mister p.

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.

On the surface, they appear to be good, with nice communication and fast delivery. But recently I have discovered, due to accessing my credit reference report, that they are doing stuff behind the scenes and out of sight, or where they think few people will look, and with dubious permission even though they are following the rules.

I found, due to receiving a credit report that bullionbypost have been marking and checking my credit reference file - admittadly not a hard/permanent footprint, but all the same I thought this strange, after all I do not buy on credit.

So I contacted them to ask why they are doing this. They pointed to KYC (Know Your Customer) as the reason as to why they did this. For two replies all they would say was that it was down to KYC and that they are following regulations. So I went to the Inland Revenue website and looked up KYC rules - it turns out that its not that clear. From what I could gather there are certain guidlines before you check a customer Credit File - did I purchase using funds from many sources... no; did I make a purchase of over 15,000 Euros... no; but the last rule of KYC basically gives the instruction to check 'just because' which bullionbypost was following and simultaeneuosly ignored the first two rules. My last communication with bulionbypost pointed this out, to which I am still waiting for a reply after all this time...

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.

[12/01/24]

Update to above.

Believe it or not, I rejoined trustpilot, but have just closed account with them, for a variation of above.

I made a post about sainsburys supermarket, it was removed, then made a second more detailed post about the same company, which was also removed, in both cases it was stated that their software had done this, that mistakes can be made, but they were sure it was the "right call".

I replied to both, got a email to both replies stateing that if i could proof that I had a purchase with sainsburys by way of invoice, delivery proof etc that they would consider reinstating the postl my reply was that this was inapplicable, to which I am.was still waiting for a reply.

I think that these posts were deliberatly removed because i used the word 'discrimination' and trustpilot can not have that, for some reason.

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.

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...

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.

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.

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.

Bought what was advertised as 100% cotton shirts. Turned out that they were a cotton/polyester mix. Complained to alibaba. Went through their process. Took photos of the label that shown the percentage of the mix. All the while the seller with the broken english was complaining that he had done nothing wrong - "dears". Alibaba made a decision. Because it was 80% cotton I was to be refunded 20% of the cost of one shirt. But I bought two shirts together. They had the same order number. I sent photos of two shirts - different colours. They didnt put two-and-two together. The western way is to get a full refund - not 20%. As it turns out I did not even get that money. So no refund - 'dears'! As thick as two short planks put together. They make a poodle look intelligent.

I am looking for an ISP, so I called this outfit to sound them out, this afternoon.

I got the usual what packages I could have etc... but then I had my own unique question, "what are your call centre staff like, do they argue, argue, argue,. Do they think its a competition with the caller to get their own way?" He replied that the staff are very friendly, but of course I dont believe that, so I asked him to prove it if he could, and also he would be friendly as he is in sales. He then tried to change the subject to what he wanted to talk about - whether I wanted to sign up - but I kept pressing for what I wanted, an answer to my question, but as he changed the subject (something that call centre staff do in all companies) I put it to him that it would be reasonable to assume, considering that he has just done what call centre staff do in other companies, that they would argue argue argue after all he has just tried to effectively lie by the change of subject. Instead of replying to the point, he then claims that he has told me about the package, how much it costs etc... but again this is a tactic that call centre staff use to avoid answering the point. So then he has the bright idea of bringing a supervisor onto the phone, but of course asks whether I would like that, I say no, and he gets the supervisor anyway. The supervisor arrives on the phone and immediately asks a leading question - what is it that I want help with (bare in mind that he goes on to tell myself that he had been listening to the call - so he already knows), I tell him that I did not ask for him, to which he claims he knows. I then bring up what the previous chap had been trying to avoid dealing with - if you are doing this then is it not reasonable to assume that you will behave in exactly the same way as call centre staff in other companies and that you are lying when claiming that you are friendly. He then states he is ending the call, he makes his excuses, wishes myself to have a good rest of the day, and plonks the phone down, while I am saying repeatedly "you are doing the same thing", in other words trying to sound friendly while being rude.

So yes they are just as friendly, as call centre staff in all other call centres, and it is safe to assume that if one signs up, as they have already treated the caller badly, thus proving that they are no better, that if one needed to contact their team one would have a hard time of it.

