is bolluex.

If it is more a matter of misleading advertising I would start muttering about Trading Standards if they don't agree to swap for the correct one. You might have to offer to cough up for the price difference, if there is one, in this case.

jzed

To the feckwit on the hybrid at Col du Chutney Mary. Riding on the pavement and then jumping off the pavement without looking into the path of an oncoming cyclist (me) is dangerous. Bricks were shat, as I was powering up and the last thing I expect is a hybrid to magically appear in front of me.

Then looking quizzically at me when I shout "careful". Moron.

scattered pedals

Bloody Bloody Halfords! 3 weeks they've had my bike now! how hard is it to replace a shifter?!! If it was'nt on warrenty I would never have taken it there - I knew it was going to be bad but how the hell do they get away with running a business like this?

walkingbootweather

So I'm riding in this morning on an abandoned railway line track and this guy throws a rubber ball for his dog, straight at me. I brake and dodge one way to avoid the ball, then quickly have to dodge the other way to avoid the chasing dog.

At least it woke me up and gave me a chance to practice my superior bike handling skills

The guy was very apologetic, but I nearly had to ask to borrow his 'poop bag'.

mudcow007

walkingbootweather wrote:

So I'm riding in this morning on an abandoned railway line track and this guy throws a rubber ball for his dog, straight at me. I brake and dodge one way to avoid the ball, then quickly have to dodge the other way to avoid the chasing dog.

At least it woke me up and gave me a chance to practice my superior bike handling skills

The guy was very apologetic, but I nearly had to ask to borrow his 'poop bag'.

there's an old couple that i pass most morning who do this (throw the ball, not nearly shat themselves..) they have got two springers who loyally chase the ball no matter what is around them. the ball always seems to aim for me too :shock:

Drysuitdiver

JZed wrote:

To the feckwit on the hybrid at Col du Chutney Mary. Riding on the pavement and then jumping off the pavement without looking into the path of an oncoming cyclist (me) is dangerous. Bricks were shat, as I was powering up and the last thing I expect is a hybrid to magically appear in front of me.

Then looking quizzically at me when I shout "careful". Moron.

sounds like the jizzer on the hybrid this morning who decided the "cyclepath" was a good way to beat waiting at a red light. that bit of the pavement isn't a cycle path tho . he then popped off and cut down the inside of a tanker at the next set of lights :shudders:

a nice wide pass by the tanker driver and the nobber cyclist pulls up with his cab and starts shouting at the driver. the sort of tw@ that makes my ride a bit more onerous than it should be.

jonny_trousers

If you are going to sell your bike/frame then please... state the size first! The ammount of times I've seen ads for bikes and thought, oh my God, it's perfect, only to discover it was seemingly a custom build for Jimmy Cranky near the end.

nich

2 or 3 close calls this morning just near home, all was ok when I was nearer the city though.

I did leave 10 mins later. I shan't be doing that again. I prefer less cars and less racey drivers :x

Gussio

nich wrote:

2 or 3 close calls this morning just near home, all was ok when I was nearer the city though.

I did leave 10 mins later. I shan't be doing that again. I prefer less cars and less racey drivers :x

Amazing what a difference 10mins can make to the volume of traffic on the roads in the morning.

mudcow007

i was a very nearly an ex mudcow last night.

cycling through liverpool's Albert Dock there is a series of single lanes just out side the Echo arena with prioritised traffic management here

so im riding along last night after a 60 mile ride, i have right away with nothing coming the other way so i start down the lane taking primary as its only narrow an if you dont cars will try an over take you even though its only 20mph.

As im half way down the lane a bus comes the opposite way on a head on course so i stop as does the bus, the driver then shouts "move over" so i say to him "can you not read them road signs....i have priority" to which i get a reply of "cheeky c*nt" an he drives away in a bloom of diesel smoke

so Comfy Buses of Liverpool you are hear by named an shamed

also if said scrawny ginger smack head looking scum bag would like to call me that again to my face when he is out of the cab, give me a shout an we will have a chat about it

annnnnd breathe

Gussio

mudcow007 wrote:

i was a very nearly an ex mudcow last night.

cycling through liverpool's Albert Dock there is a series of single lanes just out side the Echo arena with prioritised traffic management here

so im riding along last night after a 60 mile ride, i have right away with nothing coming the other way so i start down the lane taking primary as its only narrow an if you dont cars will try an over take you even though its only 20mph.

