** Lets just put back the question you posed and then snipped - Noddy:
Err, um, I'm sorry?
I'd *already* posted it and you'd replied. Why did it need to be posted
again?
** Very naughty to snip out the context like that.
I guess I'll have to take your word for it, but I'm afraid I'm not following
you.....
** Not really - control freaks are pretty boring in my book.
Mine too.
The interesting part is that you could gather that he is a control freak
from his post. I've had half a dozen people read it and no one seems to get
that impression
** A "reasonable" person would have mentioned it.
Why?
Is the level of service relevant to the nature of the fault in any way?
** The subject is Paul's post - not idiocies from Noddy's.
Speaking of idiocies, is your asterisk key stuck, or can't you tell where
your own comments are when reading it back to yourself?
** Read you own question again - the operative word was "unreasonable".
Indeed, and I think it's quite unreasonable of you to suspect his story is
untrue simply because you personally can't verify it.
** The subject is Paul's post - he claims to be stuck with no
options.
He does indeed.
And if he started small claims proceedings a week ago, how long do you think
it would be before there was some resolution?
** There is plenty that needs explaining.
And, like a ture armchair expert, you don't want to name them, right?
I doubt it Phil, I really do
Regards,
Noddy.