Believe it not I will not be signing up, after their proving my suspicions correct.

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.

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?

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.

For a week I have been raining telephone calls upon this outfit trying to get them to sort out a problem of their creation. That is they have stopped the use of my debit card on their guest accounts, which means I cannot make donations. They have been telling me that there is nothing they can do; but I know that they can as I have been in this situation with them before and their executive escalations department removed the problem.

This is what they have been doing instead:

Making opportunities for themselves to put the phone down, such as, after you have countered what they claim, they go silent for a short time say 120 seconds, then they make their putting the phone down speech ie I cannot hear anyone anymore, I am going to put the phone down, you can always call again later to get th problem sorted, thank you for calling paypal, have a nice day. Then they put the phone down.

Or a variation of this ie they do the putting the phone down speech ie I cannot hear anyone anymore, I am going to put the phone down, you can always call again later to get the problem sorted, thank you for calling paypal, have a nice day. Then they wait for for a couple of minutes before putting the phone down.

Here is the thing with both - who are they saying all that for if they are claiming there is no one there? Whose listening? Its just to make sure that they are covered using the recording.

They even put the phone down while you are talking, of course making sure that there job is covered by doing the end of call speech - and this is despite the fact that they are not supposed to do that - so they claim!

I had one yesterday telling myself that it was my card issuer that was causing the problems not paypal. I repeatedly called him a liar. He put the phone down while I was talking. I then contacted my card issuer, who assured myself that there was nothing wrong with my card. I also recorded this and the paypal bloke who was telling me it was not paypal. I returned to paypal to prive my point by playing the recordings to them. The woman while the recordings were being played to her make her job covering excuses and put the phone down. You see she saw it as an opportunity as I was not there or highly unlikely to be able to hear her or know what was happening to put the phone down 'scot-free'. Unfortunately for her I have two recording devices, so she was recorded in the act.

I am sure that if you were standing in the middle of a field covered with grass, and you said the grass is green they would say 'no its not'.

[UPDATE] There has been some progress. I now can use my debit card online to make donations. But this took a further conserted effort. I finally got thriugh to someone who in typical Paypal fashion symphases with my plight over the phone, but did not do anything there and then to releive the situation. A number of weeks later I find that this problem has gone. So I guess what I said to this guy got through.

But I still would not have an account with them, and still will have as little to do with paypal as possible.

At the beginning of 2015 I tried to buy some silver from this company. I was having some trouble with payment at the time, but informed the company of the troubles. At first they said ok, but then I received an email informing that they had cancelled the order - I had the money in cash btw. Go forward a number of months and I tried to place another order. I was told that because "I" had cancelled the order I could no longer place any order. I pointed out, and proved with emails that they sent that they had cancelled the order. But no, would not accept by not responding, after they had been shown the proof. Make your own mind up.

It began three days ago where I was forced to contact Santander to try to change the OTP (One Time Password), as I was stopped from doing this with the online-account. I truly believe that if a person has entered the correct details, and as a consequence have got into the account then that person should then have the free run of the facilities - they dont think so.

Despite being told that I have passed security on at least three separate occasions (and on a fourth occasion having the phone put down on myself) they still would not help, as they thought that now they was going to ask more security questions - surly if you pass security - you have passed security - period!

But they wanted to change the rules of the game half way through, and now claim that they knew who was calling but still more security was needed to be passed. A bird does not have three, four or five wings, as two is enough, likewise in triangulating a mobile phone three masts are used not four, five or six, as three is enough, only a certain amount of questions is required to know who you are speaking with, anymore is doing it just because. Its not my fault they made a mistake by saying I had passed security, they should abide by what they claim.

They kept saying they know not who is calling, but if that is the case they also would not have any account details on the screen, yet they do, as they then blocked my use of an ATM, blocked access to my account online, and are holding what money I have in the account as a kind of ransom until they get what they want, which is to go to a branch with id - even though I have passed security. If they did not know who is calling they would not know which account to target - just to reiterate.

They are basically $#*! slapping me until they get what they want. Unfortunately for them I am not financially in dire straits, so there goes that leverage for them.

The following is what uswitch is trying to have removed from the truspilot review site claiming it breaches the rules - yet it is an honest review - which they dont like of course - enjoy.

There are on the whole three types of tactics call centre staff use to get their own way; the first is by just blah, blah, blah, just keep talking until the caller makes the decision to end the call, the second being making an excuse to end the call, and the third by using an opportunity to end the call; all three require manipulation, either of the caller, the recording that is made, or both. I was on a call yesterday that took 45 minutes to complete - why?

Why was I calling, because there is a problem with their site, that this company has not read the GDPR, in so much that there needs to be an opt-out button for cookies.

The first woman I spoke with, even though I told her why I was calling, ploughed on with what she wanted "Could you give me your postcode...", she was not listening to what I was saying, I needed to repeat myself several times and she still could not be bothered to listen or register what I was saying - I then got it, she was giving me the middle finger, so I asked to speak with a supervisor.

The supervisor even though she offered to give me an email address of uswitch (who you call is actually carphonewharehouse btw) would not listen or register when I said I will report the matter to ICO. Repeatedly, she kept offering an email address, I asked "have I not replied to your offer of an email address several times", but no offer, other than an email address is given.

Then I asked to speak to a manager, who turned out to be the worst of the lot. I told him "maybe you can just do the honest thing, instead of trying to manipulate myself, the call and the recording to make sure that you keep your job, just end the call". Its quite clear that they wanted the call to end but wanted myself to end the call, and if they did not get that they just hung-on to the call for dear life repeating themselves, and I hate giving call centre staff anything, I am not responsible for them keeping their job, nor will I be made responsible for them keeping their job - I am a stickler with this.

So this managers respose to my statement was "I am looking to get you the best deal possible, and for you to goaway happy" - how does that answer the point/question I was making? Just another tactic.

This guy was a complete cretin, he repeatedly tried to get me the best deal, he talked about his favorite football team, asked what I was doing tonight - and all to avoid doing what he knew I wanted - put the damned phone down in an honest fashion without trying to use myself to keep his job.

At one point he said we were having a conversation, to which I balked, I was not there to have a conversation.

I was getting increasingly frustrated with the antics of this guy, so I said you must get punched a lot? He replied there was little chance of that as he was 6'4.

I then started ranting and told him I did not need to know about his favorite football team, how they played last night or anything about his life. He replied that I sounded like his wife.

Four times I put the phone down on my table and did something while he blahed on. To this when he did not hear me he tried to use the opportunity to make an excuse for himself (making sure he got it on the recording of course) to end the call as there was no one there anymore - shows an indication of his real intention.

He then says that he could put the phone down whenever he wanted, but after I couple of minutes I twigged that he could not, otherwise he would have done so a longtime ago, and I told him so as well.

He then used the recording to make an excuse for himself to put the phone down, and did so while I was still talking.

This guy has something wrong with him, indeed they all have, but this guy in particular, and I told him as well.

He seamlessly went through all three tactics that call centre staff employ, as described at the beginning of this tome.

I also forgot to mention the trick leading questions employed by all three staff, such as do you want me to end the call, and are you asking for the call to end, and do you want my help, all asked to elicit permission from myself so they can end the call and keep their job, when all I wanted is for them to not do any of it and be honest.

If you want to keep your sanity dont call. It will take days to get the dirt of this call of my body.

Reporting this review just further proves how dishonest you are; this is a review of my experience calling you, none is a lie and parts have been missed out.

We all know that complaints almost invariably get nowhere as in the same way as above all you are trying to do is not admit anything wrong has happened to protect the company and employees therein.
You will claim that you will need to investigate, but the only reason why you want to do this is to see whether you can find anything to lesson the companies culpability, and if possible if you think you have enough switch the complaint around into making a complaint about the complainer. So what is the point of taking part in a completely bogus process - therefore my experience is posted here, and if somehow you get your way it will be posted elsewhere where you cannot get it deleted - what will you do about that then?

And its really rubbing my face in horse manure wishing myself have a nice day isnt it after what you are attempting.

This will now be posted elsewhere - tough luck.

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.

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!

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.