As im half way down the lane a bus comes the opposite way on a head on course so i stop as does the bus, the driver then shouts "move over" so i say to him "can you not read them road signs....i have priority" to which i get a reply of "cheeky c*nt" an he drives away in a bloom of diesel smoke

so Comfy Buses of Liverpool you are hear by named an shamed

also if said scrawny ginger smack head looking scum bag would like to call me that again to my face when he is out of the cab, give me a shout an we will have a chat about it

annnnnd breathe

Write a letter of complaint to the bus company. The driver sounds easily recognisable and will hopefully get a good dressing down.

bdave262000

mudcow007 wrote:

i was a very nearly an ex mudcow last night.

cycling through liverpool's Albert Dock there is a series of single lanes just out side the Echo arena with prioritised traffic management here

so im riding along last night after a 60 mile ride, i have right away with nothing coming the other way so i start down the lane taking primary as its only narrow an if you dont cars will try an over take you even though its only 20mph.

As im half way down the lane a bus comes the opposite way on a head on course so i stop as does the bus, the driver then shouts "move over" so i say to him "can you not read them road signs....i have priority" to which i get a reply of "cheeky c*nt" an he drives away in a bloom of diesel smoke

so Comfy Buses of Liverpool you are hear by named an shamed

also if said scrawny ginger smack head looking scum bag would like to call me that again to my face when he is out of the cab, give me a shout an we will have a chat about it

annnnnd breathe

Would you point out if he was a blonde smack head or brunette smack or is your abuse just reserved for gingers?

veronese68

I didn't read that as picking on gingers in particular. Just an identifying feature, like scrawny. Could have just as easily have been fat had that been the case. Had the bloke had 2 noses I'm sure that would have been picked up on. I think the abuse is for being a twunt and ginger is picked up on as it's not as common as brown hair.
No rants to add I'm afraid.

bdave262000

Veronese68 wrote:

I didn't read that as picking on gingers in particular. Just an identifying feature, like scrawny. Could have just as easily have been fat had that been the case. Had the bloke had 2 noses I'm sure that would have been picked up on. I think the abuse is for being a twunt and ginger is picked up on as it's not as common as brown hair.
No rants to add I'm afraid.

Try explaining that to my 10 year old son who was singled out from his friends by a bunch of low life on bikes who chased hiom down the road calling him a ginger c**t and then came home shaking and crying in fear of his life, basically its one of the last exceptable forms of prejudice, and using the word ginger in that context doesn't help things.

Blacktemplar

Veronese68 wrote:

Had the bloke had 2 noses I'm sure that would have been picked up on.

bails87

bdave262000 wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

I didn't read that as picking on gingers in particular. Just an identifying feature, like scrawny. Could have just as easily have been fat had that been the case. Had the bloke had 2 noses I'm sure that would have been picked up on. I think the abuse is for being a twunt and ginger is picked up on as it's not as common as brown hair.
No rants to add I'm afraid.

Try explaining that to my 10 year old son who was singled out from his friends by a bunch of low life on bikes who chased hiom down the road calling him a ginger c**t and then came home shaking and crying in fear of his life, basically its one of the last exceptable* forms of prejudice, and using the word ginger in that context doesn't help things.

*acceptable.

See also, travellers.

Koncordski

bdave262000 wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

I didn't read that as picking on gingers in particular. Just an identifying feature, like scrawny. Could have just as easily have been fat had that been the case. Had the bloke had 2 noses I'm sure that would have been picked up on. I think the abuse is for being a twunt and ginger is picked up on as it's not as common as brown hair.
No rants to add I'm afraid.

Try explaining that to my 10 year old son who was singled out from his friends by a bunch of low life on bikes who chased hiom down the road calling him a ginger c**t and then came home shaking and crying in fear of his life, basically its one of the last exceptable forms of prejudice, and using the word ginger in that context doesn't help things.

As a fellow Ginge I sympathise and fully agree that it's still deemed perfectly acceptable to use as a derogatory statement. Smack Head in the car beefed upto Ginger Smack Head in the car, it's akin to calling someone fat barsteward when in reality barsteward would suffice. I hope your son learns to turn it around on people (not in this situation cos he was massively outnumbered!) and learn to shrug it off. It's not fair but I'm 30 now and was walking home with my GF less than 2 weeks ago when someone outside a bar smoking shouted 'Ginger C**T' at me. Told him at least I'm not a sad lonely bastard like him and walked away. Haters gonna hate.

mudcow007

bdave262000 wrote:

Would you point out if he was a blonde smack head or brunette smack or is your abuse just reserved for gingers?

ahh sorry i wasnt trying to cause offence to anyone with any of those features!

but yes if he he had red, green, blue, black or brown hair i still would have said it......

Koncordski

No offence taken dude. Like I said, you learn to shrug it off. 8)

mudcow007

My brother is a ginger, well he describes him self as "strawberry blond". I thought gingers were becoming quite rare these days?

anyways i love gingers

here is an example why.....