Developed in part with a grant from
the National Science Foundation

Member since December 2015

  • Reviews 30
  • First to Review 10
  • Thank Yous 0
  • Fans 0
  • Profile Views 851

Review Distribution

5 stars
1
4 stars
1
3 stars
2 stars
7
1 star
21

30 Reviews by mister

Sort by: Most recent

Alpro.com

Alpro

9/26/19
I bought the Almond Unsweetened Milk Substitute yesterday (24/09/19) having never had this before, and hearing this type of product being raved about I thought I would try.

Immediately upon the first mouthful there was a bad taste in my mouth, followed by a bad lingering after taste, and smell. This lasted well into the late evening - it just kept coming back at you like a bad salesman or a rash.

During the night my ears began ringing, in the morning I awoke to ringing ears and the sensation that I had cotton wool in my ears, and therefor limited hearing.

I live on a limited diet, almost invariably eating the same food, therefor when a new food is introduced and there is a reaction of some kind I know what has caused the situation.
Co-operativebank.co.uk

Co-operativebank.co.uk

9/9/19
I had a telephone conversation with one of their woman representatives about the co-operatives email address and that I wanted her to give it to myself. Instead of doing what I asked she repeatedly tried to scam myself for my details before she would even bother to deal with the request; but for something that does not require a login as I was not requesting anything to be done with the account, I know this is not needed and refused to succumb. Nonetheless she tried and tried and tried. She then out of the blue made the claim that she found myself 'threatening'; I was a little surprised, and asked how so? She then changed the subject to avoid answering the question citing her need to get a supervisor as a diversionary tactic. But I kept pressing for an answer as to why she found myself aggressive, to which I got no answer.

I then made a written complaint. the first response was basically a switch around where they looked for something to blame myself, and then turn my complaint into a complaint about myself - but what I brought to them was not answered, and they also found that they had done nothing wrong as part of their standard process.

I made another complaint about the handling of the complaint. The point was taken that my complaint had been switched to a complaint about myself, but then the same result ie they have done nothing wrong was achieved via a different method.

They did backwardly admit by including the woman calling myself 'threatening' that the incident did take place, but you have to laugh at the reason why she did not change the subject that was made "...strictly speaking she did not change the subject, she asked to get a supervisor..." but still there is no explanation for this statement.

Ironically, a few weeks later I called again, and asked whether they had got my emails; I was then put through the same bogus validation that is completely unnecessary given what I was asking. This call ended and I had to call again, this time though I was told that they had the email, and the woman also registered a complaint and found in my favour - for something that is essentially the same as the first complaint - emails!

But no according to the complaints investigator, this second complaint that was found in my favour was found in my favour because there was a yes/no answer.

The email address of the co-operativebank is on their website, but the explanation given as to why this first woman would not give myself the email address is "...I do not agree that Nicola declined to provide an email address..." but she did by trying manipulate the situation by using leveraging what I wanted to get what she wanted first - a competition, and they are always leveraging this is how they operate, and then deny they have done anything wrong when challenged about this behaviour and make the statement "we are here to help".

What they have done with the complaints could be summerised as follows; should I punch you to the ground you would not be happy, but I know that if you do not have the money to take myself to court, and I know the bodies charged with dealing with this will not, then you have to bring myself to do something about it - it is not in my best interests to admit I have done anything wrong. I will say that I need to instigate an investigation, but the only reason why is to find anything against you that you did that I can use to lesson my culpability. Worse still I am the judge, jury and executioner - I control the outcome.

What they should do is admit that they have done something wrong, punish the person who did it, and promise not to do it again. What they are doing in actuality is trying to pull a fast one where they get to rejudge (what you have found to be wrong and what is wrong) in their favour, then palm it off as the real judgement.
Sse.co.uk

Sse.co.uk

8/11/19
A complaint I made, about the way a supervisor wriggled out of handling a complaint I made about the way I was handled by one of the front-line call centre staff, was closed by SSE because THEY WAS HAPPY THAT BY PHONE AND EMAIL THE COMPLAINT HAD BEEN ADDRESSED - what about the customer being happy with the way the complaint was handled? - clealry a case of an emplyee covering their own back and not just their own.

So I made a complaint about the complaint handling; I heard nothing so I called on a Tuesday after the bank holiday in May 2019. I then had once they found out who I was - thats a different story - the phone slammed down on myself four times on a trot with the message that they was not allowed to talk about the complaint, and even while I was talking the phone was slammed down.

later, in the same day, I found that the notes written about these four calls had the front-line call centre staff just say that the 'call ended' - not that the call was ended by them slamming the phone down while I was still talking.

When the contract is up, the contract will be up!!
PayPal

PayPal

8/11/19
I found due to needing to call PP about something that my telephone number is linked to a paypal account - I do not have a paypal account.

Over the course of three weeks - obsessive - I have telephoned them to get the account removed from my telephone number; I found it disturbing after all what other details are linked to my number, bank, name, address...

Not one I have called have helped, I have had dubious excuses thrown at myself as to why , but no unlinking.

1... I have paid for something online and the online merchant has used paypal behind my back - as I rebutt when you purchase something there are clearly at least two ways to pay, paypal or a proper online card merchant, and besides surly a paypal payment would show on my bank statement - to which the phone is slammed down by them.

2...That I should contact my telephone company to have them do something about my telephone number being linked to a paypal account - rebuttal why does everyone else have to run around for paypal changing their records? - phone slammed down by them.

3...I have called paypal before.

I could go on and on with the scams and fastones they have pulled, but suffice it to say that this is a company that the employees think they can do what they want.

BTW also can not make a complaint, unless you are a member aka have agreed to their conditions and rules - WTF!!!

Also keeping one in a telephone queue for as long as they do is rude.
Onestream.co.uk

Onestream.co.uk

8/11/19
I was thinking at one point of sounding out this isp with a view of joining them; however, neither by telephone nor email could I get a response.

When I reported my experience on trustpilot, onestream had my post removed even though it is a genuine experience. So the post is here instead - try to get this removed!!!
Uk.trustpilot

Uk.trustpilot

8/10/19
Recently told Trustpilot to delete/remove all my posts and basically close the account.

Why? Well, a company (onestream.co.uk) which is an ISP in the UK, did not pick up the phone, or respond to an email I sent, so I posted what happened to myself on Trustpilot. The company then complained to Trustpilot about the post claiming I was not a customer and then that I had no contact with them either. Trustpilot removed my post with the proviso that if I could supply proof, then the post would be reinstated - I refused and made a counter argument, that if they check my post in this way then they need to check every post on their site to make sure that there was contact, otherwise if they do not check every post then they should not check mine either, just for fairness.

I received an email from someone called manuel, who did a cut'n'paste job of trustpilot rules - my reply 'that is not the question'.

He then, made a more compressed and more personal explanation of the rules - but again this did not answer the question/point, and was basically going over the same point he tried to make in his first email; I suppose he thought it would be rude to just repeat the cut'n'paste job, or would the rudeness be too obvious LOL!!!

He then did the same thing for a third time.

it was obvious that he was trying to avoid addressing the point I had made and therefore validating my point/contention - a typical neo-liberal move, he also got shirty when I pulled him up over his claim that there was no pre-screening of posts by my replying that there is just post-deletion.

So I told them where to go and close the account and delete all posts.
BT

BT

12/5/18
Where do I begin?

Even though they claim I can access my bill online - I would have to allow them to track my activities while I view my bill and any other account details via cookies that have been deliberately mixed - marketing and essential cookies -to cause obfuscation. According to the GDPR one is not supposed to have no opt out of marketing cookies, yet BT deliberately flout the rules; I say they flout the rules as I have told them. They say as a defense "but other companies use cookies"; which bring us to the next problem - everything you say has to be contradicted, argued and quibbled; you are not allowed to be right, or to go away thinking you have won. Its like they want to control your thoughts, like an adult controls a child.

Every call is a war. You call for something that has no need for them to access the account - such as how does something or other work? - of course they claim they cannot do anything until they access your account.

They constantly claim that you have not tild them why you are calling - yet it is the first thing you do. They even claim this when quite clearly you have repeatedly told them why you are calling - which I have cottoned on to as a tactic by the telephone staff of trying to get you to change the subject - a bit like going to a tarot card reader, and keep going to different tarot card readers, until you get the reading you like; with them just keep saying you need to tell me the reason for the call, until you change the subject to something they are happy with.

They claim they have no account details on the screen, yet quite freely seem to know your last calls and the reasons for the calls, and your name.

They claim that you will not be charged for a paper bill; yet when it comes to the crunch you are charged for a paper bill, and when you call, you are told "that hasnt been written down."

On top of all this and more, there is the situation that there is no customer service that deals with the problems that customer service creates for the customer, and whenever you tell whoever you are on the phone with of what one of their colleagues have done, all that is said too try to wriggle out of commenting on a fellow member of staff is "but I wasnt on that call so I dont know what happened"; these two things combined make the BT telephone staff completely unaccountable.

Awful. Ask not what the call centre staff can do for you, ask what you can do for them.
Anonymouse.org

Anonymouse.org

6/30/18
I have had need t use an anonymous email service; after searching and testing I came upon anonymouse. All I can say is that it worked. Good job.
USwitch.com

USwitch.com

5/24/18
I made several calls yesterday. Let me rephrase I was forced to make several calls yesterday.

I originally called due to a contradiction in their terms for a £60 voucher. At clause 5 they state something like you are not eligible for the voucher until or for 90 days. This is followed by clause 6 that states that once your line has been activated then you will receive the voucher. I called them to explain. I got the usual corporate blarney that tried to explain away this issue. Of course the explanation barely was in line with the words in the clauses.

Other gems to note include the following from this call and subsequent calls include: the passing the buck tactic, forever accusing myself of not providing a reason for the call, accusing myself of calling the wrong number, condescension by phrases such as 'is your tea getting cold' or 'I think the simpsons is on now' ie trying to get myself to end the call without the agent having to tell myself to go away or end the call, myself having to repeatedly say 'as you are not helping please put the phone down', the abuse by these tactics of the caller, going beyond the norm of acceptable behaviour ie forever despite being told to go away refusing by remaining on the call, changing the subject when the questions that the caller asks or the points that the caller makes are too close to home, the complete make over of the call by the agent as if the caller has asked a different question entirely so that the agent can deal with the call as if an entirely different person is on the call, forever carolling to get what the agent wants ... the list does just go on.

Overall, condescending, arrogant, devious, manipulative, breaking the rules of acceptable behaviour, forever angling for a result which is good for the agent and to hell with what the caller feels or wants. Did I mention selfish?

I would give minus stars if I could.

Also why give a telephone number to contact them on their web page and it states to contact uswitch use this number, but if used you get through to a different organisation?
National Lottery

National Lottery

3/3/18
Just spent the better part of 90 minutes on three calls with these clowns. The first call the female representative could not get past forcing myself to answer a question which I could have supplied any answer I wanted and she would be non the wiser. When it became clear to her that I was not going to help her keep her job, she hung up.

The second call I asked another female representative whether they have call logging feature because of the question I was asked on the first call. This one tried to make out that she had no idea what call logging is, only to go on and use call-logging to tell myself that I had called before and what the call was about. She them went on to pull a classic call centre trick, that is say just wait a moment, then after a certain amount of time has elapsed, come back to the phone put the phone down, because there is a rule that states that if a certain amount of time has passed with no sound then the hapless employee can put the phone down - no thats not using the call to keep her job - now is it?

The third, I was to a superviser, who subsequently refused to answer questions about what had happened on the first two calls, who deflected, who made excuses about deflecting, then made an excuse for herself to put the phone down. And just as she was I told her to eff-off. And she and they deserve it.

Needless to say but I have just sent them an email to close the account.
DuckDuckGo

DuckDuckGo

2/23/18
I have used this service for some years now. It is the only company that I would give top marks. More recently I found that they have an onion address which I now use. So this makes them even better. The searches always bring relevant results. Its always difficult to write lots about a company that is good.

[EDIT]

I have noticed of late, that their search engine in displaying results is not working properly. When one place a '-' in front of a word then one does not want to see that word in the results. What is happening instead is that one gets every search result with that word; this is an error, and its a general error.
Google

Google

2/22/18
As we all should know by now GG offer a lot of services, including youtube. To be able to post on youtube you need an account. So now you have setup an account - with a password. And I want to emphasise with a password. So now you try to login from another machine/browser. You are blocked even though the password is correct. So what then is the point of the password? Ok so you can reset the password - or are required to reset the password to something different. But...but...but... to get through to this you enter the current password, which means the current password is OK, as they recognise it. SO what is the FRIGGIN POINT??? So essentially, if you dont bow down, and drop your trousers and do everything they want you have no account for no good reason. Also, if there has been a serious security breach as they claim is the reason for forcing a password change then surely this procedure allows the scammer/hacker to reset the password?

Also, the forcing of double authenication, via blocking access to your account, unless you supply a code that is sent to your moble - I have deliberatly not enabled double authentication.

And, I delberetely, have opened an account from one machine with the intention of using that one machine only to login - but gurgle still makes the claim that there is something different about my login and force the double authenication procedure - same OS, same router, same isp, same browser same...
Trustpilot.co.uk

Trustpilot.co.uk

1/2/18
I have posted reviews on trustpilot of various companies. I was doing so just a week ago where I posted one review and it was accepted, then I went to post another. Its at this point that I was logged out. I contacted them by email to explain the problem. Just got a reply back today. Apparently their "advanced software" had noticed "patterns" and this was why it happened. They have not explained what they mean by pattern nor offered to rectify the situation. I am just without being told (manipulation) banned from posting out of the blue with no adequate explanation. So ironically I am posting on sitejabber about trustpilot - ha!

[UPDATE] - OK, since the above this has happened. They reinstated my account - or did they? You see despite being now able to login and see my reviews, I can only see my reviews when I am logged in. If I am not logged in my reviews do not appear in the general timeline. I have contacted them about this a couple of times, and they claim that there is no problem. So I made a more thorough check. I used two browsers. One browser I was logged in to trustpilot, and the second I was not. Sure enough, I could not see my reviews on the browser where I was not logged in, but could with the browser I was logged in with. So I made one final complaint. I mentioned yet again what I had read twitter were doing, and that is "shadow accounting". This practice is exactly as I have just described. It is where for all intents and purposes when logged in you can post and see your reviews - but no one else can. This is what trustpilot is doing as well.

[Further update] - They have relented and given back full site privileges.
PlusNet

PlusNet

12/26/17
Upon the first three calls I made to this company, all three women I talked with, subsequently wrote, on my record, that I had not answered security questions. I pointed out when I found out about this that the opposite was true. The manager I was talking with found that I was correct, and he apologised profusely; but that set the tone of my stay with plusnet.

Here is one for you, just to show that they are playing the caller and are not very good at it. I state that they must have my details on the screen as I am calling them using the line I rent from them The reply I got was sublime and went something like this "No, no, no, it doesnt matter that you are calling us using the line that you rent from us, we have no details on the screen, it is a white screen, a blank screen. I am waiting for you to give me the answers to the questions so that I can pull up your details (drum roll for the punch line) Mr Jones!!!"

Here is how it ended. I had had enough of them, so I put in a termination of contract request. This takes two weeks to go through because of the BT engineers. Near the end I cancel the termination request, and I am told that the termination request had been cancelled. But as it turns out there is a difference between what they claim is happening and what will happen. At the end of the two weeks on a Monday I awake, do my stuff, and then went to switch on the internet. Nothing - no connection. Same with the phone line. You see by the end they were taking my protestations personally, and this move by plusnet was personal. They had no intention of cancelling the cancellation.

So I would say stay away.
Amazon

Amazon

11/26/17
Cant login to Amazon when using tor. Cant even retrieve a lost password without going through the 'spanish inquisition'. I will buy from elsewhere then - shall I amazon?
NationWide.co.uk

NationWide.co.uk

11/23/17
I for one do not trust call centre staff as I have been lied to by them too many times. The call centre staff that this company employ are no exception. Case in point, yesterday I called using a phone I have never used to call Nationwide before. I was not asked any identifying questions before being put through to someone. This phone is also not registered with them. Yet after ten minutes (approx) the woman slips and tells me my name. I point out approx two minutes later that she had told me my name. She went into denial. You know the kind of denial that call centre staff excel at. That is change the subject, make an excuse such as I dont recall doing that etc... Not only this but she had asked previously whether there were any other questions I had that she could help me with. So of course I started asking questions about their telephone customer service, to which she tried one way after another to not answer any questions. I said to her you have no intention of honouring what you promised. After 26 minutes she put the phone down on myself. This is another thing. Tell them to put the phone down as they are doing nothing but string you along and try all sorts of tricks to wriggle out of doing what is asked, including claiming that they do not have permission. But they all work for the same company and if one can do it they all can do it. Which by-the-way they do on almost every call.

They use voice recognition software, and your training it. Thats what you are doing by answering their remedial 'security' questions.

Never a straight answer is given. They are only interested in hijacking your call to get what they need to keep their job.
Zopa

Zopa

10/22/17
I have never heard of this company before I got mail from them.

They got my details somehow through equifax, so zopa claim.

I didnt like this. I dont like this. I never asked to be contacted by them.

In my eyes not good. I recognise they are a business and they want to get customers, but do it some other way.
Lloyd's Bank

Lloyd's Bank

10/22/17
Basically money was taken from my account.

Lloyds have not refunded the money, as is claimed they will do on their online guarantee.

Lloyds have not followed the rules of the FCA in this matter either. Despite claiming they are regulated by the FCA in most of their documentation.

BTW they are not only regulated by the FCA but are also authorized by the FCA which means they definitely have to follow the rules of the FCA.

They have lied both to myself and all outside bodies ie the FOS, FCA.

Their staff have lied about my behaviour while in one of their branches. I was accused of being aggressive and threatening. But here is the problem. Three hours later I returned to the local branch, only to have the woman who subsequently lied about my behviour, to not know who I was or why I was there. You would think with someone who had been aggressive and threatening with you three hours earlier, that you would remember who that person is. It does not pan out.

Avoid these clowns. deal with them at your own peril.
Equifax

Equifax

10/22/17
I have contacted these clowns on numerous occasions in the past 24 hours. Reason is that I received a letter from a company offering me a loan that I have never had any dealings with. This produced an itch that needed to be scratched. So I contacted the company. It turned out they had got my details from equifax. I have no account with equifax; (I did quite some time ago have a trial account that was cancelled before I had to pay anything). But as I write I have no account with equifax. I then contacted equifax for an explanation. I have been given the run-around. The indian call centre staff are almost incomprehensible, as anyone speaking english is to them. They are not interested in what you want; they are only interested in what they want. I like the way the caller can go into a rant about why they are calling and the problems they are having, and the question comes back from the hapless call centre staff "why are you calling" (I call it the magic eight ball, that is if they dont like what you say they pretend you havent said anything and ask why you are calling over and over again until they get an answer they can deal with - like shaking the magic eight ball when you dont get the result you wanted). At all points when I contact them they presume they can pull up my details from a non existent account, and dont know how to cope when you challenge them about that.

The excuses they have given. They have tried to blame a building society or a bank for giving equifax details. But this is a red herring as its the banks and building societies that come to them for details. They have tried to blame the electorial role and myself for not ticking the box that stops one from being placed on the open register. I always tick the box to stop that from happening.

Here is another for you; it quite clear from the tone of the conversation and the way the conversation is progressing what you want to be done by them. Instead of doing this, they ask whether you want it done. I reply "what do you think?" bear in mind the general direction of the conversation. If they dont get an answer that complies with what they want they pretend they dont know what to do. They even go as far when challenged about this to say something like - well judging from what you have said I would say you would like me to do this. But still nothing is done until they get a certain three letter word.

I had one of their call centre staff, come back from yet another break, to then ask me whether I am going to answer his questions. But due to my considerable experience calling call centres I immediately knew what he was up to. He had gone away to ask a supervisor for permission to put the phone down on myself, and had been given the go-ahead to do so as long as he once again checks by asking myself that question before putting the phone down. I told him of this instead of answering his question, and included that he was using the call to keep his job. he agreed before putting the phone down on myself.

All I can write is morons.
FinancialOmbudsmanService

FinancialOmbudsmanService

10/22/17
Lloyds bank, when I was with them, conned me out of a fraud claim, to which I went to the Financial Ombudsman. Despite all the evidence, that is a BCOBS 5.1.11 guideline by the FCA that Lloyds was ignoring, even though Lloyds claim they are regulated by the FCA, the FOS found nothing wrong. They claimed or claim that they find a solution which is fair to both parties. It was not fair to myself though, as I had provided evidence that I had already repeatedly done what Lloyds had asked for, but the FOS just claimed 'do it again'. Did you realise that only 1 out of 4 claims are found in favour of the issuer of the complaint at the FOS, and that they are funded by the Banks through the dealing with complaints on behalf of the banks - the FOS is a cheap way for the banks to deal with a complaint in the banks favour. And why shouldnt it be like this if the shoe was on the other foot and the FOS was given money from taxpayers through the government the onus would be to find in favour of the taxpayer - would it not. A law unto themselves. They operate with impunity. It is their own fiefdom.

I have since discovered that when they are producing a verdict, they not only use what is fair, but they use what is fair in relation to the terms and conditions of the financial company. They also claim they use FCA rules - but there is a problem with that. The FCA rules do not apply to individual account holders. That is if you have a current account with a bank then you are not covered by the FCA. Also the terms and conditions of the bank does not need to include anything about the FCA. This means that should the individual sign up for a current account and the FCA is not included, in the terms and conditions then you as an individual are not covered by the FCA. So how can the FOS use the excuse that they use the FCA rulings in their deliberations; I ask you? Only I suppose, if the terms and conditions include mention of the FCA; if not, then lets move on.

Due to this even I agree that Lloyds have done nothing wrong; at least legally.

I have now have more info after receiving the SAR documentation. I noticed that what Lloyds Bank had provided was scant. Plus there was no mention of listening to the recordings I had made of Lloyds Bank telephone staff. But focusing upon the scant information, made me thinks of three questions to put to the financial ombudsman. The first is do you bother to check that the information given by the financial institution is correct? The second question - do you bother to check the information is complete, and the third question do you check to see if the information supplied has not been 'cherry picked' by the financial institution to influence your decision? I called them this morning and the FOS do not check - period.

Update - As it happens the SAR that was promised by the FOS would answer my questions did not. So I was cheated out of £10.00. I keep contacting them asking questions and now they are stonewalling. I contacted the ICO about this whole situation. The ICO contacted by email the FOS and the FOS responded to the ICO almost simultaneously. But any replies to myself take at least five days to be responded to if I am lucky.

Its quite clear that the recorded conversations I had with Lloyds was not listened to at all by the FOS. The recordings are a vital evidence, so vital that it would determine a decision.

Upon further scrutiny, the FOS have admitted that they ask for information from both sides then select what the FOS think is relevant. In other words, because of this practise they conduct an investigation for themselves - as it turns out just like the ICO do.

mister Has Earned 53 Votes

Mister P.'s review of PayPal earned 3 Very Helpful votes
Mister P.'s review of Amazon earned 2 Very Helpful votes
Mister P.'s review of co-operativebank.co.uk earned a Very Helpful vote
Mister P.'s review of PayPal earned a Well Said vote
Mister P.'s review of DuckDuckGo earned 24 Very Helpful votes
Mister P.'s review of Bullionbypost.co.uk earned 3 Very Helpful votes
Mister P.'s review of LibertySilver.ee earned a Very Helpful vote
Mister P.'s review of Google earned 3 Very Helpful votes
Mister P.'s review of PlusNet earned a Very Helpful vote
Mister P.'s review of EurGold earned a Very Helpful vote
Mister P.'s review of anonymouse.org earned a Very Helpful vote
Mister P.'s review of Equifax earned 2 Very Helpful votes
Mister P.'s review of Trustpilot.co.uk earned a Very Helpful vote
Mister P.'s review of Trustpilot.co.uk earned a Well Said vote
Mister P.'s review of Google earned a Well Said vote
Mister P.'s review of National Lottery earned a Very Helpful vote
Mister P.'s review of FuelBroadband.co.uk earned a Very Helpful vote
Mister P.'s review of TalkTalk.co.uk earned a Very Helpful vote
Mister P.'s review of AliExpress earned 3 Very Helpful votes
Mister P.'s review of eBay earned a Very Helpful vote

mister hasn’t received any thanks yous.

mister doesn’t have any fans yet.

mister isn’t following anybody yet.

Similar Reviewers on Sitejabber

juliannei
11/22/19

I purchased a piano through PayPal when it arrived it did not work. I spoke to your customer...

rossj25
Ross j. reviewed PayPal
11/22/19

Charging me money few times a year for a goods that I never bought and when I open Dispute never...