[talks-uk] Re: to the moderator
- From: "Eleanor Burke" <eleanorburke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <talks-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 10:02:38 -0000
Maybe she is fictious!
----- Original Message -----
From: Barbara Wilson
To: talks-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 7:52 AM
Subject: [talks-uk] Re: to the moderator
Adrian
You can't sell your TALKS license along with your phone. So any buyer who
found an upgrade still remaining on a phone should inform the seller and have
them remove it. Any buyer who used the upgrade would be in the wrong.
Which is why of course the alleged buyer in this case never what is alleged.
Nor did she buy a phone from Bridie in the first place!
I think Graham would prefer we drop this thread now. If people want to start
a general thread about licenses then fine. But as Bridie has failed to contact
me off list regarding this matter, then I think it should be dropped.
Find me on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/barkingbabs
Barbara Wilson
M: 07917710779
T: 02887784046
E: barkingbabs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
IM: creativeeyes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Skype: creativeeyes
----- Original Message -----
From: Adrian
To: talks-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 10:19 PM
Subject: [talks-uk] Re: to the moderator
Seems to me if bridie was selling her phone and not the licence for talks
she should of removed the licence before parting with the phone. Not at all
unreasonable of someone receiving a phone with a licenced software package
installed to assume that such software is part of the sales package. A
definite case of the seller trying to pass the buck when they have been proven
at best lazy and at worst neglegent.
Adrian Higginbotham
E: Adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Twitter: @AHiggi
From: talks-uk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:talks-uk-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Barry Hughes
Sent: 24 November 2009 20:13
To: talks-uk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [talks-uk] to the moderator
To The Moderator
Find below an email that was posted but didn’t make it to the
list from Bridie who is the person I referred to in my posts.
When she was wrongly made to pay £150 because her licence had
been taken over without her or nuance’s permission, she was totally dumbfounded
and had no option but to pay to carry on using talks on her new phone.
I think Bridie has explained the matter quite plainly in her
email.
To be fair I feel that as Barbara Wilson requests that any
other contact be to her personally I feel that it will be swept under the
carpet and that is why perhaps Bridie's email should have been posted to at
least allow other people to form their own opinion on the Licence Agreement.
Barry
--- On Tue, 24/11/09, Bridie
<bridgetlittler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Bridie <bridgetlittler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Fw: Re Barry Hughes
To: "Barry Hughes" <barry.hughes17@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, 24 November, 2009, 8:16
Barabara regarding the emails from Barry Hughes I am the
person he is referring to. I sold you a Nokia e50 which was imediately
upgraded without either mine or Nuances permission. When I needed to upgrade on
my licence it then came to light that it had been hijacked from that Phone
leaving me having to pay the full Licence amount of £150. After months of
hassle and me finally threatning Legal Action this matter has recently been
resolved throuhg Computer room services and I have been refunded the £100 with
Nuances permission.
Perhaps this situation would and should not have occurred
if people adhered to the Licence Agreement.
Bridie Littler
--------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.425 / Virus Database: 270.14.80/2523 - Release Date:
11/24/09 07:46:00
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 4640 (20091126) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
Other related posts:
